Attention! If your trainer doesn't know what are the strategies (ie the management of a succession of actions that occur within the mind and which are related to the events of the environment or simply with the events generated by the mental simulator ), run!
The metaprogramas are often described as boxes that process information in a certain way, filtering or distorting information that gets results within our head.
It's a usuall practice to label the people through metaprograms ("He's a internal or external reference filter", or "She's proactive," etc.) in the same way that people are labbelled through the representational systems ( someday I'll talk also about this mania to label all). Ie, they are often dealed individually.
What hardly anyone knows is that metaprograms are part of a strategy or strategies that can run simultaniously. In addition to the different steps of those strategies, metaprograms can change its EQ (that is the percentatge of predominance of one or the other) or simply switch to another metaprogram.
A group of key metaprograms in a strategy are the primary interest sort because they give us information on the environment and conditions (necessary and / or sufficient) that must be taken to trigger a strategy.
But in addition, there are false metaprograms or just labels that define strategies subroutines, such as the conviction metaprogram that describes how someone is convinced of something. This metaprogram is the representation of subroutines that depend on the number of iterations and / or kinesthetic threshold for exiting out of a subroutine.
Another false metaprograma is the flow of mental events in which the focus is categorized according to similarities or differences. A metaprograma that doesn't make any sense because is against set theory and general common sense, speaking to differentiate and matching processes as opposed. Again, it is simply the nominalization of a strategy that runs in our minds and in which I will not go into details now.
All this sounds to you like Chinese? Don't worry it's ok (unless you are already Master Practitioner).
All this sounds like Chinese to your trainer? Caring much! Yes, because he's certainly a part of the set "trainers", but also part of the subset of "people with a title of dubious reputation and who think they understand something of NLP."
Tip: Do not let your trainer to answer you "Man of course! It isn't anything new! That's basic!" (Classic breakaway of the insecure).
Ask a demonstration that doesn’t lead you to misleading technicalities. If He is good, he will know how to simplify it in order that just with your common sense you will understand it.
Then just look for a couple or three examples to clarify the explanation.
.jpg)
Posts
