Hi everyone

Thanks to Mark Sherwood for the heads up on this through facebook.

Richard seems to come over really well imo, def worth a listen.

BBC iPlayer - Simon Mayo: 29/04/2009


About 1.06 mins in.

Lenny

Lenny, us outcast North Americans can't watch or listen to BBC iPlayer. If someone had a way to make an MP3, however...

BMcKenna wrote:

Lenny, us outcast North Americans can't watch or listen to BBC iPlayer. If someone had a way to make an MP3, however...

Try using a proxy.

Proxy server - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://proxy.org/cgi_proxies.shtml

Interestingly he never mentioned John Grinder when talking about the origin of NLP.

John

I don't think he ever mentions Grinder at all after the settlement in court back in 2000. And he refers to himself as THE creator of NLP on the grounds that he started out modeling Fritz Perls before the involvement of Grinder or anyone else.

Damian wrote:

I don't think he ever mentions Grinder at all after the settlement in court back in 2000. And he refers to himself as THE creator of NLP on the grounds that he started out modeling Fritz Perls before the involvement of Grinder or anyone else.

He said it was Virginia Satir.

John

z8000783 wrote:

He said it was Virginia Satir.

Sorry, i should had been more precise.

I was referring to the year he edited Perls' book The Gestalt Approach & Eye-Witness to Therapy which was in 1973 according to the inside cover. The first book he wrote together with Grinder wasn't until 1975 (The Structure of Magic Vol 1). Changing with Families was co-written with Grinder and Satir in 1976.

At the evening event, Richard mentioned that he and Grinder created the Meta Model, though he didn't mention Grinder for NLP itself.

Cheers

I haven't got a working home computer, and I'm using somebody else's, but if you're going to grind exceeding small, the sequence of events is this:

1. Richard, while still a student, got asked by Bob Spitzer, a publisher, to edit tapes of Fritz Perls for a book. Out of those tapes, he, RB, extracted the 'model' or sequences of FP's moves.

2. RB started using them on fellow students in a weekly evening "class".

3. John heard of it, and dropped into see what RB was up to (RB's version - JG had some supervisory role/ college responsibility for RB, along with some other college students - and his main concern was: would any of it "blow back" on him? Grinder's version - RB approached him at home with a request for help, 'cos he, RB, couldn't make sense of the language parts of what he had.)

4. Both RB and JG went to work on that model.

5. Then, while JG was away in Africa, Bob Spitzer asked RB to go out on the road with Virginia Satir, act as her sound man - but also come back with tapes that could be turned into a VS "working live" book.

6. Out of that RB made a model of VS's sequences and moves.

7. When JG came back from abroad, RB showed the second model to him.

8. Then, when at a barbeque organized by Bob Spitzer, both RB and JG started to explain their ideas to a neighbour of Bob Spitzer's, Gregory Bateson, and it was he, Bateson, who pointed them in the direction of Milton Erickson, who he, Bateson, knew.

9. Off they both went to Phoenix, AZ, to do a study of ME.

10. Then they jointly started to write about him, AND the other two models, in a series of five books (Structure I and II, and Patterns I and II - all four by RB and JG; Changing with Families - that one by RB, JG, and VS).

So if you wanna quibble:

RB did two lots of modeling all by himself. You need to give him credit for that. Phenomenal at the age of 22.

JG added in some of the intellectual framework, in particular, the As If frame, AND the linguistic usage of the time. You need to give him credit for that.

But JG didn't originate the linguistics, he took what other people had created and applied it to this new context, this new stuff. And when I say "applied it", I mean just what I say. Much of what became the Meta Model was already there, in the 1967 book of Virginia Satir's.

So JG - good on formalism, but low on originality. IMO.

On the other hand, RB - equally good on formalism, but high on originality (both then and now). No question about that.

On the third hand, if the "data" from these three modeling projects hadn't been turned into the formal explanation and notation of Patterns II (1977), nlp wouldn't have had the explanatory power it had then, and which power it has still. And it took BOTH mathematician RB AND linguist JG to turn the data into THAT FORM.

You can say JG did undoubtedly make a contribution. People say, "it couldn't have happened without both" - and they are right. And you can certainly give him credit for what he did put in - and he did put in something - quite a considerable something. But the question is: how much?

The question I think it's fair to ask is this: what proportion did each of the two men contribute to the over-all early model, the over-all early success?

Both RB and JG built their model of ME, and listing out the linguistics of that, using EXISTING LABELS AND CATEGORIES, was a key part in what later became known as the Milton Model. But more important is the range and kind of "mental spaces" you take hypnosis into. And in that respect, RB was then, and is now, much more adventurous. Certainly, and in my experience, by 1983, RB was far better at doing Milton than JG was (in 1983).

And since those early days, RB has got steadily better and better at doing hypnosis - in many ways, surpassing Milton. While JG - IMHO - has stayed pretty much the same as he was then. That is, doing obvious, two-trick pony stuff. Nowadays, made even more obvious by his "no content" rule.

Now, if you really want to have a bone to pick over, or a chewy slipper to pull apart, you could get past the readily-conceded "it couldn't have happened without both", and go after the much more elusive - but much more important - "What was the relative contribution each made, in those days, once you assume it wasn't a 50-50 split?"

In my opinion - which I'm entitled to - "co-creator" does not necessarily mean "co-equal creator", and "couldn't have done it without" does not mean "it was an even, 50-50 split".

And I have sufficient arguments and evidence to support my opinion - that it was 30 per cent from JG, and 70 per cent from RB.

(And I was saying that in 1983 - so no Californian court ruling can make me change my mind.)

But for those arguments, and for lists of the two men's relative contributions since ... well, them's other fish to fry, and on another day.

Eric.

PS, I was at the gig, BTW, and Richard was in great form.

I went to the event last night and thoroughly enjoyed the experience. I realised that I have learned immeasurable amounts in lifes journey and I also realised that watching masters on stage... 'yep' they have done a fantastic job.

I don't claim to know what was being 'done' on stage in certain/plenty of aspects but I did think that I was addressed on a couple of occasions. Got me pondering on a few more "can they see something I cant?" What a feat with an audience of about 5/600 people... I'll have some of that...

I walked away thinking thank fuck for people like them who come on this planet and give their gift for others to use. Spend their knowledge like a person intent on going skint and share the complexity, simply of the tools of NLP.

Tracking stories elegantly and... then... made a couple of mistakes, or were they? a few mathmatical equations that didn't equate from a mathematicion? but hey, I know my coco's and well it was probably done on purpose. After the break I was hammered, beleive me I talked to two people whom i've trained with as if I didnt know them... Because...

I have a great state to enter when it comes to training... I was taught it by Someone else... He said, when he introduced modelling to 'swallow the melon whole'...

I did... and I got exactly what I wanted for the life 'I' Want...

Then I spat out the pips....

I am more receptive to the words/gestures etc that people around me offer and I utilise my filters like a musician tuning his instruments...

They put some real meat on the bone for people with hunger to eat. You can pick at the bone or take a big bite... it's your choice. One says NLP wouldn't have been created had it not been for the 'two' of them... The other says.........

Is that true?

Maybe...

There are some brilliant folk around that sometimes, like a child that sits on his daddy's shoulders... Now Daddy I can see further than you... Let them see...

All in all an experience i'll not forget... I like them... experiences. Gunna keep getting more.

Wayne

P.S Every night I tell my son a bedtime story off the bat... Tonight it was ~Freddie the frog who was really a prince...

I saw bandler last night, and he mentioned grinder once or maybe twice. Oh and on his book jacket he is billed as 'co-creator of nlp'