Speaking of chunks, this section of patterns starts with the “Chunk Down” pattern and the “Chunk Up” pattern.
Chunk Down
These patterns are a lot of fun. Chunking down is incredibly simple. Whenever you ask for more specific information, that’s chunking down. To explore this a little further, let’s forget about sleight of mouth for a moment and just think about this idea of chunking down.
If we take a category of something, like cars, for example, and we chunk down from that, we’re getting more specific information. In the case of cars, this more specific information could be things like steering wheels, tires, etc.
Alternatively, we could go to the type of car like Maserati, or Lincoln Continental, or whatever. On the other hand, if we were to chunk up from cars, we might go into something like modes of transportation. In other words, cars are just one example of many modes of transportation. Chunking up from there, we might even get to different types of movement. The point is that in chunking up we’re getting more general, while in chunking down we’re getting more specific.
You can see, then, that chunking down is very simple. The chunk up pattern, however, is a little trickier. In fact, I believe the chunking up pattern is misnamed because in using the pattern we’re not really chunking up in the strict sense of that term. That is, we’re not really becoming more general, so the name is misleading. As you’ll see shortly, the chunking up pattern should really be called something like the “ exaggerate pattern.” Nevertheless, the name
“chunking up” has become standard for this pattern, so we’ll continue to use it.
Let’s look first at chunking down in the context of each of our four example beliefs. The first one is, “Saying mean things means you’re a bad person.” To use the chunking down pattern on this belief, all you have to do is say, “How specifically?” A somewhat more elaborate application might be, “How specifically am I saying things that sounds so bad or to whom?”
This might be one of the easiest of all of the sleight of mouth patterns to understand. Notice, however, you can chunk down in either the A, the B, or the meaning. Thus, you could say things like, “How do you know it means that? How specifically does it mean that or make that happen?”
The next example: “Cancer causes death.” Here are some ways to chunk down on this belief: “Which cancers, specifically? How specifically does it cause death? Dying? How, specifically?” It’s worth mentioning here that there are lots of other words you could use instead of “specifically.” For example, you could ask, “How particularly, or how exactly, do you mean that?”
The next example is, “Your being late means you don’t care about me.” Some chunking down responses might be, “Late? Define that, please. Don’t care? How, specifically? How specifically does lateness mean not caring? How do you draw that correlation between them?”
Here’s our last example: “Nuclear arms cause strength, protection and safety.” Chunking down responses: “How exactly do they make us safe? How do they specifically protect us? Which nuclear arms are we talking about, the bombs or the missiles?”
Chunk Up or the Exaggerate Pattern
As mentioned previously, " Chunking Up" (or the “ Exaggerate Pattern” ) is a little bit different. To my mind, it’s one of the most fun patterns of all. Go back to the first of our examples, “Saying mean things means you’re a bad person.” Here’s one way a chunking up response might look: “So you mean if somebody slips up and happens to be irritable in their communication, then they’re doomed to be evil for the rest of their life?”
There are actually several things going on here. First, in terms of the A equals B belief structure as represented in the NBS, the chunking up pattern has us verbally diminish the “A” part and then wildly exaggerate the “B” part. Second, that one-two punch of diminution and exaggeration is facilitated by the notion of transformation of vocabulary that I mentioned earlier in reference to the hierarchy of criteria.
So instead of saying “mean things,” we’re saying, “Someone slips up and happens to be irritable in their communication.” That diminishes the “A” part. “I wasn’t saying mean things, I just slipped up and was irritable in my
communication.” On the other hand, we also say, “So if anyone ever does that, they’re doomed to be evil for the rest of their life?” That’s a massive
exaggeration of the “B” part. The chunking up pattern, then, starts with the diminishing and then follows up with the exaggerating.
Let’s move on to the next example: “Cancer causes death.” Here’s one way of using the chunking up pattern on this belief: “Are you saying that a change in mutation in some small part of the system is going to automatically cause the destruction of the entire system?” It’s that same pattern as before. We begin with the diminishing and end with the exaggerating. Do you see how it works?
Next example: “Your being late means that you don’t care about me.” “Are you saying that the most fundamental aspect of our relationship is simply a matter of time?” This is not necessarily recommended for use in a real life relationship, but it’s kind of fun to think about.
Finally, “Nuclear arms cause strength, protection and safety.” “Well, since nukes and weapons cause safety, then let’s give them to all the peoples of the world so we can all be safe.” That’s chunking up, and you can see how it’s not just getting more general. It really is, in a sense, taking the first part of the A equals B and diminishing the A part verbally and then wildly exaggerating the second side. It’s a lot of fun.
Counterexample
Continuing to progress around the pattern map, we come to the left-hand corner, the " Counterexample." This, by the way, is one of the patterns that I discovered I did very naturally, myself. Maybe you will, too, or maybe you will find other ones that you’re just naturally good at. Remember, though, it’s having all of them at your fingertips that gives you the real power.
So let’s take a look at the counterexample pattern for “Saying mean things means you’re a bad person.” A response might be, “Well isn’t it possible to say mean things and not be a bad person?” Or, “Isn’t it possible to be a bad person and not say mean things?”
Example number two: “Cancer causes death.” Counterexample response: “You know, there are more and more documented cases of people who have had cancer and are surviving just fine. People die of many other things than cancer. In fact, most medically treated cancer patients die from the severity of their treatment rather than from the cancer itself.” Or you could ask, “Have you ever heard of anyone who has had cancer and lived?”
This example illustrates the fact that you can use the counterexample pattern in two ways. You can offer counterexamples that form a statement, or you can ask questions and help the person draw from their own references and resources. If you can do the latter, it’s sometimes even more powerful because they’re bringing up their own arguments for themselves. So if you ask them the question, they come up with an answer that can be even better and more powerful than the statement you might have given them.
Next, “Your being late means you don’t care about me.” You could say, “Isn’t it possible to be late and still care?” Or conversely, “Isn’t it possible to be uncaring and punctual?" I think so.
Next, “Nuclear arms cause strength, protection and safety.” Response: “Is it possible to have nuclear weapons and not be safe?” Or, “Is it possible to create safety without nukes?”
Another very effective way of doing counterexamples is to exaggerate the premise of the person’s statement and ask it as a question. Let me give you an example. If someone says, “Nuclear arms cause strength, protection and
safety,” you might say, “So, are nuclear weapons the only way you can be safe?” “Is that the only cause that can have that effect? Is that the only way that could ever happen?” You ask that as a question and let them answer it because, of course, it’s not the only way to be safe, and they’ll come up with their own counterexamples. Sometimes that’s even more powerful.
True Life Confessions - Part 1
It was a few days after Valentines Day, many years ago. I'd been away over the holiday and, while I was gone, my at-that-time girlfriend had secretly begun a new relationship. Perhaps you can appreciate that, when I found out several days later, I was a wee bit upset. Especially since her paramour had supposedly been a mutual friend of ours.
The thing is, I have never been one to give up easily. So I called up the guy and confronted him with this betrayal. Truth be told, I was livid. How could he have done such a thing? I was morally outraged and knew I was right. I knew this argument would be a slam dunk.
Amazingly, however, as I argued more and more with this guy, I found myself losing! How could this be when I was so clearly right? His point of view was that he and she were soul mates and were meant for each other. He believed this made normal rules not apply.
Did you ever notice that, under pressure, people often resort to old patterns? I was falling right into this phenomenon and my old patterns were not working. Now I'm sure you know that if you do the same thing over and over again, you’re likely to get the same results. It would be like a baseball pitcher who always throws in the same spot. People will hit him every time, no matter how fast he throws it. It’s always the same pitch.
Of course, I should have known that, too. Especially since the reason I'd been away is that I'd been attending an NLP Master Practitioner training with Robert Dilts and Todd Epstein where they'd taught Sleight of Mouth.
So finally, almost as a last resort, I was able to step back in my mind and get a perspective on what I'd been doing in this argument. I realized I'd been doing the same two patterns over and over again. I'd been using Counter Example and Hierarchy of Criteria. Remembering the NLP adage that if what you're doing isn't working, try something else, I decided to make an effort actually to use other Sleight of Mouth patterns I'd just learned. I visualized the Pattern Map in my mind and picked one of the patterns pretty much at random. To my shock and amazement, he was thrown for a loop. It was like the old pitcher had suddenly thrown a curve ball.
This illustrates the point that one of the reasons sleight of mouth is so powerful is that there are so many different patterns to choose from. I sometimes use the analogy of James Bond being a powerful guy, not because he’s the biggest and strongest or fastest or quickest, but because he has the most toys. He’s got the fountain pen that is actually a breathing apparatus for swimming under water. He’s got the wristwatch that does any number of things from satellite positioning to all sorts of stuff. He’s got that car that does any number of things. It can be a spaceship or an underwater vehicle. So many different possibilities are available to him that of course he’s going to win.
If you’re always doing the same thing over and over again, you’re going to get the same results and then become predictable like a Major League pitcher who always throws in the same spot. People will hit him every time, no matter how fast he throws the ball. So you’ve got to have change-ups, you’ve got to have sliders, you’ve got to have different approaches to take.
As you start learning the sleight of mouth patterns, you’re going to notice that some of these patterns are familiar to you. Some of the
patterns are ones you’ve already been doing. Sleight of mouth gives you strength in having more than one choice.
You need to be able to use all the patterns that are available to you. You also have to be able to step back and look at the patterns as if they are on a wall chart or on something like a clear piece of Plexiglas that’s in front of you so you can grab hold of the patterns and utilize them. It’s going to make your use of the patterns much, much more powerful.
Practice Session: Close Your Eyes
Practice that now. Close your eyes for a minute (after you read the directions, of course) and imagine the pattern map right there in front of you. Reach up with your left hand and your right hand and just touch that “A equals B or A causes B” image in the center. Then reach up with your right hand to the upper right-hand corner and touch the Hierarchy of Criteria pattern. See it in your mind and touch it. Get this spatially anchored in your brain. Then move down in a clockwise motion to the arrow going out to the right, the consequence pattern, and do the same thing - see it in your mind and touch it. - get this spatially anchored also. Continue with all the patterns learned so far... the Another Outcome, the Metaphor, the two Redefines, Chunk up and Chunk Down, Counter Example. Actually use your hands and reach up into the space in front of you as if you are touching a large Plexiglas representation of the Pattern Map. This helps to spatially anchor the patterns in your mind.
Intent Pattern
Now looking at the pattern that has the arrow going to the left, it’s still kind of indicating time in a way because in a sense, we’re stepping back and looking at the intention behind the person saying that particular argument. If you take that step back and think about it, there must be a reason for what they said. They must have an intention behind it. That’s why this is called the “ Intent Pattern,” or the “ Intention Pattern.”
Let’s look at, “Saying mean things means you’re a bad person.” Once again, defending yourself, you could say something like, “My intention is not to be mean, but to teach you something, to make you better, to be realistic. My
intention is to protect myself.”
Next example, “Cancer causes death.” You might say to the person, “I know your intention is to prevent false hope, but you are preventing any hope at all. Let’s find some good alternative choices.”
For the belief example that, “Your being late means you don’t care about me,” you could say, “My intention wasn’t to be late or uncaring, but rather, to finish my work so I could spend the highest quality time with you.”
And the last example here, “Nuclear arms cause strength, protection and safety.” “Since your intention is to create safety and protection, I’m sure you’ll join me in finding as many choices and alternatives as possible.”
With this pattern, of course, you’re going to have to do some mind reading and say, “I know your intention is this or that or the other thing.” You might not really know. You might be hoping; you might be fishing. If you can hit it, that’s great. If you know what their intention really is, you might just wonder to yourself what would cause them to believe a thing like that. What would cause them to think this way? “OK, I know your intention is such and such.” If you can just do that, you can create a nice intention sleight of mouth example.
Model of the World
Let’s continue around the pattern map. The next one up is “ Model of the World.” A model of the world response for “Saying mean things means you’re a bad person” could be, “Well, it might be mean or bad in your model of the world, but in my family, that’s how we showed that we cared.” I had a friend once who married this woman, and they came from very different families and very different models of the world.
In his model of the world, when they argued in his family, they got intense. They raised their voices. They emoted. They told what their true feelings were loudly. It was expected they would do that. For them, that’s simply what one does in an argument. The worst thing you could do would be to walk away. Instead, you handle it, you get intense until it’s handled, and then it’s done.
Now his new bride came from a family where they never did that. They were a very proper family and if anyone ever raised their voice, that was the
worst thing that could happen. So, of course, if you raise your voice, it means you’re getting out of control. In that event you must leave the situation and come back later and talk about the matter rationally when you have your emotions under control.
So these two people got married. Eventually, of course, they had their first argument. Guess what happened. He starts getting intense. He starts raising his voice. That’s the worst thing that could happen in her model of the world. So, of course, she leaves to make it so that everyone could have an even temper when they come back. But leaving is the worst thing you could do in his model of the world, so he chases her and makes it even more intense. The situation escalates like this. It’s very interesting, very comical, really, from the outside. But it probably didn’t feel that way from the inside.
Let’s go to the next example, “Cancer causes death.” In the model of the world, you could say, “Not all medical people hold that belief. Many people believe that all of us have some mutant cells all the time and it’s only when the immune system is weakened that it becomes a problem.”
The next example is, “Your being late means you don’t care about me.” “Well, many people I know judge caring on the basis of sensitivity to another’s