Post on 14-Mar-2018
Advanced Language Advanced Language
Pattern Mastery Flash Pattern Mastery Flash
Cards Vol II:Cards Vol II:
Sleight of MouthSleight of Mouth
Matt CaulfieldMatt Caulfield
© 2012 Matt Caulfield
This entire document is copyright to Matt Caulfield. The right to sell it as a
book or ebook is strictly reserved.
Acknowledgements
These cards would not exist without the hard work and insight of some of the
geniuses and forerunners of NLP. In particular Richard Bandler, who’s
argumentative skills these patterns are based on, and Robert Dilts who
modelled and codified those patterns.
I must thank above everyone else Doug O’Brien who’s hard work in this area
has made the sleight of mouth patterns accessible and easy to understand,
learn and apply. If you wish to learn sleight of mouth, I highly recommend
Doug’s books and audio programmes, which you can purchase at
www.ericksonian.org.
Introduction
I produced the original set of “Advanced Language Pattern Cards” for myself
and then for the attendees on my NLP Practitioner trainings. The plan was
always to expand this deck into a second volume to cover the Sleight of
Mouth Patterns, and finally here they are.
To use these cards, print them out onto card (or print them on paper and stick
them to card), I have included a handy card back for you to use on them if you
wish! If you really want to you could even laminate them...
The secret is to use them every day, even if it is just one card for 5 minutes. If
you do that you will be surprised how quickly you master these patterns.
The great thing with having them as a pdf, rather than a hard copy, is if you
lose a card or your set becomes a bit tatty, you can just print out a new one!
I hope enjoy them and find them useful,
Matt Caulfield
Sleight of Mouth: A History
“Sleight of Mouth” is a system of language patterns for persuasion. The story
goes that Robert Dilts devised the patterns by modelling the argument and
persuasion skills of Richard Bandler. By breaking down the methods used by
Bandler, Dilts came up with 14 patterns.
The name "Sleight of Mouth" comes from the phrase "Sleight of Hand" which
refers to a magician's skills in making things happen which appear impossible.
Sleight of Mouth helps you change (or reinforce) peoples beliefs as if “by
magic”.
The Structure of Belief
Sleight of Mouth focuses on influence by challenging, changing or reinforcing
beliefs.
Sleight of looks at the two Meta Model Patterns of beliefs in more detail:
Cause-Effect: X causes Y, for example “if I eat chicken (CAUSE), it will make me sick (EFFECT)”. Complex Equivalence: X=Y, or X is equivalent to Y (the meaning a word or statement has to you). For example: “You're late again, which means you don't love me”. (Note that this is not just "I believe you don't love me", but rather there is something that leads to that outcome.) “I am not going to do that, [because] I am not that kind of person!”
Polya Patterns and the Structure of Beliefs
George Polya was a mathematician (much the same as Alfred Korzybski, the
developer of General Semantics) at Princeton who was curious about how
people came to believe something if it wasn’t provable. He referred to this
ability to believe in something as ‘plausibility’, he wanted to see how things
became so plausible, that at some point it becomes ‘true’ for that person.
He described five patterns of plausibly (We have simplified the description to
remove the complex mathematics. If you love maths feel free to dig out a copy
the book these came from: “Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning Vol II”):
1. The Meta Pattern: Probability
The likelihood that something will occur again based on its past performance.
The more something occurs the more we will tend to believe it will occur again
(the sun coming up for example).
Also, if something which is not very probably occurs it tends to validate the
case-effect belief which predicted it (pressing the button more often gets the
lift to come quicker)
2. Verification of a Consequence
If a particular belief (B) implies a particular consequence and we verify the
consequence (C) than it makes the belief more plausible.
>>> If B implies C and C is true then B is more credible. <<<
3. Contingency
If a belief (B) presupposes some event or phenomenon and we verify this
contingent event (C) then it makes the belief more plausible.
>>> If B presupposes C and C is true then B is more credible. <<<
Polya’s example is about criminal defence or prosecution and is believed to
have committed it, and that crime needs a contingent event and that event is
proven to have happened it makes it more plausible that the person
committed the crime.
Say someone is accused of holding up a store with a gun and the prosecution
demonstrates the person has a gun, then the possibility that they held up the
store seems more plausible.
4. Inference from Analogy
A belief (B) is more plausible if an analogous conjecture (A) is proven true.
>>> If B is analogous to A and A is true then B is more credible. <<<
This is where we draw comparisons to things that appear related, but aren’t.
If the analogy cannot be shown to be true but it can be shown to be credible
then it still increases the plausibility of the analogous belief.
Animal testing is the classic analogy. In fact much of science is based on
analogous testing...
5. Disprove the Converse
The plausibility of a belief increases is a rival conjecture is disproved.
This is the classic argumental process that the philosopher Nietzsche would
use. He would rubbish the challenging conjecture and then provide his own.
His own was often no more plausible, but because he has rubbished the
alternative his appeared more plausible.
6. Comparison With Random
If the belief can be shown to be able to predict results better than random
guessing then it is more credible.
Tips for Learning These Advanced Patterns
1. Us the Meta Model questions to recover the full belief before you begin.
You can see the Meta Model patterns in the “Advanced Language
Pattern Cards Vol. 1” (see www.mattcaulfield.co.uk).
2. You don’t need to learn the labels. They are the least important part of
these cards. It is more important to be able to recognise, generate and
know what to do with the patterns.
3. Set a goal, develop a plan and stick to it!
4. Start slowly (otherwise you may overwhelm yourself), just pick one
card a day to begin with and listen out for, and generate, that pattern.
5. Have FUN! Enjoying what you are doing will make you learn much
faster.
6. It must sound like naturally spoken, “normal”, language. If it sounds like
hypnotic mumbo jumbo, it will not be as effective.
7. Practice good tonality (for more information see “Developing You Dynamic Voice” audio programme at www.mattcaulfield.co.uk).
Suggested Beginner Exercises
1. Write down a list of as many beliefs as you can think of, either in the
Cause & Effect (this causes that) or Complex Equivalence (this means
that). The classic examples are:
• “Cancer causes death” • “Saying mean things, means you are a bad person” • “You being late means you don’t care about me”
• “Nuclear arms means strength, protection and safety”
But generate (or listen out for) your own examples.
2. Draw one cards at and random and use it generate 3-5 challenges or
counter examples.
3. Draw one card at and random and use it generate 3-5 suggestions that
can reinforce the belief.
4. Draw three (or more) cards and generate a counter examples (or
reinforcing suggestions) and form them into a coherent paragraph or
statement (or story if you pick the “Metaphor/Analogy” card).
5. If you hear a belief pattern REMEMBER you do not need to challenge
it, you can reinforce it too. However, it is good practice to think of a way
it could be challenged.
For many more suggestions on how to practice language pattern drills please see the “NLP Exercise Manual” at www.mattcaulfield.co.uk
CAUSE/EFFECT
will, will make, cause, requires, etc (X => Y)
“Positive thinking leads to unrealistic expectations”
META PATTERN Linguistic Structure of
Belief © Matt Caulfield
COMPLEX EQUIVALENCE
Making two different
experiences have the same meaning (X=Y)
“He doesn’t love me, he doesn’t buy me flowers”
META PATTERN Linguistic Structure of
Belief © Matt Caulfield
THE META PATTERN: Probability
The likelihood that
something will occur again based on its past
performance.
The sun coming up.
POLYA PATTERN
© Matt Caulfield
VERIFICATION OF
CONSEQUENCE
If a particular belief implies a particular
consequence and we verify the consequence than it makes the belief
more plausible.
POLYA PATTERN
© Matt Caulfield
CONTINGENCY
If a belief presupposes some event or
phenomenon and we verify this contingent event then it makes the belief more
plausible.
POLYA PATTERN
© Matt Caulfield
INFERENCE FROM
ANALOGY
A believe is more plausible if an analogous conjecture
is proven true.
This is where we draw comparisons to things that appear related, but aren’t.
POLYA PATTERN
© Matt Caulfield
DISPROVE THE CONVERSE
The plausibility of a
belief increases as a rival conjecture is
disproved.
POLYA PATTERN
© Matt Caulfield
COMPARISON WITH RANDOM
If the belief can be
shown to be able to predict results better
than random guessing then it is more credible.
POLYA PATTERN
© Matt Caulfield
INTENT
What makes them make this statement?
Concentrate on the intention behind it.
Highlight the positive
function of the idea, or challenge the negative
one.
SLEIGHT OF
MOUTH © Matt Caulfield
CONSEQUENCES
Look for the
consequence (even an unintentional
consequence) which can lead to the belief
being challenged.
SLEIGHT OF MOUTH
© Matt Caulfield
ANOTHER OUTCOME
Offer an alternative
outcome of the belief.
“Maybe you don’t need ABC, maybe you need
XYZ?”
SLEIGHT OF MOUTH
© Matt Caulfield
COUNTER-EXAMPLE
Use an exception
where their statement would not be true
(useful if the structure of the belief includes a (Universal) Quantifier
as evidence to that belief).
SLEIGHT OF MOUTH
© Matt Caulfield
APPLY TO SELF
Turn the comment around onto them - by
saying (or implying) the consequence they
suggest is applicable for you, really is
applicable for them.
SLEIGHT OF MOUTH
© Matt Caulfield
REALITY STRATEGY
Delve behind the belief
to their perceptions about the world. Challenge the
perceptions the belief is based on.
SLEIGHT OF MOUTH
© Matt Caulfield
MODEL OF THE WORLD
Demonstrate that the
belief is only true in their understanding or model
of the world. Give alternative models as
counter examples.
SLEIGHT OF MOUTH
© Matt Caulfield
META FRAME
Challenge the basis behind the belief, rather
than the belief.
This can be a rather aggressive attack. It is
“an all” out strategy, don’t use it lightly!
SLEIGHT OF MOUTH
© Matt Caulfield
CHANGE FRAME SIZE
Extend the implications from the belief to some
bigger (or perhaps a more compact) scale in
order to a bigger (or shorter) time period.
SLEIGHT OF MOUTH
© Matt Caulfield
HIERARCHY OF CRITERIA
Challenge the idea according to more essential criteria, recommending
something more important they must be
thinking about.
SLEIGHT OF MOUTH
© Matt Caulfield
CHUNK DOWN
Much like a lose thread can unravel a knitted
jumper. Chunking down to a specific part of the belief and pulling that apart can unravel the
whole belief.
SLEIGHT OF MOUTH
© Matt Caulfield
METAPHOR OR ANALOGY
Using an example, story or demonstration to challenge the belief.
SLEIGHT OF MOUTH
© Matt Caulfield
CHUNK (BLOW) UP
Exaggerate the belief to an absurd level in order to challenge it. Taking it out of the context it is in.
SLEIGHT OF MOUTH
© Matt Caulfield
REDEFINE
Redefine the meaning of the words used in the structure of the belief.
You can redefine the cause or effect or the
resulting meaning (complex equivalence).
SLEIGHT OF MOUTH
© Matt Caulfield
TIMELINE Challenge the belief on the basis of when and how long it holds true.
(ADDITIONAL) SLEIGHT OF
MOUTH © Matt Caulfield
REDIRECT
Attack the belief by questioning the
underlying beneficial motives.
(ADDITIONAL) SLEIGHT OF
MOUTH © Matt Caulfield
Card back to cut out and stick to your cards!