We learned in the previous chapter about our internal representation system and how different pictures, sounds and feelings affect us. But in order to assess what is important and what is not and therefore know how to be, we need to have some way of filtering the many thousands of pieces of information we are presented with every day. Clearly, they can’t all be equally important, but what we choose to make important very much shapes our map of the world around us.
Put very simply, we take in information via those main senses – visual, auditory, kinaesthetic – and pass it through a filter of our previous personal experiences, the process of which deletes information that we perceive not to be important or relevant to us. We also distort some of it in the process and then generalize what’s left in order to make it fit into one of the nice groupings we already have. We pigeonhole it, if you like, so that we know what to do with it at an internal sensory level. You may have already noticed some big differences between what you noted in the ‘submodalities checklist’ and the reality of the event you were actually remembering, especially if you were seeing it from somewhere else, when clearly you saw it through your own eyes at the time. It also wasn’t likely to be black and white or completely silent either… interesting eh? What did you notice for yourself?
Then think about it like this for a moment in a more general sense. If we’re starting a conversation about cars, then, if you are visual, an image of something to do with cars probably just popped up in your mind. What was it? Because I’ll bet it was very different from the image that’s in my mind’s eye as I write this. And it will be different in the mind’s eye of every single person who ever reads this. What colour was the car? Or is the picture black and white? What make? What model? How many seats? Where is the car? How big is the picture of the car? And is it moving or still? Are you seeing it through your own eyes or from somewhere else? Is it a car you have or have had or one you’d like to own in the future? Is the picture framed or is it panoramic? Are you inside the car or outside the car? Is the picture even of a car? Or is it something to do with a car? Is it a movie called Cars or a movie about cars, is it motor sport or the thought of someone being knocked down by a car or of going on a journey or being stuck in traffic and being frustrated and late for work? There are all these variables and many more, but we can make them all fit rather neatly into the pigeonhole of ‘cars’ without even a moment’s conscious thought.
In NLP, we often refer to this process with the phrase ‘the map is not the territory’. It certainly represents the territory, but it is not the same as the real thing. Clearly, we can easily get that because, of course, a map is much smaller than the area itself; it does not have any of the features of the area but instead they are displayed using symbols, visual codes that show us what is where in relation to something else but very little of the actual detail. Even with the most accurate and detailed map, so much information is missing. Think of a map of somewhere you know really well. How accurate is it? Is each individual streetlight or paving stone marked on the map? Are you yourself on the map? No? What an oversight that is… you mean to say that all of that information has been deleted right off the map? Wow! OK, now, does the railway track go in that nice straight line and are the stations all nicely spaced at even intervals? No? So it’s a distorted map then too… Well, is the local hospital at least blue and in the shape of an H? And are the roads really those colours? No? What kind of map is this? Have those things been simply generalized to make it easier for you to understand and make sense of? Exactly!
And no matter how good and detailed a map, it is always full of those deletions, distortions and generalizations… Just like the mental map of the world in your mind.
We filter out what we perceive we don’t need; we distort information to make it fit and then we generalize to allow us to neatly file away that experience for storage and easy access later. But what if, instead of making the railway lines, roads and hospitals important, we chose to filter those out and focus on the trees, hills and rivers? Do you think you’d even recognize the place where you live just from those reference points on a map?
How about if you did that with a big city like London or New York? Could you navigate your way around without your usual reference points? I doubt it, but you would be in exactly the same city. Nothing at all would have changed in the real world and yet you would be completely lost without your usual reference points. Nothing has changed except what you have chosen to make important and that is exactly the same in your mind.
If you store one set of data and re-present it in a certain way, then you will have one experience, but as soon as you store a different set of data or hold it in a different way (about exactly the same thing), you will have a totally different experience and nothing whatsoever needs to change in the real world to make it happen. Your subjective experience can change in a heartbeat, much faster than you think, in fact. When you know how and as a good NLPer, you will have enough flexibility in your map of the world to adjust to anyone else’s too… From now on, it’s not anyone else’s responsibility to get you; as NLPers, it is our responsibility to be got.
In Part II, you will be given all the know-how you need to make really powerful changes in your mind and therefore in your life and the lives of others too… look forward to it.
But what if you are not predominantly visual? What if sounds are much more of a driver for you than pictures? Well, in that case, what I’ve just said would have made much less sense to you than to someone who is more visually oriented. Nothing wrong with that at all, it’s just how you and they are wired up… If you are more auditory dominant, then it’s likely the surround sound at the cinema that does it for you or the big bank of amps and speakers at the concert. You’re probably the kind of person to whom the stereo in the car is just as important as the engine and you can remember a telephone conversation as though the person were speaking to you right now. You will be reading this clearly in your own voice, and in your reading voice at that. That is just how you are wired up.
Now and, just for now, read the next few lines in your really bored voice and see what effect that has on the experience of reading this book… OK, actually, that’s enough of that. Now, read the next part in your most curious, fascinated kind of voice that even makes you feel like you are sitting a little further forward and really taking it all in… OK, good, and notice the difference in your state and in how much more you retain, even though, yet again, nothing has actually changed in the real world. Hear what I’m saying?
As we’ve said already, the vast majority of the time, the real world is not the problem; our subjective experience of it is. But we can change that so there’s no problem there either; it’s all good.
But what if pictures don’t really do it for you and you struggled to see my point and, while you can read these words, you can’t replay the sound of yourself reading them… but oh, how you look forward to climbing into bed tonight and all the comfortable feelings that go with it?
You are also most likely to be someone who has a lot of different textures around your home, like a leather sofa with fluffy cushions or carpet in some rooms and tiles on the floor in others and when you go shopping, you pick things up and give them a good squeeze and feel them in your hands before deciding to buy them or not. If you’re that person, then you are kinaesthetically (feelings) dominant. That’s absolutely fine too; there is no right and wrong here, only how you are.
We are how we are in this respect and remember that no one is 100 per cent any one representation system. We all filter the world through all our senses and representation systems, but we definitely do have an order of preference or dominance.
As you read this, you might have found that the thought of the visuals and the feelings resonated with you most. Or maybe it was the pictures and sounds that really struck a chord, or the sounds and the feelings that you were most able to get to grips with. Whatever it was, you have just learned something really important about yourself, something that we will continue to explore with the same curiosity all the way to the end of this book and beyond.
Take this quick test to see which representation system preference you have.
For this exercise, you will need a clock, a piece of paper and a pen. You’ll likely already have a big clue as to how this will go from your submodalities work so far, but this will really help you define how your representation system works.
So, for the next two minutes, describe your home using only visual words. Then, for the next two minutes, use only auditory words. Then, for the next two minutes, use only kinaesthetic words and for the final two minutes use only auditory digital words.
Hint: For visual, you can describe the different colours, shapes and generally what you can see; for auditory, the different sounds and also the different thoughts you have while in your home (sounds on the inside); for kinaesthetic, different feelings or textures; and for auditory digital, you can use facts and figures.
Notice which modality (or modalities) gives you the most ease and also which is the most difficult.
We all have a preferred representational system (some of us have more than one) for our conscious thinking. In order to bring something to our conscious awareness, we use a lead representational system. Your lead representational system may be the same as your preferred representational system and it may not.
For example, assume my preferred representational system is visual and my lead representational system is kinaesthetic. If someone asks me about my last holiday, I may first get in touch with all of the good feelings about my trip before fully bringing up the pictures in my mind.
Lead representational systems may vary between contexts. For example, before accessing the feelings associated with a very distressful event, I may choose to first access the event through pictures and then ease myself into the feelings associated with the event.
Now it’s your turn…
How about you? Think of a happy time and notice the order or sequence of your own sensory experience and then do the same for a sad time.
So, you’re _____________ then with _____________ secondary and then with ______________ following along in third when happy.
But you’re _____________ then with _____________ secondary and then with ______________ following along in third when sad.
OK, cool.
This will be really useful information as you continue through the exercises in Part II, when we’ll also be accessing that ‘happy time’ or memory again and putting it to good use.
But what if you are working, living, communicating with someone who is not the same as you?
Have you ever had the occasion to explain something to someone and they’ve said, ‘I don’t see what you are saying,’ or ‘I can’t picture this.’ What’s going on here? One possibility is that they are highly visual and you have been using words other than visual references; hence, they are having difficulty forming a picture of your explanation in their mind. And how do we usually handle this situation? We repeat the same words over again, only this time LOUDER and SLOWER, as obviously they simply did not hear us!
Given what you know now and creating that flexibility in your own map, how can you approach this differently so the person can see what you are saying? Of course, they can’t actually see what you are saying, but the words you use can help them form a picture in their mind and, of course, that’s what we really mean, isn’t it?
Well, one possibility is to use visual words to help them make a picture in their mind or alternatively, you may wish to draw them a diagram or an actual picture.
And of course, it is not just visual people who may have difficulty with your explanation. An auditory person may say, ‘I can’t hear what you are saying,’ or ‘It doesn’t sound right to me.’ Well, of course, they can physically hear what you are saying and there is nothing wrong with the volume at which you are saying it, but what’s making it unclear is that the words you are using are not creating an internal experience that they can make sense of and navigate around. This could simply be because they have no experience or map for it, so we need to help them to find something that they do recognize and then help them to navigate from there.
A kinaesthetic person might say, ‘I can’t grasp (or get a handle on) what you are saying,’ or ‘I don’t have a feeling for this.’ An auditory digital person: ‘There is no logic in what you are saying,’ or ‘This just does not make sense.’
Really pay attention to the words people are using; they are revealing to you how they see, hear, get in touch with or make sense of the world around them and how they construct their map of the world.
Think about this. Have you ever found yourself in what we might call a ‘heated agreement’ with someone, or is there someone with whom lots of things do fit but for some reason that you can’t quite put your finger on – you just don’t get along, or you fall out over silly things a lot of the time? You’ll have heard yourself complaining that they just don’t ‘get’ you and yet others have no problem, so it can’t be your fault, can it? Well, yes and no.
The most likely cause for the miscommunication or their not ‘getting’ you is that you are going from one place (or representational system) and they are rightly coming from theirs; it’s just a different place. So while you may well both have the best of intentions, you still manage to fall out a lot of the time. I said you are both right and wrong because, first of all, I want you to think of it as if you are both speaking slightly different languages. Actually, dialects might be a better way to think of it. You recognize and understand most of what they are saying, but some parts are just lost in the fog of translation in your own mind and so you tend to fill in the blanks yourself, making it up in order to make sense of it.
The problem with that, given what we know now, is that you are both already deleting, distorting and generalizing anyway so now you are adding in an element of making it up to the make it fit so that it makes sense, but you very quickly end up in a place very far from reality. Then, factor in that we understand that thought leads to feeling, meaning that you are generating false feelings and have two people with emotions, too often false emotion talking to false emotion, rather than person to person. When you actually think about it, it’s a wonder we ever get anything done and even more of a miracle that the global population continues to grow at such a rate. Let’s get back to person to person instead of emotion to emotion, eh?
Then of course, you also get the opposite, where you just click with someone. They don’t necessarily have to have any of the same normal cultural reference points and, in fact, you don’t even have to have the same first language, but for some reason you just click and get on like a house on fire. That is very simply because you both share the same fundamental representation system base so they will see your point as you see theirs. Or they might hear what you are saying while their remarks really strike a chord with you or perhaps you are just easily able to get to grips with it as they find it easy to grasp what you are saying.
Now have a look back at all the words and phrases in italics. What do you notice? They are all very common phrases that we use in everyday speech and life, but do you notice that they are nicely paired: visual-to-visual, auditory-to-auditory and kinaesthetic-to-kinaesthetic? Did you also realize that without thinking about it, the words we use all day, every day tell us so much more than just the information we are trying to convey.
Let me put you in the picture so that you can clearly hear what I am saying and get a proper handle on this.
No one would ever say that, because in that sentence, we have all three main representational systems well represented. From the visual team, we have let me put you in the picture representation; for the auditory, we have so you can clearly hear what I am saying and from the kinaesthetic there is get a proper handle on this.
Do you see my point? Sorry, I couldn’t resist that.
In the next section, we will really look at how we use language literally and how to use it properly to get what you want, even if that’s just from yourself.
We all use language really quite literally although you may not have realized it till now. The phrases and figures of speech that we choose (subconsciously), called ‘predicates’, indicate so much more about us than we think; they also indicate how we think.
As a good NLPer, you will have the flexibility in your own approach to be able to communicate clearly, effectively and even persuasively with anyone, no matter which representation system they (or you) are coming from.
This brings me rather neatly to another phrase we touched on earlier that you will hear a lot in NLP: ‘The meaning of communication is the response that you get. This simply means that it is no longer the responsibility of the other person to ‘get’ you; it is your responsibility to be got. How many times have you heard people deride others because ‘they don’t understand me’? Well, from now on, it is not their fault; everyone has the capacity to make sense and to make sense of the information they are presented with. So if something doesn’t make sense, it can only be because it is not being presented in the correct way.
It’s kind of like the difference between ‘lecturing’ and ‘learning’. In lecturing, the information comes out and that’s about it; what happens next is up to the student. The responsibility of the lecturer is to inform their audience and that’s where it ends; the facts are fired out there and then forgotten about, sadly and all too often, by the audience. I don’t know about yours, but that was certainly how my education went. But how different would it (and your life) be if instead the emphasis were on ‘learning’? How would it be if the meaning of the communication was the response that the teacher got? How would it be if your teachers were measured on how much learning you did and how much you got, not simply how many hours they spent sending it out there for you to make whatever sense of it you could? The world of education would be an entirely different place, that’s for sure!
So from now on, for you and I at least, the meaning of your communication is the response that you get, so if at first someone doesn’t get it, try something else. If you are someone who is primarily oriented in a visual sense and they are more auditory, you can begin by trying to include more auditory references in your conversation and see how that resonates better for them. Give it a shot and notice how you get on.
Make sure the conversation is a meaningful one if you want to find some good predicates to work with, because people will not only tell you which their dominant representational system is, but also, if there’s a problem, they will very often tell you how to fix it if you listen closely enough and use your new skills. Below you’ll find that list again for reference.
How many language predicate references can you spot in the next conversation you have?
Usually memorize by making pictures and less likely to be distracted by noise. Often have trouble remembering audible instructions. They are interested in how something looks and, even if they can remember the sound, they will most likely make a picture of it first.
Typically are easily distracted by noise. They can repeat things back to you easily and learn just by listening. They like music and talking on the phone. Tone of voice and the words used are usually very important. You can upset them not by what you say but just by how you say it.
Often speak slowly and feel their way. They respond to physical rewards and touching. They memorize things best by doing it, walking through or rehearsing something. They will be interested in a solution that feels right or gives them a good gut feeling.
Tend to spend a fair amount of time talking to themselves. Superfluous information annoys them and they memorize by steps, procedures and sequences. They can also sometimes exhibit characteristics of any other representational system.
If Chapter One was about paying attention with your eyes, then this chapter has been all about paying attention with your ears. The best NLPers are not the ones who are the slickest with the various techniques, they are the ones who pay most attention and notice most, just as the best doctors are the ones who are really good at diagnosis and not just writing prescriptions. The more you notice, the more choice you have, so it’s time to pay real attention, not just to the story but how it is constructed, even if you’re the one telling that story.