Frogs Into Princes by Bandler and Grinder (NLP). Still important? YES!

Рет қаралды 5,760

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 31

@theswcoaching 5 жыл бұрын

CONTACT: www.theswcoaching.com/ SPECIAL FREE GUIDE: mailchi.mp/75f43c0ddd59/manage-stress-in-the-moment TELL ME WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT OLD NLP BOOKS! (I'd love to know!) This video link: kzbin.info/www/bejne/b3q9mWirbKqCd9k

@DeanneShoyer 5 жыл бұрын

Fascinating! I found myself thinking of parallels in my history studies - as a grad student you are pushed to discover the new, cover more specialized, narrow areas, and kids are therefore growing up learning about events and subjects in a deeper, narrower way. What I love about the older books is how terrific they were at putting things in context and giving the reader a sense of the narrative.

@theswcoaching 5 жыл бұрын

Thank you Deanne, really interesting.

@aryankulshreshthastayalive 10 ай бұрын

Exactly, old books are mines of treasure more than today's books.

@Nataliepfund 5 жыл бұрын

Very interesting! We do lose so much when we think of anything as whole and fixed. I love your take.

@theswcoaching 5 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much Natalie.

@DrShelleyMeyer 5 жыл бұрын

Interesting video, new info for me on NLP. Thanks for explaining it!

@theswcoaching 5 жыл бұрын

Thank you Shelley, I'm glad it was useful for you.

@martinwilliams9866 2 жыл бұрын

Although in "The Structure of Magic" deep structure was explained as linguistic, later on Bandler & Grinder talked about it as experiential, as with the 4-tuple. The good thing about NLP is that it's generative, the bad thing about it is that it's generative. Well-formed outcomes isn't in "Frogs"

@theswcoaching 2 жыл бұрын

Hi Martin. Thanks for commenting and good to meet you. I always enjoy meeting fellow NLPers. Yes, I've seen that inconsistency myself although to be honest I would put that down to inconsistency rather than NLP being generative. The latest version of the official NLP practitioner manual used by the Society of NLP, the Bandler branch of it, still posits deep structure as a linguistic structure in accordance with the original model. And to be honest I think that's best because as you know B&G didn't create that model, they took it from Linguistics. Where a well known model is invoked, its probably best to invoke it correctly, or supersede it with a new model with new terms. But actually, I think it is about time we retired the surface structure, deep structure model anyway. Linguistics abandoned it as the wrong concept about 40 years ago and replaced it with better models including x-bar theory and the Minimalist Program. If the Meta Model had been coded in the age of the Minimalist Program we might be talking about select (and failure to select), move and merge rather than delete, distort and generalise. And if you think about it, failure to select is probably more accurate than deletion. See, if we say something has been deleted, my question is what has it been deleted from? It wasn't deleted from the surface structure because it was never there in the first place. It wasn't deleted from the speaker's experience because when we ask a question, we find it is still there. Deletion only seems accurate if there an intermediate structure between the surface structure and experience that it can be deleted from, and in the model, that was the linguistic deep structure, the idea Linguistics abandoned. When B&G drew the surface structure as being directly created from the 4-tuple, that probably is more accurate, but if they really meant it as a generative new way of thinking about language and experience, it would be better to use new terms rather than invite confusion with those old concepts of Transformational Grammar. I would love to see NLP reform it's coding of the Meta Model to align with more up to date concepts in linguistics, but I don't see that happening. Ref: Frogs Into Princes, I'll take your word on that as I don't have my book to hand to check myself right now. Thanks for pointing it out. Thanks again Martin. Be well.

@aryankulshreshthastayalive 10 ай бұрын

Informative. Thanks

@theswcoaching 10 ай бұрын

Glad it was helpful!

@aryankulshreshthastayalive 10 ай бұрын

@@theswcoaching how we create problem through linguistics still works to heal and nlp showed this to the world in a very well way. Nlp co founders, Perls,virginia satir have played a very big role to make nlp possible and one more thanks to nlp cofounders about creating nlp out of their different kind of discoveries. Must say that nlp cofounders have done an immense work to serve humanity in the best possible way and this should not be forgotten by anyone. Nlp has taught people about what exactly is "attitude" and that more than technique or methodologies, the "attitude" matters because then person can come up with her own approaches to handle anything in life, and as a result this is the source of more discoveries and inventions. Before, nlp, hardly any therapy, any models talked about "attitude" as explicitly as nlp did. Structure of magic vol 1&2 books both are mines of endless treasure till today and will always be. Nlp Cofounders surely deserve a standing ovation and a highly respectful salute by everyone.

@timmy1874 2 жыл бұрын

Indeed, it's subjective learning, and about creating a direction and not a specific outcome.

@theswcoaching 2 жыл бұрын

Hi Andre, thanks, yes good call. Thanks for sharing!

@DalDhaliwalOfficial 5 жыл бұрын

Great video Stephen. Really informative and interesting to watch. Thank you for sharing.

@theswcoaching 5 жыл бұрын

Thank you Dal

@MooncakeEnglish 5 жыл бұрын

Really informative, thanks for sharing!

@theswcoaching 5 жыл бұрын

Thank you for commenting, I'm so glad you liked it.

@ElizabethRitchie 5 жыл бұрын

I have not heard of this book and know very little about NLP. It seems there is a lot of overlap between NLP and counselling techniques. Thanks for the informative video!

@theswcoaching 5 жыл бұрын

I'm glad I could introduce it to you Elizabeth. Thanks for commenting.