THE NEURO-SEMANTIC DIFFERENCE Part V

“Why ‘Neuro-Semantics?’ What does Neuro-Semantics offers that NLP does not? What would you say is the biggest difference?”

In explaining the difference that Neuro-Semantics has brought to the field of NLP, one of the newest developments is an understanding of the historical position of NLP. After I discovered this, I wrote about it in various articles and books on Self-Actualization Psychology. You can find the articles on the website www.self-actualizing.org and in the book, Self-Actualization Psychology (2008). I also presented it to four different NLP Conferences from 2007 through 2009 as well as a chapter in Neuro-Linguistic Programming: Concepts and Applications (2008).

And what is the position of NLP historically? We know that, historically, it arose in southern California during the early 1970s from the encounter that Richard Bandler had with the materials of Fritz Perls as he listened to tapes and transcribed them for a book and then his encounter with Virginia Satir, similarly making transcripts of her work. The language patterns that he found and replicated were then analyzed by John Grinder using Transformational Grammar (TG) distinctions. Together this gave birth to The Meta-Model of Language in Therapy as recorded in “The Structure of Magic” Volumes I and II, 1975, 1976.

Further, because TG was part of the emerging Cognitive psychology movement that was being led by Noam Chomsky, George Miller, Eugene Gallanter, and Karl Pribram, the Cognitive Revolution informed and governed the early development of NLP. Grinder did his doctorate in TG and even wrote a book on TG with Suzanne Elgin (A Guide to Transformational Grammarm 1973). Then together Bandler and Grinder used George Miller’s developments of the TOTE model as their template for identifying “strategies” within the structure of experience.

Gregory Bateson then encouraged them to study the language patterns of Milton Erickson, after that came the “Gesalt Class” that Richard ran at the University as a student which turned into the first NLP study group. And that, in turn, gave birth to the movement and field. Out of that class came the first group of NLP leaders and trainers as they were inventing it as they went— Robert Dilts, Judith DeLozier, Leslie Cameron-Bandler, David Gordon, Terry McClintock, Steve Gilligan, Frank Pucelik, Bryon Lewis, etc.

That’s the usual “NLP History” that’s in the great majority of books on NLP. But where did Perls, Satir, Bateson, and Erickson get their ideas? What was the larger historical perspective? If we step back just a little bit— they were all part of a larger historical movement there in California, the Human Potential Movement (HPM). In fact, just up the road from Santa Cruz

was Esalen which Michael Murphy and Richard Price created in 1962 when they purchased the property. Then in 1963 Fritz Perls moved onto the property to become the first “scholar-in- residence.” In 1964 Virginia Satir moved there to live as the first Director of Training and Development at Esalen. And in 1964 Gregory Bateson delivered the second workshop at Esalen and later moved there as the last “scholar-in-residence.” That’s also where he died.

So there you have it— The Whos Who of the Experts that NLP modeled to launch the movement were all living and working together many, many years prior to Bandler and Grinder as some of the second and third generation of leaders in the Human Potential Movement.

How about that! And if they were second and third generation leaders, then who were the pioneers of the HPM? Abraham Maslow primarily, then Carl Rogers, and then other key thinkers as Rollo May, Eric Fromm, Roberto Assagioli, Viktor Frankl, James Bugental, Evert Shostrum, Will Shultz, etc. And way back in 1937 Maslow was the person who began modeling self-actualizing people. And the first two individuals who stood out as excellent characters of the best in human kind were Max Wertheimer and Ruth Benedict. And it was Maslow who almost single-handedly created the paradigm shift in the field of Psychology from studying sickness and pathology to studying health and excellence.

And what does all of this mean for NLP today? It identifies where NLP sits historically— NLP is a step-child of the HPM. NLP got its basic “presuppositions” from the Self-Actualization Psychology of Maslow and Rogers. NLP with its emphasis on modeling human greatness for communication excellence is actually positioned within a much larger perspective— the development and unleashing of human potential with the human potential movement. It is actually within the humanistic movement that emphasizes the humanity of persons — in contrast to treating people impersonally as tools or technology.

So NLP arose from two movements— the Growth Movement of Maslow and Rogers (that later became known as the Human Potential Movement in the 1960s) and the Cognitive Psychology Movement. That’s why NLP is often put in the chapter on Cognitive Psychology in textbooks.

What does all of this mean for NLP today? It means that NLP people, and especially Trainers, need to lift their eyes and minds to the larger frame, the larger perspective of what NLP is about —it is about the ongoing development of the best in human nature. It is part of a psychological perspective. It means that NLP comes out of an ethical movement in psychology to make sure that psychology is person focused (in contrast to the Behaviorist approach of Watson and Skinner). And when NLP people fully know this, then we can begin to stop and/or correct the mis-use of NLP and the unethical practices.