Just So» NLP

Controlling likes and dislikes

mikael — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 19:40:12 +0000

When I first read Unlimited Power years ago, it struck me that likes and dislikes are really part of the machine. What I mean by that is that the personality is really an automaton. Yet we continue to identify with the personality.

Assagioli, if I remember rightly, once defined neurosis as behaviour that’s no longer appropriate. And well, as a student of Freud’s perhaps his definition is entitled to some credibility. Are likes and dislikes that no longer work a neurotic condition? Is perhaps a better definition of a neurotic being someone that hasn’t awakened? And well, it’s just a thought label therefore it’s an illusion anyway.

What I do think is interesting is that we can control our likes and dislikes. Obviously there’s the mindfulness approach and while the most powerful is a longterm strategy. NAC, or NLP if you prefer, offers a short term approach. So, if you haven’t achieved being beyond like and dislike and if you’re not attached to your likes and dislikes, there’s an NLP technique called switching submodalities:

Share/Bookmark

NAC (2)

mikael — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 11:00:00 +0000

In the last blog on this topic, I suggested that the fundamental difference between Buddhism and NAC/NLP was that Buddhism was aiming for the unconditioned self, where as NAC was all about conditioning.

What’s interesting is that meditation is a kind of conditioning in that respect, but a conditioning that is setting up the mental space for the unconditioned.

And on that note in Personal Power II, Day 6 Anthony Robbins talks about the power of focus, which he uses to direct the state of mind and emotion. The object for him is still how you feel.

This to some extent is a Buddhist’s objective. Metta bhavana is at least to some extent choosing to focus on loving kindness towards all beings. And Anthony Robbins in his hour of power suggests that a person focuses on gratitude. How dissimilar is that from appreciation?

He further suggests that’s it’s how you’re evaluating things that determines what you focus on, i.e. the questions you ask. This reminds me of the Zen Koan, e.g. What was your original face before you were born, or the more common what is the sound of one hand clapping? The difference is that these questions are meant to bring the stuff of mind (citta) to calm

Thinking = evaluation. That’s true, Anthony Robbins. Duality arises in the mind. But perhaps there is a focus which has its root in Buddhi and is non-dualistic.

NAC (1)

mikael — Sat, 26 May 2007 11:00:00 +0000

I’m not quite sure where to start with this one. I’ve been attracted to both buddhism and NAC. NAC has certainly helped me over the past several years. What is NAC you might ask. Neuro Associative Conditioning, which is fundamentally Anthony Robbins reframe of NLP.

The question I guess in my mind is how compatable these two areally are. On the surface it seems not. NAC and its parent NLP are both focused on object. Whereas Buddhism is focused on the subject. The aim in Zen as I understand it at least is meditation without object. NLP and NAC are focused on conditioning or programming. Buddhism is focused on the unconditioned state – Nirvana.

Is there any reconciliation between the two, not that I’d want to reconcile Buddhism to anything, but I think at least for myself it might be worth examining where the intersections are, if any. So this topic will last a little while.