Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Matt Caulfield
© 2012 Matt Caulfield
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!
Matt Caulfield
Sleight of Mouth: A History
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”.
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)”.
“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.)
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.
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.
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.
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.
This is where we draw comparisons to things that appear related, but aren’t.
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.
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.
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.
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:
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).
SLEIGHT OF SLEIGHT OF
SLEIGHT OF
MOUTH MOUTH
MOUTH
© Matt Caulfield
© Matt Caulfield © Matt Caulfield
(ADDITIONAL) (ADDITIONAL)
SLEIGHT OF
SLEIGHT OF SLEIGHT OF
MOUTH
MOUTH MOUTH
© Matt Caulfield © Matt Caulfield © Matt Caulfield