»ä¤¿¤Á¤Ï¡¢¥â¥Ç¥ê¥ó¥°¤Î̵°Õ¼±¤Î¼è¤ê¹þ¤ßÃʳ¬¤Ç¥¨¥ê¥¯¥½¥ó¤ò̵ÈãȽ¤ËƱ²½¤·¡¢¼«Ê¬¼«¿È¤È¤ª¸ß¤¤¤È²¿¤âÃΤé¤Ê¤¤»ä¤¿¤Á¤Î¥¯¥é¥¤¥¢¥ó¥È¤Ë¡¢»ä¤¿¤Á¤¬Èà¤ÎºÅ̲¤Î¥Ñ¥¿¡¼¥ó²½¤ÎÆÃÄê¤ÎÉôʬ¤ò½¬ÆÀ¤·¤¿¤³¤È¤òÌÏÊï¤òÄ̤¸¤Æ¼¨¤·¤Þ¤·¤¿¡£¼«Ê¬¼«¿È¤ò²òÆÉ¤¹¤ë¤È¤¤¤¦¥×¥í¥»¥¹¤Ï¡¢¥Õ¥£¡¼¥É¥Ð¥Ã¥¯¤Ë¤è¤Ã¤Æ¤â¤¿¤é¤µ¤ì¤¿·Ð¸³¤ò¹¥¤ó¤Ç»ä¤¿¤Á¤¬¤·¤Æ¤¤¤¿¤³¤È¤ò°Õ¼±Åª¤ËÍý²ò¤¹¤ë¤È¤¤¤¦¿®Ç°¤ÈÍ×µá¤ÎξÊý¤òÃæÃǤ¹¤ë¤³¤È¤Ë¤è¤Ã¤Æ¡¢»ä¤¿¤Á¤¬°ì»þŪ¤Ë¼õ¤±Æþ¤ì¤¿ÌÕ¿®¤ËÄ©À魯¤ë¤È¤¤¤¦·Á¼°¤ò¼è¤ê¤Þ¤·¤¿¡£»ä¤¿¤Á¤Ï¡¢¥¨¥ê¥¯¥½¥ó¤Î¹Ôư¤òÃé¼Â¤ËºÆ¸½¤¹¤ë¤¿¤á¤Îµ¬Î§¤¢¤ëÆü¡¹¤Î¼ÂÁ©¤Ë¿È¤ò¤æ¤À¤Í¤Æ¤¤Þ¤·¤¿¡£»ä¤¿¤Á¤ÎÌÜɸ¤Ï¡¢¥¨¥ê¥¯¥½¥ó¤¬Èà¤Î¥¯¥é¥¤¥¢¥ó¥È¤ËÂФ·¤ÆÃ£À®¤·¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤Î¤ò»ä¤¿¤Á¤¬Ìܷ⤷¤¿¤Î¤ÈƱ¤¸¥«¥Æ¥´¥ê¡¼¤ÎÈ¿±þ¤ò¡¢¤Û¤ÜƱ¤¸»þ´ÖÏȤǡ¢¤Û¤ÜƱ¤¸¼Á¤Ç¡¢»ä¤¿¤Á¤Î¥¯¥é¥¤¥¢¥ó¥È¤«¤é°ú¤½Ð¤¹¿®Íê¤Ç¤¤ë°ì´Ó¤·¤¿Ç½ÎϤò³«È¯¤¹¤ë¤³¤È¤Ç¤·¤¿¡£¤³¤Î´ð½à¤Ï¡¢¥¨¥ê¥¯¥½¥ó¼«¿È¤Î¹Ôư¤Èµ¡Ç½Åª¤ËƱÅù¤Ç¤¢¤ëɽ¸½¤ò»ä¤¿¤Á¤¬¡Ê»ä¤¿¤Á¼«¿È¤Î¿À·Ð³Ø¤Ë¤ª¤¤¤Æ¡Ë¹ÔưŪ¤Ë¼ê¤ËÆþ¤ì¤¿¤È¤¤¤¦¤³¤È¤ò³Î¼Â¤Ë¤·¤¿¤Ç¤·¤ç¤¦¡£º£¤ä»ä¤¿¤Á¤¬Ä¾Ì̤·¤Æ¤¤¤¿²ÝÂê¤Ï¡¢¥¨¥ê¥¯¥½¥ó¤¬¤½¤ì¤Ë¤è¤Ã¤ÆÍ̾¤Ç¤¢¤Ã¤¿°Õ¼±¤ÎÊÑÀ¾õÂÖ¤òͶƳ¤·ÍøÍѤ¹¤ë¤È¤¤¤¦³èư¤Ë¤È¤Ã¤Æ¡¢¤É¤Î¹Ôư¡Ê¤ÈÂбþ¤¹¤ëÆâºß¤·¤Æ¤¤¤ë²óÏ©¡Ë¤¬ÉԲķç¤Ç¤¢¤ë¤«¡¢¤½¤·¤Æ¡¢¤É¤Î¹Ôư¤¬Ã±¤ËʸÂÎŪ¤¢¤ë¤¤¤Ï½ã¿è¤ËÆÃ°ÛŪ¤Ç¤¢¤ë¤«¤òʬÎह¤ë¤³¤È¤Ç¤·¤¿¡£
¤³¤³¤ÇÌäÂê¤Ë¤Ê¤Ã¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤Î¤Ï¡¢¥Ñ¥¿¡¼¥ó¤È¤½¤Î¥Ñ¥¿¡¼¥ó¤¬Ëä¤á¹þ¤Þ¤ì¤Æ¤¤¤ë¥Î¥¤¥º¤È¤Î°ã¤¤¤òȽÃǤ¹¤ëǽÎϤǤ¹¡£¤³¤ÎÌäÂê¤Ï½ÅÍפÊÊýË¡ÏÀŪ¥Ý¥¤¥ó¥È¤ò´Þ¤ó¤Ç¤¤¤Þ¤¹¡£
Î㤨¤Ð¡¢°å³ØÅª¡¢ÌôÍý³ØÅª¤Þ¤¿¤Ï¿´Íý³ØÅª¼Â¸³¤Îɸ½àŪ¤ÊÀ߷פǤϡ¢¼Â¸³¼Ô¤Ï¡¢¤¢¤ë¼£ÎÅË¡¤Þ¤¿¤Ï²½³ØÊª¼Á¤¬¤¢¤ëÆÃÄê¤Î½¸ÃĤËÂФ·¤ÆÆÃÄê¤Î¸ú²Ì¤òµÚ¤Ü¤¹²ÄǽÀ¤Ë¤Ä¤¤¤ÆÃµµá¤·¤¿¤¤¤È¹Í¤¨¤Þ¤¹¡£¼Â¸³¼Ô¤Ï¡¢¶½Ì£¤Î¤¢¤ë½¸ÃĤ«¤éÃê½Ð¤µ¤ì¤¿Å¬ÀÚ¤ÊÂåɽ·²¤ò½¸¤á¤ë¤Ç¤·¤ç¤¦¡£¤³¤Î½¸ÃĤΥá¥ó¥Ð¡¼¤ò̵ºî°Ù¤Ë³ä¤êÅö¤Æ¤ë¤³¤È¤Ë¤è¤Ã¤Æ¡¢¤Þ¤¿¤Ï¼Â¸³¼Ô¤¬½ÅÍפǤ¢¤ë¤È¹Í¤¨¤ëÊÑ¿ô¤Ë´Ø¤·¤Æ£²¤Ä¤Î·²¤Î¥Ð¥é¥ó¥¹¤¬¤È¤ì¤ë¤è¤¦¤ËÀ߷פµ¤ì¤¿³ä¤êÅö¤Æ¤òÄ̤·¤Æ¡¢Èà½÷¤Ï¼Â¸³·²¤ÈÂоȷ²¤òºîÀ®¤·¤Þ¤¹¡£¼¡¤ËÈà½÷¤Ï¡¢¼Â¸³·²¤Ë½èÃÖ¤Þ¤¿¤Ï²½³ØÊª¼Á¤òÅêÍ¿¤·¡¢ÌÀ¼¨Åª¤ËÂоȷ²¤Ë¤ÏÅêÍ¿¤·¤Þ¤»¤ó¡£ÌôÍý³ØÅª¸¦µæ¤Î¾ì¹ç¤Ï¡¢Âоȷ²¤Ï¥×¥é¥»¥Ü¡Ê¤¤¤ï¤æ¤ëÉÔ³èÀʪ¼Á¡Ë¤¬Í¿¤¨¤é¤ì¡¢¿´ÍýŪ¸¦µæ¤Ë¤ª¤¤¤Æ¤Ï¡¢¼Â¸³·²¤¬Ä󶡤µ¤ì¤Æ¤¤¤ëÀÜ¿¨»þ´Ö¤ÈƱÅù¤ÎÎ̤ÎÀìÌç²È¤È¤ÎÀÜ¿¨»þ´Ö¤¬Í¿¤¨¤é¤ì¤ë¤Ç¤·¤ç¤¦¡£¸¦µæ¤Î½ª¤ï¤ê¤Ë¡¢¸¦µæ¼Ô¤Ï¡¢Åý·×³ØÅª¤Ë£²¤Ä¤Î·²¤¬ÉÔµ¬Â§ÊÑÆ°¤«¤éͽ¬¤µ¤ì¤ë¤è¤ê¤âÂ礤¯°Û¤Ê¤Ã¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤«¤É¤¦¤«¤ò·èÄꤹ¤ë¤¿¤á¤Ë¡¢¤¤¤¯¤Ä¤«¤Î¬Äê·Ï¤ò»ÈÍѤ¹¤ë¤Ç¤·¤ç¤¦¡£¤½¤Î¤è¤¦¤Ê°ã¤¤¤¬È¯¸«¤µ¤ì¤¿¾ì¹ç¤Ë¤Ï¡¢¤½¤Î¼£ÎŤޤ¿¤ÏÌôʪ¤Ï½¸ÃÄ¤ÎÆÃÄê¤Î³ä¹ç¤ËÂФ·¤ÆÍ¸ú¤Ç¤¢¤ë¤ÈÀë¸À¤µ¤ì¤Þ¤¹¡£
¤³¤Îɸ½àŪ¤Ê¼Â¸³¥Ç¥¶¥¤¥ó¤òÄɲÃŪ¡Êadditive¡Ë¤È¸Æ¤Ö¤³¤È¤Ë¤·¤Þ¤·¤ç¤¦¡£¼Â¸³¼Ô¤Ï¡¢²¿¤é¤«¤Î¾ò·ï¡Ê¼£ÎÅË¡¡¢ÌôʪÅù¡Ë¤Î¡ÖÄɲáפ¬¡¢Â¾¤ÎÅÀ¤Ç¤ÏƱÅù¤Î½¸ÃĤȤ·¤ÆÇ§¤á¤é¤ì¤Æ¤¤¤ë¤â¤Î¡Ê¼Â¸³·²¤ÈÂоȷ²¡Ë¤Ë°ã¤¤¤òÀ¸¤à¤«¤É¤¦¤«¤ò¥Æ¥¹¥È¤·¤Æ¤¤¤Þ¤¹¡£
¥¨¥ê¥¯¥½¥ó¤ÎÍ¥¤ì¤¿¥Ñ¥Õ¥©¡¼¥Þ¥ó¥¹¤òÊ¿¶ÑŪ¤ÊÆâ²Ê¤äÀº¿À²Ê¤ÎºÅ̲¤Î¼ÂÁ©¼Ô¤È¶èÊ̤¹¤ë°ìÏ¢¤Îº¹°Û¤Î¥³¡¼¥É²½¤ËŬÍѤµ¤ì¤¿¥Ð¥ó¥É¥é¡¼¤È¥°¥ê¥ó¥À¡¼¤ÎÊýË¡ÏÀ¤Ï¡¢¤³¤Îɸ½àŪ¤Ê¥Ç¥¶¥¤¥ó¤ò¤Ò¤Ã¤¯¤êÊÖ¤¹¤â¤Î¤È¤·¤ÆÍÍѤËÀâÌÀ¤Ç¤¤Þ¤¹¡Ý¤½¤ì¤Ï½ü³°Åª¡Êsubtractive¡ËÀïά¤Ç¤¹¡£¥¨¥ê¥¯¥½¥ó¤Î¥â¥Ç¥ê¥ó¥°¡ÊµÚ¤ÓNLP¤ÎʬÌî¤òÀ¸¤ß½Ð¤·¤¿Â¾¤ÎÅ·ºÍ¤Î¸¦µæ¡Ë¤òÀâÌÀ¤¹¤ë°ìÏ¢¤Î½ÐÍè»ö¤Ï¡¢°Ê²¼¤ÎÄ̤ê¤Ç¤¹¡£
▶¼¡¤Î¥Ú¡¼¥¸¡Ö¥¨¥ê¥¯¥½¥ó¤Î¥â¥Ç¥ë¤Î¶çÆÉÅÀ¡×¤Ë³¤¯
Methodological Commentary
The model that captures some of the patterning of Erickson - the so-called Milton Model - was arrived at through a subtractive process. This process is so essential to the modeling of any complex system that it deservesat east an initial description.
We had assimilated Erickson uncritically duringthe unconscious uptake phase of modeling and demonstrated to ourselves, oneanother and our unwitting clients through imitation that we had masteredcertain portions his hypnotic patterning. The process of decoding ourselves took the form of challenging the superstitions we had temporarily accepted by suspending both belief and the requirement to understand consciously what we were doing in favor of experience driven by feedback. We had committed ourselves to a disciplined daily practice of reproducing Erickson's behavior with high fidelity. Our mark was to develop a reliable consistent ability toelicit the same category of responses from our own clients that we had witnessed Erickson achieving with his clients in roughly the same time frameand with roughly the same quality. This criterion would ensure that we hadcaptured behaviorally (in our own neurology) representations that were functionally equivalent to Erickson's own behavior. The challenge that now confronted us was to sort out which behaviors (and the corresponding underlying circuits) were essential to the enterprise of inducing and utilizing the altered states of consciousness for which Erickson was so well known; and which behaviors were simply stylistic or purely idiosyncratic.
What is at stake here is the ability of determining the difference between a pattern and thenoise in which the pattern is embedded. This issue contains an important methodological point.
In the standard design of medical, pharmacological or psychological experimentations, for example, the experimenter wishes to explorethe possibility that the some treatment regimen or chemical substance has acertain effect on some identified population. The experimenter will assemble anappropriate representative group drawn from the population that is of interest. Either through random assignment of members of this population or through anassignment designed to balance the two groups with respect to the variables the experimenter suspects are of importance she creates an experimental group and acontrol group. She then administers the treatment or chemical substance to the experimental group and expressly not to the control group. The control group inthe case of a pharmacological study will receive a placebo (an alleged inertsubstance) or in a psychological study an amount of contact time with aprofessional equivalent to the contact time the experimental group is beingoffered. At the termination of the study, the researcher will use some measurement system to determine whether statistically the two groups differgreater than can be anticipated through random variations. If such a differenceis discovered, the treatment or drug is declared effective for a specified percentage of the population.
Let us refer to this standard experimental designas additive. The experimenter is testing whether the addition of some condition (treatment regimen, drug...) produces a difference in what is accepted asotherwise equivalent population (the experimental and the control groups).
The methodology Bandler and Grinder applied in the coding of the set of renceswhich distinguished Erickson's superb performance from average practitioners of medical and psychiatric hypnosis can usefully be described as turning thisstandard design on its head - it is a subtractive strategy. The sequence ofevents that describe the modeling of Erickson (and the other studies of geniusthat created the field of NLP), was:
¡Ê'Whispering in the Wind' p.178-179¡Ë
Carmen Bostic St. Clair
2001-12-31
NLP¶¦Æ±Áϻϼԥ¸¥ç¥ó¡¦¥°¥ê¥ó¥À¡¼Çî»ÎǧÄê¹»
¥Ë¥å¡¼¥³¡¼¥ÉNLP¥¹¥¯¡¼¥ë

µ»ö¹¹¿·Æü¡§2020/06/24