By L. Michael Hall and Bobby Bodenhamer
Check out Mind-lines: Lines For Changing Minds at Amazon
Michael Hall’s mind lines model sorts and extends these patterns into seven categories based on his Meta states model.
Language powerfully affects mind and emotional states. Although words are almost totally powerless to change our external reality, they have almost complete power over our internal reality. A tiny idea can start a revolution or trigger depression.
Framing and Reframing
We can change our perceived reality by using the process of framing and reframing. Nothing inherently means anything; it is only our associations.
Bandler and Grinder called the Meta model and Milton model change patterns reframing. Every mental image has both an internal content and format and an external environment or context
- Content — inside the box. Details of the external behavior and the internal states. How else can I view this? What other perspectives could I use? What are some viewpoints others might use?
- Context — outside the box. Setting a higher frame on the belief or ideas i.e. Meta stating. Out framing the external behavior or the internal state with some other concept, ideal meaning. In what context would this behavior be useful?
Content reframe changes the meaning of an experience. A context reframe changes the perception of the problem while keeping the meaning
The one who sets the frame governs the experience. Someone or some idea always sets the frame. Awareness of the meaning process gives us control over it.
Sleight of mouth patterns are about persuading others and ourselves conversationally. The model, based on the Meta model, persuades by transforming meaning. We also use them to repel ideas and maintain our beliefs
A conversational reframe is a quick way to redirect our brain to a new point of view. It avoids resistance
Beliefs often relate to “shoulds”. They are our assumptions about causation and meaning. They confirm our models of the world. Beliefs become organizing frames of reference that allow us to focus on what’s important. They are the validated thoughts that encode our sense of reality that get manifested in behavior.
A belief has at least two levels of thoughts
- A set of representations about something
- Thoughts of confirmation and validation about these representations. You can think all kinds of things without believing them. You cannot change a belief merely by changing the submodalities, it needs conviction. Beliefs feel real and act as commands to the nervous system. The “yes” validates the thoughts.
The Mind Line Patterns
De-framing enables us to take meaning apart by testing stability. We want to expose the faulty logic and unuseful consequences
- Make it more specific. We create beliefs by generalizing, deleting and distorting. They depend on vagueness. We can use the Meta model to test the reality of the belief or meaning.
- Sequence – examine the logic and structure. If the logic doesn’t hold, it messes up the program. We can say this means that, or this causes that.
Here we are changing the meaning inside the box by saying that an event, experience, person or idea is not one thing but another. We call them new names, we redefine them, and we substitute one term for another.
- content reframing – redefine the external behavior – call it a different name
- content reframing – redefine the internal state. What the internal state really means is … What the internal state really causes is …
- and 6. Reflexive reframing Here we are turning either the external behavior or internal state to self or listener. The purpose is to reality test the idea or beliefFor example, “saying mean things makes you a bad person”. “What a mean thing to say.”
Here we are reversing meaning in order to create fresh meanings. How is the whole thing the opposite of what you thought? When a belief becomes a frame of reference, we move through life searching for evidence for it. You can find evidence to support just about anything.
- Counter examples
Here we are reality testing beliefs by examining at what times or places it doesn’t occur. “I lack energy”. To do what? At what times, according to what standards?
Here we are learning to play with the concept of time, consequences, intentions and causation.
- Positive prior intention framing
Invite the person to find more effective ways to accomplish the positive intention. By guessing the positive intent of people’s behavior, it shifts attention from negative behaviors.
- Positive prior cause framing
We are usually skilled in identifying negative things that cause us to do things – blaming and justifying
- First outcome framing
Discovering the future consequences of our behavior. This is a more confrontational stance
- Outcome of outcome framing
Changing our time frames alters meaning. What will the behavior could cause over time?
- Eternity framing
How does the behavior fit in the overall picture of your whole life? How will this look 50 or 100 years from now? The small size of our fear in a larger perspective
Context reframing is Meta stating. In what situation is the behavior useful
- model of the world framing is the ability to hold our maps more tentatively. Notice what happens when you say “this seems like my X”. Or how long have you thought this car belonged to you? Our internal representations of things are not the things.
- criteria and values
When we reframe something as valuable it allows us to reorganize ourselves in terms of that value. You can texture the state of anger so it becomes something valuable and useful, for example respectful anger. “Stress causes me to eat chocolate”. “Is avoiding stress more important than being healthy?”
- “Allness” or universality framing
What if everyone did this all the time? This pattern pushes the belief to its limits. We typically expressed beliefs in absolute terms. “Allness” words don’t make room for exceptions.
- Necessity framing
We typically use one particular style to frame our world.
- Necessity – obligation and force (have to, must, ought to)
- Possibility – opportunities and desire (get to, want to, desire to)
- Impossibility – lack of possibilities or options (can’t, won’t, it’s impossible)
We can use Meta Model questions to challenge this framing. What would happen if you did? What stops you?
- Identity framing
There is no such thing as sameness. We live in a world of processes; nothing is static. Can you describe self without using the to be (am, is, are) verbs? Whatever we identify with sets a self organizing frame. For instance “I am an accountant — begin to see yourself as only that”
- Framing all other abstractions
What principle would empower this person? What idea will make this belief more empowering?
- The unreality frame uses words such as seems, appears, thinks, looks like. These words imply doubt and loosen up our beliefs.
- The self and other frame emphasizes the word “you”. It suggests that your model of the world is different from my model of the world. So for you it seems that being late means I don’t care?
- The tonal emphasis frame emphasizes different words to change the meaning. “So you think being late means I don’t care?” is different from “So you think being late means I don’t care?”
- In English we ask a question with a rising inflection at the end of a sentence. A command has falling inflection. “We are going to breakfast?” Is different from “we are going to breakfast”. You can embed a question or command in a sentence so it is received unconsciously.
- Time Zones frame distinguishes current situations that are now occurring from situations in the future or past. For example “have you always thought about it this way?”
- The realization frame acknowledges the changes we make. We often don’t realize the difference our efforts make, we discount our achievements and progress. How does it feel to realize this?
- Ecology framing Is this belief useful, empowering, limiting, balancing, enhancing? Does this way of thinking serve you?
Analogous framing – reframing using Metaphors and Stories
- metaphor framing
Involves conveying a message in terms of something else. Telling a story that has a similar structure to the problem. Stories are less threatening than advice.
Additional mind lines
- Both and framing
Instead of either/or, we find a middle ground that includes both options
- Pseudo word framing
A” real” word has to function as a symbol of something. Failure is some vague thing to avoid. You can fail but not experience the nominalized entity of failure. Is it a legitimate concept you want in your world?
- Negation framing
Command negation – do not X. You first have to represent it and then make it go away. Don’t think of pink elephants dancing in the ocean. You can also frame a thing as invisible by creating and setting a negation frame. This can loosen up beliefs.
- Possibility and “as if” framing
What would it be like if? If it were possible, what would you be thinking, feeling, doing?
- Systemic and probability framing
Linear thinking enables us to sort and separate, sequence and program so we can create models and step-by-step procedures. Non-linear thinking enables simultaneous information. It connects previously separate and fragmented elements
- Decision framing
We often theorize, analyze, diagnose and talk but don’t decide and take action to do something. Deciding literally means cutting one thing from another. When we say “yes” to something we are saying no to another, we cut off our options. We cut away what is important from what is unimportant.A clear cut decision empowers us to act on our decisions. We can also stand back to look at what decisions are currently driving our actions.
Using Mind Lines (Conversational Reframes)
When you offer someone a mind line, you are playing with meanings. You therefore need sufficient rapport, pacing and trust and respect. What are the benefits of the belief? What difficulties and limitations has it created?
Is the difficulty simple or complex? A phobia is a simple anchored response. Low self-esteem is complex with associations, levels and meanings.
Problem states can undermine and limit our effectiveness. Make sure you reframe your own stuff.