Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- modal_operators_verbs [2024/05/23 15:32] – tom
+++ modal_operators_verbs [2025/01/31 15:02] (current) – [Practical Application in IEMT] tom
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{tag>Related Believes "Robert Dilts" "Steve Andreas" NLP "Clean language"}}
+{{tag>Related Believes "Robert Dilts" "Steve Andreas" NLP "Clean language" "Transactional Analysis" "Non-Violent Communication" }}
 ====== Modal Verbs ======
-In everyday language, words like "must", "must not", "should", "should not", "could", "could not", "have to", and "need to" play crucial roles in conveying **obligations**, **permissions**, **capabilities, recommendations** and **possibilities**(choice).\\ In NLP these are called Modal Operators(MO) or more linguistically "modal verbs"[([[https://www.grammarly.com/blog/modal-verbs/|Grammarly]])] or even "adverbs". These terms can be viewed through the lens of linguistic or legal frameworks, such as the RFC 2119 or Neuro-Linguistic Programming(NLP).\\
+In everyday language, words like "must", "must not", "should", "should not", "could", "could not", "have to", and "need to" play crucial roles in conveying **obligations**, **permissions**, **capabilities, recommendations** and **possibilities**(choice).\\ In NLP these are called Modal Operators(MO) or more linguistically "modal verbs"[([[https://www.grammarly.com/blog/modal-verbs/|Grammarly]])] or even "adverbs". These terms can be viewed through the lens of linguistic, legal frameworks or Neuro-Linguistic Programming(NLP).\\
 Or when explored as in Metaphors of Movement [([[https://metaphorsofmovement.co.uk/|metaphorsofmovement.co.uk]])] or Clean language[([[https://cleanlanguage.com/|cleanlanguage.com]])] as boundary Metaphors themselves, e.g. must(rules) as walls – recommendations and guidelines as streets – choices as crossroads. \\
 The goal of IEMT here is to identify problematic [[imprinting|imprints]].
@@ Line 82: / Line 82: @@
-> **"The road must be taken"**: The road representing direction, the “must” a rule that they have to be followed or there will be consequences (e.g. punishment). **Obligation**
+> **"The road must be taken"**: The road representing direction, the “must” a rule that it has to be followed or there will be consequences (e.g. punishment). Explored these could come e.g. up as walls or fences. **Obligation**
 > **"You must not let opportunities slip by"**: Implies a prohibition against neglecting chances for success. **Obligation**
@@ Line 91: / Line 91: @@
-==== Practical Application in IEMT ====
+===== Practical Application in IEMT =====
 These linguistic markers often reveal underlying beliefs and cognitive patterns that shape an individual's emotional responses and behaviors – or in IEMT terms an imprint. By paying close attention to these markers during sessions, practitioners can uncover deep-seated imprints—specific memories and emotional events that significantly influence current issues.
@@ Line 106: / Line 106: @@
 \\
-If you do the second variant, you can eventually get a (problematic?) C-Value identity statement like:
+If you do the second variant, you can eventually get a negative Core-Value (C-Value) statement like:
 Lack of value: “I'm not worthy.”,
 Lack of authenticity: “I'm a fraud,” “I'm fake.”,
 Lack of ability: “I'm no good.”, or do a lack, wants, needs and or the Patterns.
 Cave: For both ways it is necessary to have a very agreeable person, high status and or good rapport unless you want to train for three stage overreactions. This isn't easy for most clients, especially if it involves very shameful emotions, you may want to use more indirect means.
+<blockquote>With IEMT you can ask "When did you decide that?"/"When did you learn that?" If there's a memory you can do the K pattern movement or explore the identity bits of the statement
+</blockquote>
 > MOs indicate a situation that does not (at the moment) exist (future orientation).
@@ Line 118: / Line 123: @@
 > Verbally expressed MOs may be incongruent to the (more important) nonverbal [[physiological_state_accessing_cues_psacs|Physiological State Accessing Cues (PSACS)]].
-==== Practical Application in Clean Language ====
-In Clean Language(CL) as often reflect deep-seated beliefs and emotional states. Understanding the use of these modal operators in dialogue can help individuals identify and change their metaphors for more positive outcomes. For example:
+> MOs can lead to correspondent Three Pillar like cycles and C-Values we can explore.
+===== Practical Application in Non Violent Communication =====
+<blockquote>We are never angry because of what others say or do; it is a result of our own 'should' thinking.
+<cite>Marshall Rosenberg[([[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Rosenberg|Marshall Rosenberg]])]</cite></blockquote>
+> From an IEMT point of view this comes close to the lacks needs wants exploration.
+  * "We are never angry because of what others say or do":
+From the lens of Non Violent Communication (NVC)[([[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonviolent_Communication| Non Violent Communication(NVC)]])] this part of the quote suggests that external events or other people’s behaviors are not the direct cause of our anger. Instead, anger is a signal pointing to something deeper within us.
+  * "It is a result of our own 'should' thinking":
+The term "'should' thinking" refers to rigid, judgmental thoughts that impose expectations or demands on ourselves or others. When we believe that things "should" be a certain way, we set up a mental framework that can lead to frustration and anger when reality does not match our expectations.
+====How 'Should' Thinking Leads to Anger through the NVC lens====
+//Unmet Expectations//:
+When we think in terms of "should," we have specific expectations of how people or situations ought to be. When these expectations are unmet, we experience frustration and anger.
+//Judgmental Thoughts//:
+'Should' thinking often involves judgments about others’ actions (e.g., "They should be more considerate," "He should know better"). These judgments can create feelings of resentment and anger.
+//Disconnected from Needs//:
+Focusing on 'should' thoughts can disconnect us from understanding our underlying needs. Instead of recognizing that we need respect, understanding, or cooperation, we get caught up in the belief that others are wrong for not meeting our expectations.
+Applying NVC to Transform Anger
+Using NVC, one can transform anger by:
+//Identifying Observations//:
+Separating what actually happened from our judgments about it.
+//Recognizing Feelings//:
+Understanding that our anger is a secondary emotion often masking other feelings like hurt or fear.
+//Uncovering Needs//:
+Identifying the unmet needs that are triggering our emotional response.
+//Making Requests//:
+Formulating clear, positive requests that address our needs without blaming or demanding.
+===Example===
+Suppose someone arrives late to a meeting. Instead of thinking, "They should respect my time," which leads to anger, you could use NVC:
+  - **Observation**: "You arrived 30 minutes after our scheduled time."
+  - **Feeling**: "I feel frustrated."
+  - **Need**: "I need reliability and respect for my time."
+  - **Request**: "Could we agree on a way to ensure we both arrive on time in the future?"
+> By addressing the situation through NVC, you shift from anger and judgment to understanding and constructive communication. This approach aligns with Rosenberg’s quote, illustrating that managing our 'should' thinking can transform how we experience and express our emotions.
+In IEMT we could identify the Three Pillars, work on the imprints and offer the client strategies like NVC. This is also an interesting in terms of analysing and pointing out the interal dialog from the point of [[Pronouns]] work in IEMT.
+<WRAP 50% CENTER>
+{{ youtube>zbs4tBQjt6A?full }}
+</WRAP>
+===== Practical Application in Clean Language =====
+In Clean Language(CL)[([[https://cleanlanguage.com/|Clean Language]])] as often reflect deep-seated beliefs and emotional states. Understanding the use of these modal operators in dialogue can help individuals identify and change their metaphors for more positive outcomes. For example:
@@ Line 130: / Line 201: @@
 CL offers an exercise to directly work with statements like these:
-(1) identify a metaphor for when you are angry and act inappropriately as a result;\\
+  - identify a metaphor for when you are angry and act inappropriately as a result;\\
-(2) identify a second metaphor for how you would prefer to respond;\\
+  - identify a second metaphor for how you would prefer to respond;\\
-(3) explore how you can convert or evolve the first metaphor into the second;\\
+  - explore how you can convert or evolve the first metaphor into the second;\\
-(4) translate your insights into how you can change your behavior in your everyday life;\\
+  - translate your insights into how you can change your behavior in your everyday life;\\
-(5) rehearse this new behavior.
+  - rehearse this new behavior.
 For a more in depth exploration please refer to:
@@ Line 147: / Line 218: @@
-==== Practical Application in NLP ====
+===== Practical Application in NLP =====
-=== Steve Andreas ===
+==== Steve Andreas ====
 Steve Andreas writes [(:harvard:Andreas2001)]:\\ “A MO, like accessing cues, is both a result of internal processing, and also a way to elicit it. Asking a person to say, “I won’t” rather than “I can’t,” was one of [[Fritz_Perls|Fritz Perls]], favorite ways to get people to take more responsibility for the implicit choices that they made, and feel more empowered by recognizing their ability to choose.
@@ Line 157: / Line 228: @@
 </WRAP>
-=== Robert Dilts: Changing Belief Systems With NLP ===
+==== Robert Dilts: Changing Belief Systems With NLP ====
-With Robert Dilts' System you can work with these kind of statements like a belief. His Belief Change Process is a systematic approach within Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) aimed at identifying, understanding, and altering **limiting beliefs** that hinder personal growth and achievement. Developed by Dilts, this process is designed to facilitate deep, lasting change by addressing the core beliefs that shape an individual's behavior and experiences.
+With Robert Dilts'[([[http://www.robertdilts.com/|RobertDilts.com]])] System you can work with these kind of statements like a belief. His Belief Change Process is a systematic approach within Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) aimed at identifying, understanding, and altering **limiting beliefs** that hinder personal growth and achievement. Developed by Dilts, this process is designed to facilitate deep, lasting change by addressing the core beliefs that shape an individual's behavior and experiences.
 Description of the Process:
@@ Line 183: / Line 254: @@
+===== Practical Application Transactional Analysis =====
+In Transactional Analysis, a modal operator (MO) of necessity, such as "must" or "should," often signals the start of a psychological game when the implied rule or expectation is broken, as it triggers a shift into the Drama Triangle roles of Persecutor, Victim, or Rescuer.
+> From the point of IEMT all three roles are imprints. If you assign a certain feeling to each role you can analyse the emotional chaining.
+==== Analyzing "I Should Not Get Angry" in Transactional Analysis Using the Drama Triangle ====
+Transactional Analysis (TA)[([[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_analysis|Transactional Analysis]])] is a psychological framework developed by Eric Berne[([[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Berne|Eric Berne]])] that explores interactions (transactions) between individuals based on three ego states: Parent, Adult, and Child. The Drama Triangle[([[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karpman_drama_triangle|Drama Triangle]])], created by Stephen Karpman, is a model used in TA and Structural Analysis to describe dysfunctional social interactions. It consists of three roles: Persecutor, Victim, and Rescuer.
+This session aims to analyze the statement "I should not get angry" using the Drama Triangle.
+==== Initial Statement ====
+Client: "I should not get angry."
+=== Identifying the Ego State ===
+In TA, the statement "I should not get angry" likely comes from the Parent ego state, specifically the Critical Parent, which imposes rules and judgments.
+{{ :karpman_triangle.png?nolink}}
+=== Exploring the Drama Triangle ===
+The Drama Triangle involves three roles:
+  - **Persecutor:** Blames or criticizes others.
+  - **Victim:** Feels oppressed or helpless.
+  - **Rescuer:** Tries to help or save others, often without being asked.
+Let's analyze how these roles play out in the context of the statement.
+==== Scenario Analysis ====
+**Scenario 1: Client as Victim**
+  - **Victim:** The client feels they must suppress their anger, seeing themselves as powerless to express their true feelings.
+  - **Persecutor:** The internalized Critical Parent tells the client, "You should not get angry," creating self-criticism.
+  - **Rescuer:** The client might seek external validation or someone to soothe them, reinforcing their Victim stance.
+**Example Dialogue:**
+  - Client: "I should not get angry because it's wrong."
+  - Therapist: "When you say 'should not,' whose voice do you hear? Is it someone from your past?"
+  - Client: "It sounds like my father. He always told me that anger is bad."
+**Therapist's Approach:**
+  - Help the client recognize the Critical Parent's influence.
+  - Encourage shifting to the Adult ego state to assess the validity of this belief.
+  - Explore the unmet needs behind the anger (e.g., need for respect or acknowledgment).
+**Scenario 2: Client as Persecutor**
+  - **Persecutor:** The client directs anger inwardly, blaming themselves for feeling anger.
+  - **Victim:** The part of the client that feels hurt by this self-blame.
+  - **Rescuer:** The client might try to rationalize or suppress their feelings to avoid self-criticism.
+**Example Dialogue:**
+  - Client: "I get so mad at myself for feeling angry."
+  - Therapist: "It sounds like there's a harsh inner critic. What does this critic say to you?"
+  - Client: "It says I'm weak for getting angry."
+**Therapist's Approach:**
+  - Identify the self-critical Persecutor role.
+  - Facilitate self-compassion and understanding.
+  - Guide the client towards the Adult ego state to evaluate these self-judgments.
+**Scenario 3: Client as Rescuer**
+  - **Rescuer:** The client tries to prevent their own anger to 'rescue' themselves or others from conflict.
+  - **Victim:** The client feels oppressed by their own or others' expectations to stay calm.
+  - **Persecutor:** Could be internal (self-criticism) or external (someone who taught them anger is unacceptable).
+**Example Dialogue:**
+  - Client: "I always try to stay calm to keep the peace."
+  - Therapist: "What happens if you do express your anger?"
+  - Client: "I fear people will reject me."
+**Therapist's Approach:**
+  - Explore the fear of rejection and its origins.
+  - Address the rescuing behavior and its impact on the client's well-being.
+  - Encourage expression of feelings in a healthy, assertive manner.
+==== Moving Out of the Drama Triangle ====
+To move out of the Drama Triangle, the client needs to transition from reactive roles to a more empowered stance. This involves:
+  - **Awareness:** Recognize when they are in the Drama Triangle.
+  - **Adult Ego State:** Use the Adult ego state to assess situations objectively and make conscious choices.
+  - **Assertiveness:** Express feelings and needs directly without blaming or rescuing.
+**Example Dialogue:**
+  - Therapist: "How can you express your anger in a way that honors your feelings without hurting others?"
+  - Client: "I can say, 'I feel upset when my needs are not considered,' instead of keeping it inside."
+==== Conclusion ====
+By using TA and the Drama Triangle, the client can understand the dynamics behind their statement "I should not get angry" and work towards healthier ways of managing and expressing emotions. This involves shifting from Parent or Child ego states to the Adult ego state and stepping out of the Drama Triangle roles.
+<WRAP 50% CENTER>
+{{ youtube>E_XSeUYa0-8?full }}
+</WRAP>