How we programme our own moods
How we interpret events and then have feelings as a result of our own interpretation is the main topic in today’s Pegasus NLP Newsletter.
The article takes a look at how we attach meaning to what is happening around us and how the meaning which we attach then determines how we feel.
The NLP Meta Model
The process has traditionally been called “Complex Equivalence” in the wonderful NLP Meta Model. (Here in Pegasus NLP, in our quest to make NLP more user-friendly and jargon-free, we opt for the more descriptive title “Attaching Meaning” because this actually describes what is happening.
An ‘automatic’ process
Because we do it so quickly – and unconsciously – we rarely recognise that the significance which we attach to an event is often quite arbitrary. And, since we’ve been doing it like this for years, we rarely consider what other possible meanings or interpretations we might attach to the event – unless, of course, we use the Meta Model to monitor our thinking.
I think this matter of “Attaching Meaning” is something that is massively important to us all because we can benefit enormously by understanding the processes that are taking place inside ourselves as we respond to the world around us. I urge everyone who looks at this blog to click on the link to the full newsletter article, read it carefully and digest its contents.
At the end of the article Reg suggests that when we notice and bring into our conscious minds the way in which we attach meanings to events, we might then consider alternative meanings. In consequence, we can empower ourselves to make choices about how we feel about things. As he says, this can be truly life changing.
In my view, the important point is to consider alternative meanings. The meaning I attach to ‘consider’ is ‘get curious about’. This implies taking time to think about how you are thinking and feeling, but that time is not always available, especially when you are on the spot to make a decision. Don’t let that stop you getting curious after the event because that’s an important way to learn from experience.
Some points about the “getting curious”: it is not judgemental – you are not beating yourself up, nor giving yourself false praise; it is not about avoiding gut reactions – they will often serve you well – but when they don’t, you need to get curious about them; it is a state of mind that takes time to develop and then run as a background task; it’s not about always being happy, it’s about refining your map of the world so you are better equipped to deal with whatever comes your way.
Great article Reg, but if I’ve said anything here that is an inappropriate response, do what is necessary – I don’t wish to detract from the importance of what you are saying.
– Graham.
Great points, as always, Graham.
You’re right about not always having time ‘in the moment’ to get curious and to consider alternative meanings. In fact the business of considering alternate meanings is almost invariably done in retrospect.
And that’s something I didn’t cover in either the newsletter or blog article i.e. the business of doing it in retrospect is what gradually conditions us so we eventually get into the habit of doing it in the moment.
Thanks for prompting me to fill in the gap.
Reg
It is so freeing to my NLP clients when they actually “get” that they are the ones in control of making what things mean. They sometimes get that dazed “aha” look the moment they realize that something that they have looked at through one perception can suddenly change in its entirety the minute they put on a new filter.
I think the Meta Model is one of the most useful and flexble tools to emerge from NLP and has application in just about every area of life – personal relationships, health, therapy, coaching etc. At Watt Works we offer specific trainings in the Meta Model that touch on the above fields and are also slanted towards business and workplace applications.
I like the term Attaching Meaning in place of the traditional Complex Equivalence. It certainly seems more self-explanatory (I remember one of my NLP teachers telling us that the terms used in the original Meta Model were ‘code incongruent’ for a model that was about clarity of communication :-)).
I think one of the best questions to generate a search for new meanings when we encounter someone creating a less than useful Complex Equivalence is the quick and simple:
“WHat else could that mean?”
It really stops people in their tracks and requires an expansion of the default map they have been using.
Damian