RESPONDING TO INFORMATION

When “information” comes to you, how do you respond? What we see constantly in the news is reactivity. People reacting before they even know all of the relevant information. Yet when people do this, they are doing several unthinking and mindless things. Here are some of them.

First, they are immediately and quickly assuming that the information is true and unquestionable. Big mistake! How many times in recent years has the “information” which was originally put out turned out to be wrong and erroneous? Dozens and dozens and dozens of times! That’s because there is a time-lag between the first reports about some event or some statement and the fuller story when all sides are examined. Yet because some people are so quick to emotionally and semantically react—that then becomes a secondary problem. Something that makes it harder for them to eventually adjust and change their first reaction so that they can later embrace the truth. The problem? Mindlessly reacting rather than mindfully responding. They commit themselves to a false version and get stuck, fearful of changing their minds.

Second, they assume that the information is clean and undistorted. Another big mistake! In fact, we can expect that most “information” is distorted, biased, and therefore not clean. After all, “information” that is spread quickly and immediately by people usually is spread by those who have some agenda in spreading it. The problem here? Biased spreading. People spreading it because they see that they can manipulate it and use it to make a point. The solution?

Question the source: Who is spreading this? Question the agenda: For what purpose is someone spreading this? Question the context: When, where, with whom did this take place?

Information is distorted and not clean is either mis-information created by people who only know part of the facts and do not have the whole story or it is dys-information spread by people who are more concerned about making their point, pushing their agenda, winning a point than the actual facts and truth.

Could this information contain mis-information and not all of the facts? What facts or contexts are not being stated? What is missing from this information? Could this by dys-information pushed by someone who has a hidden agenda?

Reacting to information with these assumptions then sets a person up to “jump to conclusions” and over-generalize things. These cognitive distortions then creates more distortions and confusions as they amplify negative emotional states. And because the kind of thinking within the cognitive distortions are “childish,” it increases the sense of being victimized.

None of this should actually be a problem at all for the NLP and Negro-Semantic trained person. Why not? Because the Meta-Model of language gives the trained person the foundational skills for critical thinking. After all the Meta-Model provides the distinctions and the questions by which you can stay mindful while questioning the data that first comes to you.

Who specifically is providing this information? How did they specifically know what they are writing or saying? What are they not saying? (Deletions) When, where, and with whom does this information arise? (Context facts) How specifically does X cause or make Y? (Causation statements) How do you know that X thinks, feels, or intends Y? (Mind-reading statements) When you use this vague generalization (a nominalization) what actions are you referring to? (Nominalization words and phrases) What are you assuming when you frame things in that way? (Presuppositions)

In all of this, NLP’s Meta-Model provides you a set of questions which, if you use them, enables you to think critically, precisely, and accurately so that you are not triggered to react. Now you can think things through more rationally and clearly, you can stay mindful and conscious and not get your buttons pushed by overly emotional language.

Responding to “information” sounds simple and inevitable on the surface. Yet when we think about it, to do so sanely and mindfully requires slowing down reactivity and first getting all of the facts. Getting all of the facts also means asking lots of questions—challenging questions that seeks to get behind and around and above the statements so you can understand them in context. Here then is a simple formula that will solve the problem of mindless reactivity: Take a breath and slow down any automatic reactivity. Remind yourself that “information” can be mis-information and/or dys-information. First appearances can be deceiving. Everything is not as it appears. Appearance and reality are not necessarily the same. Question things. Ask detail questions that explore the context and the context-of-the- context of the information. Question what is not being presented. “What are you not saying?” Be a detective for flushing out the fuller story. Chase out cognitive distortions and biases. Use the NLP Meta-Model to get more precision and accuracy. Identify the linguistic structures of vagueness, assumptions, etc. so that you can flush out when hidden agendas may be driving the “information.” Check with others and other sources of information. See if there is a political agenda behind the data, and who is lining up on each side of an issue. Be suspicious if it is one- side. Apply the golden rule. Would you want “information” about you to be communicated in this way? If not, then challenge the person or persons or organizations that are pushing a certain agenda.

Here’s to your best information processing!

[For more, see Communication Magic and look for a training in the NLP Meta-Model.]