CONSTRUCTIVIST

Question: What is the most basic NLP concept? I vote for constructivist. This refers to how we humans construct in our minds our understanding of reality. Early NLP literature said: “We do not deal with reality, but with reality as filtered and processed through our mental maps.” What’s real “out there” beyond our nervous systems does not enter into our minds—that territory is what it is. We do not deal with reality, but with our maps about it. There is a great gulf between reality and our sense of reality. Engineer Alfred Korzybski described the gap with the words, "The map is not the territory.”

Whatever you mentally map as your understanding about reality is a map. It is not and never can be the reality. As a map does not consist of the territory it represents, the words you use, and the internal pictures you entertain, are not the event. The territory “out there” is independent of your wishes, hopes, and intentions. While this may seem obvious, yet most personal failures occur precisely because we do not adequately acknowledge and adjust ourselves to reality. Map and territory are different logical levels—external reality and internal perceptive. If what you think and perceive is not the territory, then all you have to navigate that territory is via your perceptions. So we ask: Is your map adequate? Does it correspond structurally to the territory? Do you have a map that encourages you to face it, deal with it, and adjust yourself?

When you see an apple, you are actually constructing an internal picture of it. The rods and cones of your eyes give you the sense of "color." Your nose creates a smell. Yet what is “out there” does not have color or smell— those features are part of your perceptual filters. You construct an image along with beliefs as your mental map, then you use your constructions (called “knowledge,” “understanding,” “beliefs,” etc.) to navigate the territory of the world. Now, if the map is not the territory, then do the following:

1) Expect differences in maps. Every person responds to things according to their maps, not according to reality. Given the map/territory distinction, each person’s perception determines his or her perceptions and responses. Every person responds to the world according to his map about it. Neuro-linguistic maps consist of beliefs, values, attitudes, language, memories, and dozens of other psychological filters.

Those shocked by the election of Donald Trump must have had expectations in their mental maps based solely on the mainstream media. They somehow did not take the full reality into account— things typically not reported by the media. Perhaps they confused what the media said with the reality being pointed to. Perhaps they thought that the political rhetoric from both Clinton and Trump were to be taken literally and forgot that politicians seem to always engage in name-calling and exaggeration.

2) Explore differences in each other’s maps. When there are differences between you and others—the difference is a function of the constructions. Expect it. Explore it. The fact that others have constructed things in different ways provides an unique opportunity. You can try on a new perspective, you can lose your own perspective, you can discover how the other’s sense of reality works, you can become better acquainted with “human nature,” etc. What an opportunity! In terms of the Presidential election, if you were disappointed you were probably listening only to those who agreed with you and not even considering the viewpoint of those on the other side. Might be a good idea.

3) Explore your own response patterns. Your own responses to people and to events occur according to the mental maps you have constructed. Do you understand your own reactions and responses? Do you know how you set yourself up for disappointment through expectations and demands? Every experience gives you this opportunity. When you know yourself better, you can be better prepared and make better choices. Because all of us use our models to guide our perceptions, thoughts, emotions, and actions, when you understand the constructions that you have invented or received—you are in a much better position to adjust to external reality. After all, that reality does not operate by your wishes, beliefs, or wants.

4) Check the ecology and the quality of your constructions. If your “sense of reality” is your construct, then the usefulness of your mental maps depends on their correspondence to the territory. Korzybski wrote this: "A map is not the territory it represents, but, if correct, it has a similar structure to the territory, which accounts for its usefulness. ... If we reflect upon our languages, we find that at best they must be considered only as maps. A word is not the object it represents; and languages exhibit also this peculiar self-reflexiveness, that we can analyze languages by linguistic means. ... As words are not the objects which they represent, structure, and structure alone, becomes the only link which connects our verbal processes with the empirical data. ... Words are not the things we are speaking about... If words are not things, or maps are not the actual territory, then, obviously, the only possible link between objective world and the linguistic world is found in structure, and structure alone. The only usefulness of a map or a language depends on the similarity of structure between the empirical world and the map-languages." (Science and Sanity, 1980 Edition, pp. 58-60).

With the recent election in the United States, thousands took to the streets to “protest.” They claim to be depressed, shocked, disappointed, in fear, grieving, etc. And whatever they feel, they should feel—given their maps. What always explains our subjective (and emotional) experiences are our maps. Map governs experiences. The good news is that when we change our maps, we transform our subjective experiences. The good news is that we can learn to discern reality better, update our maps, adjust to what’s real on the outside, and more successfully reach out objectives.

How are your constructions? Do they provide you a way to move through life’s experiences so you are successful and effective? To achieve that, NLP’s first concept of constructionism provides us a direction and a resource.

A final thought. Al Pittampalli has recently (2016) written a powerful book about the ability to be persuaded, Persuadable: How Great Leaders Change Their Minds to Change the World. What he

describes is a key quality of great leaders, namely, their power to be open and to change their minds.

“... persuadability, the genuine willingness and ability to change your mind in the face of new evidence. Being persuadable requires rejecting absolute certainty, treating your beliefs as temporary, and acknowledging the possibilities that no matter how confident you are about any particular opinion – you could be wrong.” (pp. 4-5)

In fact, he says that the ability to be persuaded is “the ultimate competitive advantage” because it leads to smarter decisions, more agility, active open-mindedness, etc. “Actively open-minded leaders are in a hurry to find out the truth no matter what it is, good or bad.” (p. 11). Even more important, it saves us from the confirmation bias that plagues anyone with a strong opinion. When we are persuadable...

“... we can then treat all of our beliefs as initial guesses with particular probabilities associated with them, then we can welcome new evidence as an opportunity to get closer to seeing the world the way it actually is.” (p. 111)

Now isn’t that the design of the Map/Territory distinction— over our lifetimes to get closer and “closer to seeing the world the way it actually is?” If we cherry-pick only the information that supports what we want to believe, we will never discover the critical facts about anything. We will then become a victim of the confirmation bias which will keep us blind and deaf and set us up for disappointments.

“Whenever we believe something, regardless of whether we have a stake in that belief or not, we tend to interpret new information in a way that is consistent with that belief.” (p. 94)

Leonardo da Vinci himself spoke to this when he wrote, “The greatest deception men suffer is from their own opinions.” The point? Be open minded enough to consider opposite opinions. And when confronted with someone who believes the diametric opposite, ask yourself, “What are some reasons I may be wrong? How could this other view be right?” Do this remembering that the map is not the territory.

James Lawley: I’d like to point out that in most academic papers I’ve read “constructionism” and "constructionist” are most often associated with “social constructionism;” the idea that meaning is jointly constructed and that understanding about reality is co-created. Whereas “constructivism” and “constructivist" is more associated with the idea that each of us constructs our own unique systems of knowing. Constructionism is more about groups and constructivism is more focused on the individual. It’s unfortunate that the two words are so close (and so easily confused). However, they are not incompatible. NLP is much more focused on ways individuals construct meaning, and hence has its roots in constructivist philosophy. Perhaps the first philosopher to deeply examine these ideas was Tienne Bonnot de Condillac. Relatively, there is still very little in NLP about group dynamics and social psychology. A little historical footnote, when the NLPt section had to decide which part of the United Kingdom Council for Psychotherapy to join in 1992, we chose the Experiential Constructivists. Personally I have long thought these two words best define the philosophical underpinning of NLP. Here is a little piece I wrote which sets NLP within its an Experiential Constructivist framework: http://www.cleanlanguage.co.uk/articles/pages/FAQs.html#What%20is%20NLP <http://www.cleanlanguage.co.uk/articles/pages/FAQs.html#What is NLP>