| |
NLP and the Enneagram
by Rex Steven Sikes
My
take on it is essentially this - in a nutshell.
The
Enneagram, or any other personality system, Meyers Briggs etc.
etc.
is a set of generalizations. And if we understand the fundamental
use of
generalizations in NLP, (e.g. Eye Accessing Cues, Representational
Systems, Meta Programs, Satir Categories etc. as well as a whole
host of
others noted by NLP, as well as those not noted by NLP) then we
would
understand the usefulness of such systems. People use generalizations
to
streamline - they are big chunks of info which apply to many people,
but
they are useful. Learning to sort by generalizations and also
fill in
the specific individual detail is most desirable. Because we use
one
doesn't mean we forsake the other. Some of the more notable best
selling
books and tape programs 'getting along with difficult people'
etc.
stereotype or generalize people into groups. The 'tank', just
like Satir
did with the 'blamer' or 'leveler' etc. It is useful to recognize
generalizations when dealing with others (a form of calibration)
but not
for a moment adhere to the generalization as if it is actually
true, or
as if the person is permanently or immutably the label given them.
Just
like a nominalization - has many different aspects, colors, shades,
nuances, interpretations, meanings - but we don't stop using them.
We
hopefully understand how to use them. We don't have to denominalize
every nominalization (that would be silly and fruitless - in fact
impossible) so we use them and understand that there is a lot
of
variance to any given term.
Hence,
personality systems contain some truthfulness when applied to
groups or masses of people. And yes individuals comprise those masses,
hence it is important to keep an open mind, be ready to be surprised
often by the individual, and move beyond just the generalization.
All
things can be useful when we are ready to investigate them and accept
them for what they are. Limited models, only reflecting what may
be
possible. Still it can help us with NLP if we still remember to
calibrate, be open and accepting and don't get locked into any system,
including NLP. None of them are gospel or unerring. And all of them
have
some kernels of truth and elements which are helpful to the
practitioner.
Defining
oneself by a number, or be a rep system, or by a meta program
or a belief or value, in fact defining oneself by any label or
nominalization is limiting - yet it is done all the time. Any
time one
sets boundaries around a label, much is deleted. However, if we
recognize this fact, and are open to accepting that more is there,
and
that we are in fact not are names, or labels or scores on personality
tests, nor are others, Meta Programs, or Satir Categories etc.etc.
then
we can use all things, and hopefully we can use them wisely, and
with
respect for others and ourselves.
Respecting
others as far as I am concerned is one of the greatest means
of having rapport and understanding. True acceptance without desiring
that another person or self is different, but accepting them at
face
value. And all of us generalize about others (see I just did in
that
sentence, as well as many others) and since we do we should learn
how to
use big chunks and generalizations with respect and wisdom rather
than
labeling the very same process another person uses as 'bs'.
What
we need to do as practitioners is elevate our thinking about things
to begin to look at the very patterns we are using when we look
at
patterns. When we look at NLP or other systems of classification.
We
need to look at and assess the tools and approaches, and begin
to see
them, beyond what they are purported to be. We need to be able
to go
meta to NLP itself and determine when and how one uses what in
a prudent
and wise manner. That takes open honest critical thinking skills.
That
takes being abel to shift levels, and gain more than one perspective
(essentially more than our own perspective).
All
these things are very dynamic. And being able to sort by
generalization, speeds up calibration immensely. Being able to
go to the
heart of behavior presupposition and well as spoken presupposition,
speeds up the processes immensely. When one can begin to see that
many
things occur simultaneously, and move above that, then one has
a greater
understand, albeit still limited understanding, but a greater
understanding of how things operate together (in another person's
map)
than piecemeal picking apart of rep systems and strategies.
So
it is a matter of being able to chunk up, down and sideways. It
is a
matter of being able to begin to see the connections in another
person's
history to their present state, to discover what generalizations
are at
work and what presuppositions. And guess what - sometimes starting
with
big (and seemingly meaningless pieces like) personality stereotypes
will
get us there a thousand times faster than all the meta modeling
in the
world. However, if one truly begins to fathom the applications
of the
meta model than one finds it more than just an information gathering
tool, but as well a means of communicating more effectively, pacing,
entering another person's map, leading, inducing and much much
more.
Same with rep systems, beliefs, values and meta programs.
And
my gosh modeling becomes all the more a breeze!
Well,
my two cents.
Be
well and enjoy!
Rex
|
|
