THE ART OF DETECTING

A CLOSED-MIND

 

If your mind is your central mechanism, your ultimate power, for dealing
with reality (which it is), then you will naturally want to have an open
mind.  And if you don't want that, then recognize that it is essential if
you are to "deal with reality."  Think about the very first thinking
skill-consideration-you cannot perform that skill if you don't have an open
mind.  Consider requires an open mind and, simultaneously, as you practice
it, it develops an open mind.  You can't consider something if you do not
open your mind and give an idea a chance.  You give it a chance by
representing it visually, reproducing it auditorily, and kinesthetically
trying on the words and the conceptual frames of the idea.

 

What stand in contrast to this openness?  Answer: All of the non-thinking
skills and states: reactivity, automatic thinking, borrowed thinking,
superficial thinking, agenda thinking, "knowing," and expecting (see
Executive Thinking, Brain Camp I).  All of these unhealthy thinking styles
close down consideration so that you do not even given an idea a chance.
And when consideration is shut down, then so also are all of the critical
and creative skills.  After all, if a person will not consider, then there
can be no questioning, doubting, detailing, and distinguishing.  That shuts
down all critical thinking.

 

Now certainly you have experienced people with closed minds, haven't you?
When was the last time you encountered a closed mind?  You try to sell to a
friend your idea about a certain movie, but he will not even consider going
to it.  You ask a banker for a loan, you know that your credit score and
assets are sufficient, but no.  The banker turns you down flat.  You say,
"You haven't even actually considered it."  But no, her mind is closed.

 

Theoretically, why would a person not even consider an idea?  What would
explain that refusal?  The answer is intolerance, dogmatism, and
know-it-all-ism.  The person refuses to open her mind to an idea; he refuses
to even tolerate an idea.  And why?  Because they have already decided on
some meaning, a meaning which simply precludes your idea.  Their previous
learning and knowledge functions as, what's described in the field of
learning, "proactive inhibition."  It stops any new considerations cold in
its tracks.

 

If an open mind is a mind open for business, then a closed mind is a mind
closed for business.  Where there is an open mind, there's a sign on that
person's heart, "Open!  Come on in."  When you enter, you are warmly
greeted, welcomed, and they ask you, "How can we help you?"  Conversely,
where there is a closed mind, you see a different sign, "Closed."  It could
be, "Closed for the night."  "Closed for he Season."  Or even, "Closed: Out
of Business."

 

A closed mind says, "Go away, we don't have any room or place for you."  It
says, "No solicitators" and it may add, "Violators will be prosecuted to the
further extent of the law."  A closed mind is also not a friendly mind; it
is not a mind that's interested or curious.  With a closed mind, you can
protect your beliefs from the danger of additional or new facts.  With a
closed mind, you don't have to learn anything new or different.  And without
new learning, you can remain the same, you maintain or are stuck in, the
status quo.  Now you will be untroubled by new ideas or challenges.  That's
the upside of a closed mind.

 

The downside of a closed mind, however, is one that's much more devastating.
With a closed mind, you don't grow or develop.  Instead, you arrest your
personal development and become stuck at a previous stage, and you probably
trap yourself in numerous cognitive distortions that of which you are
unconscious.

 

I was asked recently, "Why have you been putting so much emphasis on
critical thinking skills?"  Part of the answer lies in the prevalence of
closed-minds.  That's because critical thinking is partly defined as an open
mind to facts, truth, insights as well as the ability to think clearly,
accurately, and without bias.  In a world as divided as ours, we need more
and more open minds who can have civil conversations, realizing all along
that no thought is a fact, it is just a thought -a mental construct about
something.  And as fallible human beings, we are often wrong, something that
does not frighten an open mind.

 DO YOUR OWN THINKING!

 

There is thinking, which everyone does and which is inevitable, and then
there is real thinking, which is everyone does not do, and which is not
inevitable.  Thinking is an art, it is an education, it is a discipline that
requires skills and competencies.  All that's required for inevitable
thinking is a functional brain on the top of your shoulders, one that is not
brain-dead.  Nearly everyone has that and so nearly everyone "thinks."  Yet
because there are numerous non-thinking states, you can have a brain and not
use it.  There are 7 kinds of non-thinking: automatic thinking, reactive,
borrowed, superficial, agenda, "knowing," and expectant (Executive Thinking,
Brain Camp I).

 

Imagine that-a working brain which is not engaged so it actually and truly
thinks!  The state of non-thinking is not only possible, it is far, far too
much the case with most people.  Why is that?  Because thinking is hard
work.  If you have ever struggled to understand a subject in school, with
reading a difficult passage in a book, or the mechanics of how something
works, and afterward felt exhausted, mentally drained, and if you rubbed
your heads to ease the tension you feel, then you know that sometimes,
thinking can require a lot of cognitive effort.

 

Famous people have often spoke about the effort of thinking.  For example
Peter F. Drucker once said: "Thinking is very hard work.  And management
fashions are a wonderful substitute for thinking."  John Dewey wrote a book
at the beginning of the 20th century, How We Think, and in it he defined
thinking in a way that still shocks most people: "The origin of thinking is
some perplexity, confusion, or doubt."  It is the surprises and disappoints
of life that we don't like or can't figure out, otherwise known as
"problems," that trigger us to think.  No wonder some people do not like to
think and do whatever they can to avoid thinking!

 

Not only do senior managers in organizations substitute "management
fashions" for thinking, there's another substitute you should know about.
Carl Jung wrote, "Thinking is difficult, that's why most people judge."  Now
we are back to non-thinking-making a reactionary and prejudicial judgment
rather than thinking.  Then you don't have to put in the work of actually
thinking something through.

 

When Albert Einstein thought about thinking, he noted something which many
of us have said about schools.  Namely, schools should not only focus on
what to think, but how to think.  Most do not.  Einstein said, "Education is
not the learning of facts, but the training of the mind to think."  True
thinking is not inevitable, you have to learn how to do it.  You have to
learn how to use your mind to think, and thereby become mindful, that is,
consciously aware and alive.

 

A fascinating thing about thinking is that you have to do it, no one can do
it for you.  Now it is true that you can learn from someone and take on his
thoughts and think her thoughts after her. Because of this, we all can
benefit from the quality thinking of those who came before us and we do not
have to start from ground zero.  I can read from Aristotle.  Then, what he
learned and discovered thousands of years ago, I can think those same
thoughts, try them on, and make them mine.  We call that learning.  It is
the process by which I can come to understand what someone else has already
figured out or discovered.  But again, you have to do the thinking to
transfer those thoughts into your neurology, nervous systems and brain.  No
one can do that for you.  Nor will those thoughts get inside you by osmosis.

 

We can also learn to be excellent thinking partners to each other.  This was
the discovery of Vygotsky when he described how a more informed person can
scaffold the learning of a less informed person thereby accelerating the
development of the learner (Executive Learning).  But again, the learner has
to do his or her own thinking.

 

What happens when you do your own thinking?  Obviously they learn.  You come
to know more and when you integrate that learning, you can do more.  You can
become more skilled and effective in doing things, more self-confident, more
independent, more able to stand on your own two feet.  You become empowered.
As you use your mind to think and develop your thinking powers and skills,
you becomes more self-determining and able to discern truth from falsehood.
And all of that unleashes your potentials.

 

Now you know what we are striving to do in Neuro-Semantics.  As we teach the
Meta-Model, the Meta-Programs model, the Meta-States model, etc., our larger
objective is to enable people to access their ultimate power-their thinking
powers.  This makes people more intelligent, more rational, and more
informed.  And because we want everyone to do this, it facilitates everyone
in becoming more democratic, more respectful, and more tolerant and
accepting of others

 

In enabling people to become excellent critical thinkers and creative
thinkers-we want and encourage people to do their own thinking.  This
downplays the need to conform your thinking to anyone else's.  This makes
redundant any need to have a creed and force people to submit their minds to
only the "politically correct" thinking.  In this way, we work to develop
thinkers who can engaged in healthy conversations, debates, and dialogues.
They do not have to agree, in fact, if people are truly thinking, they
probably will not agree.  There will be lots of differences.  That is not
only okay, it is to be expected.  It is desirable.

 

The professions that we focus on and develop in Neuro-Semantics (and NLP)
are thinking professions: coaches, consultants, therapists, leaders,
managers, etc.  To be highly effective at any of these professions-you have
to be a clear, accurate, precise, practical, creative, and critical thinker.
You have to know how to challenge ill-formedness in linguistic structures
(the Meta-Model).  You have to know how to challenge the cognitive
distortions, biases, and fallacies (see Executive Thinking; Thinking for
Humans).  You have to be able to detect and work with thinking and
perceiving patterns (Meta-Programs, Figuring Out People).  Is it a lot?
Yes, you bet it is and in Neuro-Semantics we have lots of training programs
to make this a reality.  Here's to you doing your own best thinking!

 THINKING ABOUT THINKING

WITH NLP

 

Isn't that a gret title?  I wish I had invited it, but alas I did not.
Joseph Yeager invented it and then wrote a book by that title, Thinking
about Thinking with NLP (1985).  It's an excellent book -insightful, playful
(full of humor), and full of practical applications.  I got that book the
next year (1986) just as I was entering into this field. 

"NLP is the science of thinking about thinking." (p. viii)

"... Think of thinking as continuous and fluid ... choice is a convention of
thinking, not a given of human nature." (p. ix)

 

And while it is a wonderful book, it is also an incomplete book.  In fact,
given what we know today, it is very incomplete!  In spite of all of the
good things in the book, Joseph did not even come close to the idea of NLP
as a Thinking Model (Neurons #43, #44).  Well, in 1985 NLP was only
officially 10 years old (1975) and Meta-Programs and Sub-Modalities were
only then in the process of being developed.  Joseph also wrote it years
before the discovery of the Meta-States Model (1994) wherein I modeled the
most unique kind of thinking and consciousness that we humans have-
self-reflexive consciousness.

 

Now as a thinking model, NLP did not make the mistake of making "thinking"
dichotomous to "feeling" or "emoting."  NLP is much too holistic for that!
When we talk about thinking, we include within it feeling and emoting.  The
fundamental channels of thinking, the sensory representational systems of
the VAK include both.  Generally, visual and auditory representations drive
the thinking part and kinesthetics drive the feeling and emotional part.
This is the basic structure of facilitating experiences using NLP.

 

If that doesn't immediately make sense, or ring a bell for you, consider
what happens in any and every NLP training and/or coaching.  A person wants
to feel more relaxed, more joyful, more confident, more curious, etc.  What
does the NLP trainer do?  She first grounds the experience of work asking
VAK questions, "How do you picture this?   What tone of voice are you using?
And how are you feeling in your body-your breathing, posture, muscle tone,
etc.?"  Once this thinking is elicited, then the NLP-er will ask the person
to make the thinking features of the pictures brighter, the tone more
upbeat, etc.  Then, "What effects does this have on your emotions or
emotional states?"

 

The visual and auditory qualities also drive the kinesthetics.  Sometimes
the kinesthetics are used to amplify or turn up the bodily sensations.  Then
to enrich it further, words are elicited.  "What do you say to yourself?"
"What could you say to yourself that would make this experience more
joyful?"  "What tonality would you use?"

All of this highlights that in NLP we think with our whole mind and body.
Thinking is visual, auditory, kinesthetic (which includes smells and tastes)
sensory systems.  It also includes linguistics for our mental categories
(our meta-representational system).  NLP, as a holistic thinking model,
involves no dichotomizing or polarizing of thinking and feeling.

 

Neurologically, when we think not only are various cortexes activated in the
brain, but neuro-pathways are activated from brain to all of the body.  All
of the many different nervous systems are activated (autonomic nervous
system, immune system, sympathetic nervous system, digestive nervous system,
etc.).  That's why, taking cue from Korzybski, NLP is as holistic and
systemic as you can get, hence, Neuro-Linguistic Programming.  We "program"
or construct strategies and experiences into our very neurology.  Then, as
"neurons are fired together, they wire together" (Donald Hebb).  Now the
program, whether it is for reading, riding a bike, getting dressed, driving
a car, solving an algebra problem, etc., that program is readily available
to us as a developed resource.

 

As a Thinking Model, NLP specifies how such programming works in human
neurology and how it is coded linguistically.  We are a neuro-linguistic and
neuro-semantic class of life (Alfred Korzybski).  What this means is that
unlike the field of Critical Thinking or the field of Creative Thinking, NLP
is so much more.  Again, that's why it is a meta-discipline.

 

When you next add the meta-levels of thinking to all of this-then you have
an even fuller picture.  As you think about your thinking, you develop
higher levels of consciousness.  This meta-thinking shows up as beliefs,
decisions, learning, understandings, conceptual models, etc.  Within each of
these we develop all sorts of thinking hierarchies- belief systems,
hierarchy of values, increasingly more abstract understandings of patterns
and the "laws" that govern a discipline.

 

NLP began as a thinking model, even though the founders didn't realize it,
or think about their work in that way.  Today Neuro-Semantic NLP continues
the original discovery by modeling the many ways that thinking functions in
our mind-body system.

 

Why is all of that important?  Because everything human depends upon, and
arises from, thinking.  Thinking is the key to everything we deem important.
As the ultimate cause; it is your ultimate power.  Consequently, if you can
get to the thinking of someone, whether a client, an expert, or yourself-you
can identify the structure of pathology, excellence, challenge, etc. and
therefore that person's way of functioning.  You can learn it, bring healing
to it if need be, and/or replicate it.  That's because it is a model of
thinking itself.