A fruit belongs to a different logic than apples its called category.
Semantically it makes sense to map words and meanings into order of logic like math. An apple is then a different fruit than an orange.
Fruits can be compared to vegetables (same level of logic) and so on and each detailed down logic is called chunking up or down (fruit to apples for example).
NLP says submodalites are used to change representations, so if you have an apple and an orange in your visual field at the same time you can now change the colors, brightness, etc..and then the representation changes the order of logic.
No it does not.
It changes the representation.
However that isn’t what we need to change at all and Bandler got it all wrong with his submodality model.
At some point people will ask, how do you know? Its what they do with NLP they ask you questions you cant answer. That’s interesting to me so if you don’t know that then do they know?
No they don’t.
So we have a whole field of people trained that ask questions none knows the answer to and everyone agrees there it’s a good thing to do, right?
They will say it’s a process without evidence and without anything logical at all due to it’s a process that lacks definition the whole field of NLP lacks it totally.
So what is then going on that those guys from NLP have no clue about?
RBIm 4 with SSG allows you to define the way the brain moves information around and organize that information ahead of time trough what’s called neural nets. The way the brain does that are trough a replacement of contextual meaning.
How we know an apple is an apple and that we want to have an apple is contained within the same neural net the same context with its associations. That you like apples and enjoy eating them does not belong in the same logic as a fruit or the chunk of apples as fruits. That’s what semantics cant tell you and since NLP is a semantic representational field, they got it all wrong and they don’t know it yet.
As I like to say, if it’s a representation, why then don’t work with what created the representation?
RBIm 4 allows one to define the system we currently are engaged into. We define when it started and when it stops. Once defined like that we set it aside and don’t work with it anymore. If your going to change something you need to know what it is to be as then we can replace it with something else normally better. The way you buy a new cellphone, car, clothes, etc…
The way we know an apple is an apple and not an orange is due to containment of context. Once that is there you can then have a craving for apples, cigarettes, drugs, coffee, cigars etc…but be unable to change those cravings due to working within the containment you have active. Once the containment been defined in a SSG you can then allow the brain to move this into a whole new containment a new neural net.
The brain don’t know why that neural net should fire off during this context but its how that works. Once we replace the contextual meaning, your behavior changes along the way.
The way we know one context is the one vs something else is trough distinctions as the signal value in the system have its peak once people do drugs those values are changed. The signal then wont be able to contain the containment. It happens for us perceptually with groups as we enter a new context we are not familiar with the system don’t know what context to run so then its vulnerable
Its not like its an alien in there an unconscious mind making splendid superb choices for us. It’s a system of reactions and responses to the world. The world we are attached to are a casual one. Some need to climb mountains go into the nature every weekend to relax and be happy and centered, all I do is, smile and there I am no need to go hiking and climbing and walking hours and hours upon some mountains. While I do enjoy the nature and hiking and mountains I don’t need to go out there everyday to experience serenity or such but those who does have no choice other than to go there to experience that a external reactionary world they now cant change.
Once you define the old SSG what happens is your brain now puts that on hold and create a reference to the SSG and its contextual containment. You now know, so I just or you just did something NLP don’t know to do but ask people about (how you know) but have no clue about and I just taught you what and why that none in NLP been able to do or the world for that matter. Once the old SSG is defined the brain now created a difference and can relate to that.
As the Skype chat I did with RBIm 4 and SSG with a couple of guys I pointed them to solutions the new SSG tweaked their current approach and that’s what someone like me does streamline so the mistakes you do the trial and error is less and less and smoothen out the learning curve.
RBIM 4 have evidence to the change and what goes on. Its not guesswork here.
So one can ask, why does this SSG approach work the way it does?
If the logic of the representation and the chunking and the category does not matter the way NLP believes it does as they have done that for 40 years and guessed its also why people don’t understand how to become geniuses from a field that supposedly studies them and build models from them.
So how can you like apples and dislike oranges for example when those are in the same logic and chunk?
You know what context what one belongs trough as your able to distinguish which one is which. Once you engage that system as we do with RBIm 4 you can then learn to create a new SSG to have a new meaning enjoying whatever you couldn’t before easier than ever.
RBIM 4 teaches you how to know.
We don’t do guesswork. Once you know which SSG is old and which one you create that is new, then you can make the choice to what one to do. Its then for our brain easy to do the new SSG. So this one instead of that old one? Ok.
Our brain reacts it does not think.
If you replace the system organizations baseline then the system changes assumptions, behaviors and such along the way automatically.
RBIm 4 with SSG allows that to be done and created for you by you.
Instead of guessing and be asked how you know you can create the way to know.
That’s rocking it.