Nic

Work with clients for any length of time and you will come across
self-sabotaging beviours - where the client says (s)he wants a certain
outcome and then behaves in a way to sabotage that outcome.

Sometimes there is an obvious secondary gain/pay off. We had an elderly
lady client who was continuously sick, though all medical tests said she
was in A1 condition. Turned out that by being sick, her daughter would
do the shopping for her and leave the lady's grandchildren with the lady
whilst shopping.

At some level in the grandmother's mind, she believed that only through
being sick could she get quality time with her grandchildren - great
example of secondary gain/pay off. Incidentally, the grandmother was
totally unaware that this was the reason for her being sick

Sometimes however, the secondary gain is not obvious - the person who
says they want to lose 50 pounds of bodyfat and rewards the first 5
pound loss with a huge binge, or the woman who was continually
complaining that she could not make love to her husband because she felt
so sore yet all tests showed nothing wrong with her.

Question is, how do you deal with self-sabotaging behaviours? And if
client believes at some level of their mind that the self-sabotaging
behaviour is in their best interest, how do you avoid being misled by
responses that are distorted by the sabotage program?

HellBrat

First off I wish to explain something, there is no such a thing as
secondary gain, there are only belief's and behaviors. Secondary gain
is something nlp came up with to explain why they couldn't get the
results they were after.

Second, as soon as I started reading your post I knew it had something
to do with getting attention from someone else, this is so common from
people who tend to get sick a lot.

The question you asked though was how to deal with self sabotage. I
think you have a copy of the 3D Mind, and I don't know if you have the
updates, but Tom and Kim have figured out 5 questions to go through to
get troubling belief. Where as mostly all the time it is a belief
which is at the root of the problem.

In order to avoid all the endless circle in which they will take you.
Simply ask them one simple question.

What kind of a person gets sick all the time. Sometimes they will try
to lead you in circles, but keep cutting them off and narrowing it
down till you get a, I am______________ ( fill in the blank )

Things they could tell you is, I am worthless, I am hopeless, I am
inferior or something along those lines. This will get you to the root
of the problem.

How ever be forwarned, they will ususally try to run you around in
circles, because admitting something like that is not a pleasant thing
to do and they may even break down and cry ( I've seen this happen
many times )

Usually but not always will this end up with an identity belief, I am
ect etc.
Or it could just be a learned behavior. There is no way of knowing
until you start asking the right questions.

Let me know if this helps.


Tim

On Jun 10, 8:32 am, Nic <nicoli...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> Work with clients for any length of time and you will come across
> self-sabotaging beviours - where the client says (s)he wants a certain
> outcome and then behaves in a way to sabotage that outcome.
>
> Sometimes there is an obvious secondary gain/pay off. We had an elderly
> lady client who was continuously sick, though all medical tests said she
> was in A1 condition. Turned out that by being sick, her daughter would
> do the shopping for her and leave the lady's grandchildren with the lady
> whilst shopping.
>
> At some level in the grandmother's mind, she believed that only through
> being sick could she get quality time with her grandchildren - great
> example of secondary gain/pay off. Incidentally, the grandmother was
> totally unaware that this was the reason for her being sick
>
> Sometimes however, the secondary gain is not obvious - the person who
> says they want to lose 50 pounds of bodyfat and rewards the first 5
> pound loss with a huge binge, or the woman who was continually
> complaining that she could not make love to her husband because she felt
> so sore yet all tests showed nothing wrong with her.
>
> Question is, how do you deal with self-sabotaging behaviours? And if
> client believes at some level of their mind that the self-sabotaging
> behaviour is in their best interest, how do you avoid being misled by
> responses that are distorted by the sabotage program?

Vance.Lear@gmail.com

On Jun 10, 8:27 am, HellBrat <monsterbra...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> First off I wish to explain something, there is no such a thing as
> secondary gain, there are only belief's and behaviors. Secondary gain
> is something nlp came up with to explain why they couldn't get the
> results they were after.
>

Tim, secondary gain is a concept from psychoanalysis. It didn't
originate with NLP.

Vance

HellBrat

On Jun 10, 11:59 am, Vance.L...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 10, 8:27 am, HellBrat <monsterbra...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > First off I wish to explain something, there is no such a thing as
> > secondary gain, there are only belief's and behaviors. Secondary gain
> > is something nlp came up with to explain why they couldn't get the
> > results they were after.
>
> Tim, secondary gain is a concept from psychoanalysis. It didn't
> originate with NLP.
>
> Vance

Irreguardless of where it orginated, nlp uses it to explain why they
couldn't get results.
I'm also betting your going to get a lot of arguements from the nlp
community on that point.


Tim

Nic

A quick search of Google reveals that Freud originated the term, which
has a certain irony - NLP makes use of the ter, yet Bandler is very
scathing about Freud!

Vance.Lear@gmail.com

On Jun 10, 10:38 am, HellBrat <monsterbra...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 10, 11:59 am, Vance.L...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Jun 10, 8:27 am, HellBrat <monsterbra...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > First off I wish to explain something, there is no such a thing as
> > > secondary gain, there are only belief's and behaviors. Secondary gain
> > > is something nlp came up with to explain why they couldn't get the
> > > results they were after.
>
> > Tim, secondary gain is a concept from psychoanalysis. It didn't
> > originate with NLP.
>
> > Vance
>
> Irreguardless of where it orginated, nlp uses it to explain why they
> couldn't get results.
> I'm also betting your going to get a lot of arguements from the nlp
> community on that point.
>
> Tim

What kind of argument can there be? Freud put the concept out there
sometime before 1910 as 'epinosic' gain and it was solidly integrated
into psychoanalysis as 'secondary gain' by at least 1940. Not
argueable.

As for NLP using it as an excuse, that would only be true if NLP's
claims for itself were that it works except in the presence of
secondary gains. Since NLP specifically includes the concept of
secondary gain in its model and that it nust be accounted for, that
doesn't wash. What does wash is if the NLP trained people either
can't recognize where secondary gains come into play, or don't know
how to deal with them. Where there isn't a solitary secondary gain,
but multiple secondary gains, which is very common, the problem is
more complex. Here, there may be no organizing secondary gain that
can be worked with but multiple independent minor gains which
interfere. In that case, you have to work with the process that
causes them to become active. At least up until the time I quit
paying attention, that wasn't something explicitly taught in NLP. It
would be more accurate to say that NLP people use secondary gain as an
excuse.

Of course, if NLP doesn't work, then there is the problem.

Vance

Odious

"Nic" <nicoliver@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:R7ydnUmfacv3cvbbnZ2dnUVZ8vudnZ2d@bt.com...

>
> Question is, how do you deal with self-sabotaging behaviours? And if
> client believes at some level of their mind that the self-sabotaging
> behaviour is in their best interest, how do you avoid being misled by
> responses that are distorted by the sabotage program?

Are you asking how to address self-sabotaging behaviors in someone else?

Because that can be a messy area, especially in a workplace situation.
Addressing your own individual self-sabotaging behaviors can be a struggle
for some, but addressing it in somebody else could be very delicate.
Especially if those behaviors are some compulsive behaviors or if the person
is sensitive about the subject. Nobody wants a coworker coming up and
psychoanalyzing them at work or telling them to inside their own head.

Odious

"HellBrat" <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1181489242.626616.149000@p47g2000hsd.googlegr oups.com...
> First off I wish to explain something, there is no such a thing as
> secondary gain, there are only belief's and behaviors. Secondary gain
> is something nlp came up with to explain why they couldn't get the
> results they were after.

So NLP predates Freud?



> The question you asked though was how to deal with self sabotage. I
> think you have a copy of the 3D Mind,

Wow... 3d mind spam. And it was posted to all the same groups that Tom
posts his spam too... interesting.

Krus T. Olfard

"Odious" <Odious@cox.net.nospam> wrote in news:0dZai.439381$115.37727
@newsfe10.phx:

>
> "HellBrat" <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1181489242.626616.149000@p47g2000hsd.googlegr oups.com...
>> First off I wish to explain something, there is no such a thing as
>> secondary gain, there are only belief's and behaviors. Secondary gain
>> is something nlp came up with to explain why they couldn't get the
>> results they were after.
>
> So NLP predates Freud?
>
>
>
>> The question you asked though was how to deal with self sabotage. I
>> think you have a copy of the 3D Mind,
>
> Wow... 3d mind spam. And it was posted to all the same groups that
Tom
> posts his spam too... interesting.
>
>
>

Yup, putting down nlp and praising 3d bullshit - where have we heard that
recently?

The fuckin' macaroons in the geek squad will attempt almost anything to
promote tommy baybee's 3d bullsit.

All they would have to do it quit lying to promote the 3d bullshit and
people would ignore them.

Hmmm... perhaps they are as desperate for attention (positive or
negative) as the gordy loser? After all, some people do think that even
negative attention is good advertising. Does tommy baybee and his geek
squad fall into that group?

--
I'm an opinionated bastard. Everything I post is my opinion. If you do
not like my opinions then killfile me - if you like my opinions then send
me money.

HellBrat

A simple question was asked by NIc.

Then come the monkey brained morons who's only purpose is...well I
really don't know what their purpose is.
What a waste of skin, Ok spammer's, fuck wit's and idiots, stay on
topic.

A question was asked, and all you've done is flame because your
retarded?

How did you get I am promoting the 3D mind when all I said was, I
think you have a copy?

Do you really have retard filers on? I am not going to respond any
more to you fucken retards since this is a discussion about methods
and all you want to do is wank off, so in the words I am so famous
for, go fuck your mother you fucken retarded baboon.

Back to discussion.


UnKaH

On Jun 10, 4:31 pm, "Odious" <Odi...@cox.net.nospam> wrote:
> "HellBrat" <monsterbra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1181489242.626616.149000@p47g2000hsd.googlegr oups.com...
>
> > First off I wish to explain something, there is no such a thing as
> > secondary gain, there are only belief's and behaviors. Secondary gain
> > is something nlp came up with to explain why they couldn't get the
> > results they were after.
>
> So NLP predates Freud?
>
> > The question you asked though was how to deal with self sabotage. I
> > think you have a copy of the 3D Mind,
>
> Wow... 3d mind spam. And it was posted to all the same groups that Tom
> posts his spam too... interesting.

HellBrat

Here in lies the problem with what you call secondary gain, it is
actually only one more symptom of a belief.

I am going to use smoking as an example of secondary gain.

If the problem is smoking and it is a behavior ( not to be confused
with belief ), then there certainly won't be any secondary gain issues
because it is just a behavior and basically is a stand alone issue.

If the problem of smoking is a belief issue. i.e. I am a smoker, then
the issue is more complex, in that smoking is now a symptom of the
belief about yourself, you get rid of smoking and they switch to
eating or another bad habit because the issue of the belief has not
been taken care of. If the issue of the belief has been dealt with,
then there are no, what you call secondary gain issues simply because
the belief was the root of it all and dealing with it, gets rid of
everything.

The same is with this lady Nic was talking about, her real issue
wasn't about getting sick, but what she got from it.
You trace that back to the belief she held, I can only get attention
if I get sick, deal with that belief and it all falls apart.

Now as to what dipshit said below about being delicate and such, I say
hell no, if you want results you don't beat around the bush, when you
hit the core belief they hold about themselves more than likely they
are going to cry, become depressed or something like that because they
just found out something fucked up about themselves which they don't
like, and all cases is just not true. I've seen this too many times
for this not to be true, but give them a moment and then tell them,
hey this is the last time you'll ever think about this, then take them
through the process you see fit to take them through. For you are not
there to be their friend, you are there to move them through the
problem, by any means within your power to do so.

Thoughts?


Tim
>
> What kind of argument can there be? Freud put the concept out there
> sometime before 1910 as 'epinosic' gain and it was solidly integrated
> into psychoanalysis as 'secondary gain' by at least 1940. Not
> argueable.
>
> As for NLP using it as an excuse, that would only be true if NLP's
> claims for itself were that it works except in the presence of
> secondary gains. Since NLP specifically includes the concept of
> secondary gain in its model and that it nust be accounted for, that
> doesn't wash. What does wash is if the NLP trained people either
> can't recognize where secondary gains come into play, or don't know
> how to deal with them. Where there isn't a solitary secondary gain,
> but multiple secondary gains, which is very common, the problem is
> more complex. Here, there may be no organizing secondary gain that
> can be worked with but multiple independent minor gains which
> interfere. In that case, you have to work with the process that
> causes them to become active. At least up until the time I quit
> paying attention, that wasn't something explicitly taught in NLP. It
> would be more accurate to say that NLP people use secondary gain as an
> excuse.
>
> Of course, if NLP doesn't work, then there is the problem.
>
> Vance

Nic

HellBrat wrote:
> Here in lies the problem with what you call secondary gain, it is
> actually only one more symptom of a belief.
>
> I am going to use smoking as an example of secondary gain.
>
> If the problem is smoking and it is a behavior ( not to be confused
> with belief ), then there certainly won't be any secondary gain issues
> because it is just a behavior and basically is a stand alone issue.
>
>
On the other hand, some therapists would argue that there must be a
secondary gain - everyone knows that smoking is bad for the health so
therre must be a secondary gain, otherwise, why do it?

Nic

Odious wrote:

> "Nic" <nicoliver@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:R7ydnUmfacv3cvbbnZ2dnUVZ8vudnZ2d@bt.com...
>
>
>>Question is, how do you deal with self-sabotaging behaviours? And if
>>client believes at some level of their mind that the self-sabotaging
>>behaviour is in their best interest, how do you avoid being misled by
>>responses that are distorted by the sabotage program?
>
>
> Are you asking how to address self-sabotaging behaviors in someone else?
>
> Because that can be a messy area, especially in a workplace situation.
> Addressing your own individual self-sabotaging behaviors can be a struggle
> for some, but addressing it in somebody else could be very delicate.
> Especially if those behaviors are some compulsive behaviors or if the person
> is sensitive about the subject. Nobody wants a coworker coming up and
> psychoanalyzing them at work or telling them to inside their own head.
>
>
>
I work as a therapist - clients sometimes present with what appears to
be a self-sabotage behaviour.

It would be cool if instead of flaming each other, people examined the
issues and looked at how to be of service to each other.

Nic

Odious

"HellBrat" <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1181535816.389721.61610@g4g2000hsf.googlegrou ps.com...
>A simple question was asked by NIc.
>

In all the same groups that Tom posts his spam too...


> How did you get I am promoting the 3D mind when all I said was, I
> think you have a copy?
>

Your answer to the question was to promote the power of 3d mind as a
solution to the problems... and bash NLP, as usual.

Typical one note song from the spam squad..

Vance

On Jun 11, 12:28 am, Nic <nicoli...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> HellBrat wrote:
> > Here in lies the problem with what you call secondary gain, it is
> > actually only one more symptom of a belief.
>
> > I am going to use smoking as an example of secondary gain.
>
> > If the problem is smoking and it is a behavior ( not to be confused
> > with belief ), then there certainly won't be any secondary gain issues
> > because it is just a behavior and basically is a stand alone issue.
>
> On the other hand, some therapists would argue that there must be a
> secondary gain - everyone knows that smoking is bad for the health so
> therre must be a secondary gain, otherwise, why do it?

That there must be a secondary gain for something like smoking isn't a
very good example. Among other things, smoking, like all abused
drugs, directly modifies experience. This would be a primary gain
pure and simple and, while you can argue about whether it is a
rationally desirable gain, it is that direct effect that is the goal
state.

Secondary gain, in the sense you first raised it, has a different
dynamic. It is the result of some evaluative function. Being sick
without any apparent disease is an example. The easiest conclusion is
the person is seeking attention and it may be true, but it also is a
way of manipulating or modifying the environment to gain a form of
control. The chronically ill (without a biological cause) may find
that their responsibilities are to much to handle and, acting out of
the created symapthy for their illness, getting others to carry the
burden. The case of simply getting attention can be handled fairly
simply; the case of manipulating others is not quite so simple.

Vance

HellBrat

They smoke because THEY HAVE TO, the secondary gain as you call it
could be to be social with others.
They have a belief which could be, that they have to smoke in order to
fit in with others who smoke. Just one scenario. Most people really
don't know why they smoke, and yes they know it is not good for them,
yet they do it any ways.

It is because they have emotions which drive that behavior and let me
tell you this, if you ever try to figure out
why people do what they do, it will drive you nuts because logic
dictates that some habits are really stupid yet
people continue those bad habits. Logic does not exist in the
emotional world. Emotions much of the time does not, nor will ever
make any sense. The emotional content of the problem is really the
problem.

Take phobia's for instance, you can't have a good phobia with out
fear, remove the fear and the phobia can not exist. Believe it or not
this is really simple stuff, once you figure out the that it's really
all about the emotions.


Tim

On Jun 11, 3:28 am, Nic <nicoli...@btinternet.com> wrote:

>
> On the other hand, some therapists would argue that there must be a
> secondary gain - everyone knows that smoking is bad for the health so
> therre must be a secondary gain, otherwise, why do it?

HellBrat

That won't happen.

Tim

>
> It would be cool if instead of flaming each other, people examined the
> issues and looked at how to be of service to each other.
>
> Nic

HellBrat

You see odorus this is why you shall remain forever stupid, you took a
statement, I think you have a copy and twisted it into your own
version of what isn't actually there. So you stupid fuck, have at it
on this thread and continue to show your dominate ignorance, I'll
continue to bitch slap you on other threads but as far as this one,
fuck off you rat bastard.

UnKaH

On Jun 11, 11:33 am, "Odious" <Odi...@cox.net.nospam> wrote:
> "HellBrat" <monsterbra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1181535816.389721.61610@g4g2000hsf.googlegrou ps.com...
>
> >A simple question was asked by NIc.
>
> In all the same groups that Tom posts his spam too...
>
> > How did you get I am promoting the 3D mind when all I said was, I
> > think you have a copy?
>
> Your answer to the question was to promote the power of 3d mind as a
> solution to the problems... and bash NLP, as usual.
>
> Typical one note song from the spam squad..

HellBrat

On Jun 11, 5:26 pm, Vance <Vance.L...@gmail.com> wrote:

Actually is it, what you call secondary gains , could be, it relaxes
me, it calms me, I fit in when I smoke.
The issues are numerous surrounding the habit of smoking..

As far as drugs are concerned, the use of drugs is the primary gain
and that is to get stoned, where the secondary gain is to feel better
about themselves, yet all of these are nothing more than symptoms of
the real problem.A belief they hold about themselves due too, low
self esteem, abuse, trauma, PTSD, loss of a loved one, the list goes
on and on.

When you take care of the belief they hold about themselves, all the
following gains and secondary gains disappear.

> That there must be a secondary gain for something like smoking isn't a
> very good example. Among other things, smoking, like all abused
> drugs, directly modifies experience. This would be a primary gain
> pure and simple and, while you can argue about whether it is a
> rationally desirable gain, it is that direct effect that is the goal
> state.
>
> Secondary gain, in the sense you first raised it, has a different
> dynamic. It is the result of some evaluative function. Being sick
> without any apparent disease is an example. The easiest conclusion is
> the person is seeking attention and it may be true, but it also is a
> way of manipulating or modifying the environment to gain a form of
> control. The chronically ill (without a biological cause) may find
> that their responsibilities are to much to handle and, acting out of
> the created symapthy for their illness, getting others to carry the
> burden. The case of simply getting attention can be handled fairly
> simply; the case of manipulating others is not quite so simple.
>

I agree, I have a neighbor who constantly goes to the doctor for ill
health and they never find anything wrong with him, his issue is he
wants something to bitch about and sympathy, he loves to complain
about his illnesses.
What if suddenly he no longer had that belief? Then all the symptoms
would stop.


Tim
> Vance

Odious

"HellBrat" <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1181621151.731455.50520@q19g2000prn.googlegro ups.com...
> You see odorus this is why you shall remain forever stupid, you took a
> statement, I think you have a copy and twisted it into your own
> version of what isn't actually there.

So you didn't lie about the origin of the concept of secondary gain in an
attack on NLP when you said, "Secondary gain
is something nlp came up with to explain why they couldn't get the results
they were after."

And you didn;t then launch into a post promoting the 3d mind by saying, "I
think you have a copy of the 3D Mind, and I don't know if you have the
updates, but Tom and Kim have figured out 5 questions to go through to get
troubling belief. Where as mostly all the time it is a belief which is at
the root of the problem."

Funny, because I could swear that's exactly what you wrote.


> So you stupid fuck, have at it
> on this thread and continue to show your dominate ignorance, I'll
> continue to bitch slap you on other threads but as far as this one,
> fuck off you rat bastard.
>

Yawn....

> UnKaH
>
> On Jun 11, 11:33 am, "Odious" <Odi...@cox.net.nospam> wrote:
>> "HellBrat" <monsterbra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1181535816.389721.61610@g4g2000hsf.googlegrou ps.com...
>>
>> >A simple question was asked by NIc.
>>
>> In all the same groups that Tom posts his spam too...
>>
>> > How did you get I am promoting the 3D mind when all I said was, I
>> > think you have a copy?
>>
>> Your answer to the question was to promote the power of 3d mind as a
>> solution to the problems... and bash NLP, as usual.
>>
>> Typical one note song from the spam squad..
>
>
>
>

Odious

"Nic" <nicoliver@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:Yq2dnSk2ZsKaZ_HbRVnyvAA@bt.com...
> Odious wrote:
>
>> "Nic" <nicoliver@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>> news:R7ydnUmfacv3cvbbnZ2dnUVZ8vudnZ2d@bt.com...
>>
>>
>>>Question is, how do you deal with self-sabotaging behaviours? And if
>>>client believes at some level of their mind that the self-sabotaging
>>>behaviour is in their best interest, how do you avoid being misled by
>>>responses that are distorted by the sabotage program?
>>
>>
>> Are you asking how to address self-sabotaging behaviors in someone else?
>>
>> Because that can be a messy area, especially in a workplace situation.
>> Addressing your own individual self-sabotaging behaviors can be a
>> struggle
>> for some, but addressing it in somebody else could be very delicate.
>> Especially if those behaviors are some compulsive behaviors or if the
>> person
>> is sensitive about the subject. Nobody wants a coworker coming up and
>> psychoanalyzing them at work or telling them to inside their own head.
>>
>>
>>
> I work as a therapist -

Well that would be the exception... in your workplace people expect you to
analyze them.

> clients sometimes present with what appears to be a self-sabotage
> behaviour.

In that case it would seem to me the course of action would be to aid them
in identifying the behavior and how it is limiting them, then work towards
replacing that behavior with a more productive and positive one.

> It would be cool if instead of flaming each other, people examined the
> issues and looked at how to be of service to each other.

I agree.

HellBrat

I disagree with your opinion odorus, replacing one behavior with
another puts them back into the same situation where they have no
options, just a one way road to deal with what ever your helping them
with, when what should be done is to give them options, so when issues
arise, they have many ways to deal with it, not just one more rote
behavior.


Tim

On Jun 12, 3:36 am, "Odious" <Odi...@cox.net.nospam> wrote:
> "Nic" <nicoli...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>

>
> Well that would be the exception... in your workplace people expect you to
> analyze them.
>
> > clients sometimes present with what appears to be a self-sabotage
> > behaviour.
>
> In that case it would seem to me the course of action would be to aid them
> in identifying the behavior and how it is limiting them, then work towards
> replacing that behavior with a more productive and positive one.
>
> > It would be cool if instead of flaming each other, people examined the
> > issues and looked at how to be of service to each other.
>
> I agree.

Lori Koonce

On Jun 13, 1:33 pm, HellBrat <monsterbra...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I disagree with your opinion odorus, replacing one behavior with
> another puts them back into the same situation where they have no
> options, just a one way road to deal with what ever your helping them
> with, when what should be done is to give them options, so when issues
> arise, they have many ways to deal with it, not just one more rote
> behavior.
>
> Tim
>

Tim

I'm just curious. How many options do you suggest giving a person. I
mean you give most people too many choices and it's just as bad as not
having. The end results end up being the same.

I'd also like to know who gets to decide what the options are? Do you
work with the client, or are you just one of those who decide for me
because you're the expert.?

Lori

Tom Vizzini

Hi Lori,


"Lori Koonce" <purplelynn35@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1181778756.990774.171670@x35g2000prf.googlegr oups.com...

> I'm just curious. How many options do you suggest giving a person. I
> mean you give most people too many choices and it's just as bad as not
> having. The end results end up being the same.

Good question. Change is not measured by the volume of choices. It is
measured by the freedom of choices. There is a huge difference. Add to that
an increased ability to create and adapt and you have a good solid change.

This is done buy balancing the way the brain accesses and operates. It
removes mental blocks and allows more flow of thought.

>
> I'd also like to know who gets to decide what the options are? Do you
> work with the client, or are you just one of those who decide for me
> because you're the expert.?

That is the best part. Because you have more access to the natural
creativity and adaptability, you generate your own solutions to your
challenges.

This is completely different that processes that just want to give you a new
pattern to follow or install a new choice. That is just giving someone a new
way to be stuck.

Let me know if that makes sense

Tom


--
Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
Gold Members Area
3D Mind

Odious

"HellBrat" <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1181766794.694634.325010@j4g2000prf.googlegro ups.com...
>I disagree with your opinion odorus,

Of course you do, anything short of recommending the 3d mind as the magic
powered cure-all would run afoul of you.


> replacing one behavior with
> another puts them back into the same situation where they have no
> options,

We were discussing someone seeking treatment, yet having their progress
limited by some self-sabotaging behaviors. Addressing the self-sabotaging
behavior by identifying it and replacing it with a non-sabotaging behavior,
serves to remove it as an obstacle that's hindering progress in an overall
treatment.



> just a one way road to deal with what ever your helping them
> with, when what should be done is to give them options, so when issues
> arise, they have many ways to deal with it, not just one more rote
> behavior.

When someone wants to know the time, do you offer to teach them how to build
a watch?

It is great to teach people a wide skill set for addressing these issues...
I'm not saying that shouldn't be done. However sometimes you have to stop
the bleeding before you can treat the wound. Sometimes people need to get
beyond one particular obstruction in order to be able to move forward on
learning and using that wide skill set.

> Tim
>
> On Jun 12, 3:36 am, "Odious" <Odi...@cox.net.nospam> wrote:
>> "Nic" <nicoli...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>>
>
>>
>> Well that would be the exception... in your workplace people expect you
>> to
>> analyze them.
>>
>> > clients sometimes present with what appears to be a self-sabotage
>> > behaviour.
>>
>> In that case it would seem to me the course of action would be to aid
>> them
>> in identifying the behavior and how it is limiting them, then work
>> towards
>> replacing that behavior with a more productive and positive one.
>>
>> > It would be cool if instead of flaming each other, people examined the
>> > issues and looked at how to be of service to each other.
>>
>> I agree.
>
>

Tom Vizzini

From: "Nic" <nicoliver@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Self-sabotaging behaviours - question for 3D Mind and NLP
practitioners
Date: Monday, June 11, 2007 3:28 AM


>On the other hand, some therapists would argue that there must be a
secondary gain - everyone knows that smoking is bad for the health so
therre must be a secondary gain, otherwise, why do it?

Let me offer my view here. there is no such thing as secondary gain. The
reason is simple. If you are dealing with secondary gain you are working on
the wrong problem so you have to go find the real problem.

My opinion is that smoking is never about smoking. Smoking is just a symptom
of the problem. If you chase symptoms you will always have secondary gain
problems. To many therapists chase the symptom, smoking, and totally miss
the problem.

Because they miss the problem the client ends up cross addicting to things
like food. The therapist takes away smoking as an option and the client
finds a new addiction to replace the old one. Even if that new addiction is
exercise, it is still unhealthy because they have no choice.

The catch is that the problem is different for each smoker.

We have 5 easy to use questions that drill straight down to the real
problem. That problem is always a belief about themselves. When you work on
the belief level you NEVER have to worry about secondary gains because
secondary gains ALWAYS satisfy a self belief.

In your example of the woman being sick all the time to get attention the
self belief might be that she is unimportant. Being sick makes her the
center of attention so the belief gets satisfied. Getting sick is just the
symptom. If you balance the belief that she is unimportant then she no
longer has the need to be sick. I say balance because you don't want an over
amplified feeling of importance. You want a balanced feeling or belief.

The problem I had with NLP is that too often people would just collapse
anchors or try to install a new pattern rather than identifying the belief
that drove the behavior. The phobia 'cure' just tries to forcible overwrite
the old experience with a new one. The swish tries to overpower one problem
with a good feeling by slamming the good feeling into the problem over and
over again.

These work for the short term but in most cases a secondary gain problem
would pop up because you just covered up the problem you never addressed the
belief that drove it.

The problem I had with hypnosis is that so many therapists were just
searching for a magic script or metaphor that simply would install a new
reaction rather than opening up the brain to more choices.

In my opinion the 3D mind is the best method for identifying and balancing
these beliefs so that the client has more choice instead of less choice. It
balances the creative/adaptive parts of the brain with the reactive/primal
parts of the brain to blend thought with movement to generate more choices
INCLUDING the original choice.

So if smoking is the only choice it is a problem. If it is one of 100
choices it is not a problem and much less likely to be picked.

Let me know if this makes sense.

Tom


--
Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
Gold Members Area
3D Mind

Odious

"Tom Vizzini" <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote in message
news:NfKdncYYAYZ3Xu3bnZ2dnUVZ_tGvnZ2d@adelphia.com ...
>
> In my opinion the 3D mind is the best method for identifying and
balancing
> these beliefs

Really? Imagine that... and what an amazing coincidence that this question
was asked in ALL the groups you normally spam.

Wow, what a stoke
of luck for you.

Too bad your belief isn't backed up by any research at all, since according
to you that makes your claims invalid.

HellBrat

On Jun 14, 12:10 am, "Odious" <Odi...@cox.net.nospam> wrote:
> "HellBrat" <monsterbra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1181766794.694634.325010@j4g2000prf.googlegro ups.com...
>
> >I disagree with your opinion odorus,
>
> Of course you do, anything short of recommending the 3d mind as the magic
> powered cure-all would run afoul of you.

Of course that is YOUR OPINION, when in fact I use parts of nlp, emdr
and other methods on a fairly regular basis, but then you wouldn't,
couldn't know that because you failed to ask, as per usual for you.
>
> > replacing one behavior with
> > another puts them back into the same situation where they have no
> > options,
>
> We were discussing someone seeking treatment, yet having their progress
> limited by some self-sabotaging behaviors. Addressing the self-sabotaging
> behavior by identifying it and replacing it with a non-sabotaging behavior,
> serves to remove it as an obstacle that's hindering progress in an overall
> treatment.

Yes we were but you answered with statement which is not in the
clients best interest.
To which I answered, your statement which IS part of this discussion.
You are determined to argue no matter what. Even when respectfully
asked to discuss this by Nic.
>
>
> When someone wants to know the time, do you offer to teach them how to build
> a watch?

Ok, this again is a stupid anal-ogy. Options when asked the time could
be but not limited too are to tell them, refer them to someone else,
go get the time for them, ask someone else for them, point to a clock,
tell them you don't know. Those are options, giving them instructions
to build a clock is a rediculious argument.
>
> It is great to teach people a wide skill set for addressing these issues...
> I'm not saying that shouldn't be done. However sometimes you have to stop
> the bleeding before you can treat the wound. Sometimes people need to get
> beyond one particular obstruction in order to be able to move forward on
> learning and using that wide skill set.
>
>
We are not talking about teaching someone a wide set of skills, but
much more options when confronted with a problem, instead of just one
way to go. Now which set of methods would you use on this particular
client?


Tim

Odious

"HellBrat" <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1181850921.350697.281230@o11g2000prd.googlegr oups.com...
> On Jun 14, 12:10 am, "Odious" <Odi...@cox.net.nospam> wrote:
>> "HellBrat" <monsterbra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1181766794.694634.325010@j4g2000prf.googlegro ups.com...
>>
>> >I disagree with your opinion odorus,
>>
>> Of course you do, anything short of recommending the 3d mind as the magic
>> powered cure-all would run afoul of you.
>
> Of course that is YOUR OPINION, when in fact I use parts of nlp, emdr
> and other methods on a fairly regular basis, but then you wouldn't,
> couldn't know that because you failed to ask, as per usual for you.

Funny i see you bashing NLP all the time.... guess that makes you a
hypocrite.

As does this..."From this day forward, I will not ever respond to this
fucking idiot
again, but turn my attention to more useful things in stead of
engaging in useless flame wars with these fucking idiots and the dee
dee dee club."

Took you all of about 12 hours to abandon that pledge. There's that
reactionary compulsion control skill from 3d mind hard at work.... LOL!

>>
>> > replacing one behavior with
>> > another puts them back into the same situation where they have no
>> > options,
>>
>> We were discussing someone seeking treatment, yet having their progress
>> limited by some self-sabotaging behaviors. Addressing the
>> self-sabotaging
>> behavior by identifying it and replacing it with a non-sabotaging
>> behavior,
>> serves to remove it as an obstacle that's hindering progress in an
>> overall
>> treatment.
>
> Yes we were but you answered with statement which is not in the
> clients best interest.

In your opinion... I disagree, I think that progress is in the client's best
interest.

> To which I answered, your statement which IS part of this discussion.
> You are determined to argue no matter what. Even when respectfully
> asked to discuss this by Nic.

You're the one who showed up saying, "I disagree with your opinion
odorus..." and now you are trying to attack me for being argumentative?



>>
>>
>> When someone wants to know the time, do you offer to teach them how to
>> build
>> a watch?
>
> Ok, this again is a stupid anal-ogy. Options when asked the time could
> be but not limited too are to tell them, refer them to someone else,
> go get the time for them, ask someone else for them, point to a clock,
> tell them you don't know. Those are options, giving them instructions
> to build a clock is a rediculious argument.

You're options are simply repeats of the same basic act, offering up the
information in one form or another as opposed to telling leading someone to
a long and overly complicated solution for a problem that can be quickly and
easily addressed in the short term, then over the long term addressed more
completely.

>>
>> It is great to teach people a wide skill set for addressing these
>> issues...
>> I'm not saying that shouldn't be done. However sometimes you have to
>> stop
>> the bleeding before you can treat the wound. Sometimes people need to
>> get
>> beyond one particular obstruction in order to be able to move forward on
>> learning and using that wide skill set.
>>
>>
> We are not talking about teaching someone a wide set of skills, but
> much more options when confronted with a problem,

And learned skills in addressing those problems, are what provide those
options.

Are you dyslexic by chance, because you really do not seem to understand the
words being used.


> instead of just one
> way to go. Now which set of methods would you use on this particular
> client?

I already described the process.... there's nothing specific to any
particular methodology.

L_Ron_Puppetmaster

Hey Tim,
Is that the same nlp that was discovered by a murderous, coke sniffing
megalomaniac??? 8D


Go figure...






On Jun 14, 12:55 pm, HellBrat <monsterbra...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Of course that is YOUR OPINION, when in fact I use parts of nlp, emdr
> and other methods on a fairly regular basis,
>

>
> Tim

John C. Randolph

On 2007-06-10 10:38:24 -0700, HellBrat <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> said:

> Irreguardless

Good heavens! Your english teacher must be spinning in her grave.

Does the "3D mind" snake-oil kit have anything to offer people like you
who suffer from semi-literacy?

-jcr

John C. Randolph

On 2007-06-11 00:30:11 -0700, Nic <nicoliver@btinternet.com> said:

> I work as a therapist - clients sometimes present with what appears to
> be a self-sabotage behaviour.

Man, I would hate to have your job.

When I encounter that crap amongst people I know, I simply don't
tolerate it. One former friend of mine lost a job, and then spent a
lot of time and effort shooting down any suggestions I offered of
places to apply, and even blew off a contact I gave him. After that,
whenever he started griping about looking for work, I just walked away
and wouldn't even discuss it with him.

-jcr

HellBwat

sure was too bad he didn't take the time to use it on himself, maybe
then he wouldn't turn out to be a coke snorting, wife beating,
alcoholic murdering, lying son of a bitch.. You guys sure do have a
fine example of what nlpp can do fer ya.

As usual you dipshit morons take everything out of context, parts of
nlp are good, but as a whole, it blows chunks.
Now what, how specifically does it blow chunks? I can't wait for the
response on this one.


UnKaH

On Jun 18, 2:52 am, L_Ron_Puppetmaster <i_am_sockpuppe...@saintly.com>
wrote:
> Hey Tim,
> Is that the same nlp that was discovered by a murderous, coke sniffing
> megalomaniac??? 8D
>
> Go figure...
>
> On Jun 14, 12:55 pm, HellBrat <monsterbra...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Of course that is YOUR OPINION, when in fact I use parts of nlp, emdr
> > and other methods on a fairly regular basis,
>
> > Tim

HellBwat

Oh goodie the grammar flame theme, how utterly boring.
Yawn... NEXT


UnKaH

On Jun 18, 4:50 am, John C. Randolph <jcr.nos...@nospam.mac.com>
wrote:
> On 2007-06-10 10:38:24 -0700, HellBrat <monsterbra...@yahoo.com> said:
>
> > Irreguardless
>
> Good heavens! Your english teacher must be spinning in her grave.
>
> Does the "3D mind" snake-oil kit have anything to offer people like you
> who suffer from semi-literacy?
>
> -jcr

HellBwat

Now come one dude, why would any one want to work at Mcdonalds with
you?
Some people have higher goals in life than you do.
What are you shooting for, just below average or way below average.


UnKaH

On Jun 18, 4:53 am, John C. Randolph <jcr.nos...@nospam.mac.com>
wrote:
> On 2007-06-11 00:30:11 -0700, Nic <nicoli...@btinternet.com> said:
>
> > I work as a therapist - clients sometimes present with what appears to
> > be a self-sabotage behaviour.
>
> Man, I would hate to have your job.
>
> When I encounter that crap amongst people I know, I simply don't
> tolerate it. One former friend of mine lost a job, and then spent a
> lot of time and effort shooting down any suggestions I offered of
> places to apply, and even blew off a contact I gave him. After that,
> whenever he started griping about looking for work, I just walked away
> and wouldn't even discuss it with him.
>
> -jcr

Krus T. Olfard

HellBwat <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1182203116.893700.139480
@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com:

>
> sure was too bad he didn't take the time to use it on himself, maybe
> then he wouldn't turn out to be a coke snorting, wife beating,
> alcoholic murdering, lying son of a bitch.. You guys sure do have a
> fine example of what nlpp can do fer ya.
>
>

and once again the geek squad loser spouts his delusion that everyone in
a.s.f. is a fan of nlp.

THIS is the type of person who defends tommy's lying in his ads.

wotta fuckin' macaroon...

--
I'm an opinionated bastard. Everything I post is my opinion. If you do
not like my opinions then killfile me - if you like my opinions then send
me money.

Krus T. Olfard

HellBwat <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1182203187.424299.218860
@n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com:

>
> Oh goodie the grammar flame theme, how utterly boring.
> Yawn... NEXT
>
>
> UnKaH
>
>

nice try, geek squad loser, but 'irregardless' is not 'grammer' it's
Stupidity with a capital S.

and THIS is the quality of person who defends tommy's lying about
research in his spam posts...

how fuckin' pathetic the wanker is...

--
I'm an opinionated bastard. Everything I post is my opinion. If you do
not like my opinions then killfile me - if you like my opinions then send
me money.

John C. Randolph

On 2007-06-18 14:48:57 -0700, HellBwat <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> said:

> Now come one dude, why would any one want to work at Mcdonalds with
> you?
> Some people have higher goals in life than you do.
> What are you shooting for, just below average or way below average.

Tom,

I'm sure that your own options are either McDonald's or snake-oil
huckster, but it does not follow that anyone else suffers from your
limitations.

BTW, have you considered enrolling in an adult literacy remediation
course? Seriously, writing standard English can open all kinds of
doors for you, even if they would be swiftly closed by your repugnant
personality.

-jcr

John C. Randolph

On 2007-06-18 14:46:27 -0700, HellBwat <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> said:

> Oh goodie the grammar flame theme, how utterly boring.
> Yawn... NEXT

Yawned right through elementary school, did you? How utterly sad.

-jcr

burtonizut

"HellBrat" <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com>
>
> The question you asked though was how to deal with self sabotage. I
> think you have a copy of the 3D Mind, and I don't know if you have the
> updates, but Tom and Kim have figured out 5 questions to go through to
> get troubling belief. Where as mostly all the time it is a belief
> which is at the root of the problem.
>
> In order to avoid all the endless circle in which they will take you.
> Simply ask them one simple question.
>
> What kind of a person gets sick all the time. Sometimes they will try
> to lead you in circles, but keep cutting them off and narrowing it
> down till you get a, I am______________ ( fill in the blank )
>
> Things they could tell you is, I am worthless, I am hopeless, I am
> inferior or something along those lines. This will get you to the root
> of the problem.
>
> How ever be forwarned, they will ususally try to run you around in
> circles, because admitting something like that is not a pleasant thing
> to do and they may even break down and cry ( I've seen this happen
> many times )
>
> Usually but not always will this end up with an identity belief, I am
> ect etc.
> Or it could just be a learned behavior. There is no way of knowing
> until you start asking the right questions.
>
> Let me know if this helps.
>
>
> Tim


You said there is 5 questions.
You tell one: What kind of a person gets _guilt_ all the time?
My answer: Small one, and unimportant. I'm small, and I'm unimportant.
BTW, I'm not really small, I just feel small. That is odd

What is other 4 questions?

Krus T. Olfard

"burtonizut" <burtonizut@email.com> wrote in news:f6q4rl$6nc$1@ss408.t-
com.hr:

> "HellBrat" <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com>
>>
>> The question you asked though was how to deal with self sabotage. I
>> think you have a copy of the 3D Mind, and I don't know if you have the
>> updates, but Tom and Kim have figured out 5 questions to go through to
>> get troubling belief. Where as mostly all the time it is a belief
>> which is at the root of the problem.
>>
>> In order to avoid all the endless circle in which they will take you.
>> Simply ask them one simple question.
>>
>> What kind of a person gets sick all the time. Sometimes they will try
>> to lead you in circles, but keep cutting them off and narrowing it
>> down till you get a, I am______________ ( fill in the blank )
>>
>> Things they could tell you is, I am worthless, I am hopeless, I am
>> inferior or something along those lines. This will get you to the root
>> of the problem.
>>
>> How ever be forwarned, they will ususally try to run you around in
>> circles, because admitting something like that is not a pleasant thing
>> to do and they may even break down and cry ( I've seen this happen
>> many times )
>>
>> Usually but not always will this end up with an identity belief, I am
>> ect etc.
>> Or it could just be a learned behavior. There is no way of knowing
>> until you start asking the right questions.
>>
>> Let me know if this helps.
>>
>>
>> Tim
>
>
> You said there is 5 questions.
> You tell one: What kind of a person gets _guilt_ all the time?
> My answer: Small one, and unimportant. I'm small, and I'm unimportant.
> BTW, I'm not really small, I just feel small. That is odd
>
> What is other 4 questions?
>

Accomplish something.
You will (well, most people will) stop feeling small.
If necessary start out with small accomplishments and work up to bigger
ones. Your self-image will grow with the accomplishments.

--
I'm an opinionated bastard. Everything I post is my opinion. If you do
not like my opinions then killfile me - if you like my opinions then send
me money.