Welcome to the SCS/NLP Web Log (Blog). If you have a technical orientation, you may wish to read more about the Geeklog software in the docs directory. It may not be obvious, but "docs directory" in the previous sentence is actually a link. Roll your mouse over it, and you'll see how Geeklog displays links.

Below are a list of usernames that have access to a specific portion of the site. While Admin has access to everything, Moderator has access only to the areas related to stories, links, and events.

Accounts:

• Admin is joel@scs-matters.com
• Moderator is debra@scs-matters.com

The purpose of this Blog is to provide a convenient means of having ongoing discussions about SCS, Energy Medicine, NLP, and related matters of interest.

Please join the SCS Blog using your real name. We will do our best to answer your questions and respond to your comments. Given the public access to this Blog, we reserve the right to delete comments and expressions inappropriate for or unrelated to the blog purposes.

Comments are appended to the "story" they follow, so, if you are a registered user, clicking on the "Comments" link below would allow you to add a comment to the "Welcome" story.

Registered users may add a new story or topic by clicking on the appropriate link on the left margin.

If you have a question about entering something new, add your comment to this story.

Today’s Headlines:

• Naked Passenger Causes Flight Diversion [I can understand that….]
• Crude on the Rise [Must be cable TV….]
• Less Drivers = Less Accidents [Less Ignorance = Fewer Errors….]

But … on to today’s subject:

“Anchoring” is the term that NLP uses for stimulus-response conditioning. Much of our (human) behavior is influenced by anchors that have been set over the years, from traffic signals and signs, to names that we associate with faces, to the meanings we ascribe to words. The word “run,” for example, is an anchor—a stimulus—that has a variety of meanings—responses—based on the context in which it is used.

Anchors are “set” when a stimulus is paired with a response. In the classic experiment with dogs, Pavlov paired a tone from a tuning fork with the presentation of food to dogs. After a number of “trials,” the dogs salivated at the presentation of the tone alone. Pavlov had “anchored” the salivation response with the tone. Although we (humans) like to think of ourselves as being more in control of our responses than dogs are, the fact is that we respond to such pairings in the same way dogs do. Think about the automaticity of your response when someone says your name.

Anchors can be paired with existing physical or emotional states. Pavlov knew that the dogs would salivate when given food. He paired the sound of the tuning fork with something that would naturally produce salivation. Consider, just for a moment, all the food commercials that appear on TV at dinnertime, when we are hungry. We already feel hungry when the commercial shows us XYZ pizza. Night after night, when we feel hungry … the commercial shows us XYZ pizza. After so many pairings, when we feel hungry, we think of XYZ pizza.

You may have seen a TV commercial for Total cereal that uses both visual (image) and auditory (sound) anchoring. The voiceover says that if you eat Go Lean cereal, you also have to take a long line of supplements in pill form. The music is discordant, in a minor key, and arrhythmic. The associated mood is “sad.” Then the voiceover says, “Or you can eat Total…” and you’ll be getting everything you need, while the music shifts to a major key and an upbeat rhythm. The associated mood is “happy.” It’s anchoring at its best, especially if you are consciously aware that the commercial is appealing to your unconscious, emotional responses rather than to your logical, conscious powers of reasoning.

Political ads are also using anchors to trigger emotional or mental “states.” In the U.S., politicians like to be seen with the flag (or at least a flag lapel pin), as images of the flag—and even flag colors—tend to evoke feelings of patriotism, which the politicians hope will be extended to them the same way salivation came to be paired with the sound of the tuning fork.

One of the interesting things about anchoring is that the association is formed whether the pairing is positive or negative. Saying that John McCain is not George Bush forms the anchor every bit as much as saying that John McCain is George Bush or saying, “George McBush.” The most common form of anchoring in political commercials, however, is a straight-forward Pavlovian pairing. In a recent political ad, the image is an old-fashioned gas pump, and the voiceover is commenting on how the cost of gas is going up, “with no end in sight.” We are asked who is responsible. The screen shows an image of Barak Obama, while a chorus intones, “Obama, Obama, Obama….”

As was true in Pavlov’s experiment, the paired items do not have to have anything in common. The sound of the tuning fork had nothing in common with the meat powder other than the association based on the timing of presentation. The dogs learned to salivate to the sound of the tuning fork because they had learned to associate it with the presentation of food.

When I say, “John McCain and George Bush have nothing in common,” I have paired McCain and Bush even if they really do have nothing in common. If I say, “Obama is responsible for high gas prices,” I have paired Obama and high gas prices and can anticipate at least some Pavlovian response regardless of whether Obama really has any responsibility for high gas prices.

One of the comments in Pavlov’s notes that wasn’t included in his report on the experiment was that, when Pavlov rang the tuning fork and withheld the food, the dogs got really angry. To them, the sound of the tuning fork was the promise of dinner. Withholding dinner was a broken promise, and they didn’t like that.

As the political commercials proliferate between now and the election, you may want to pay attention to the way that anchoring is being used. You could even think in terms of meat powder, turning fork, and salivation. When you can identify who is anchoring for what purpose, you are much less likely to salivate and get angry when you realize that dinner is not forthcoming.

It’s a whole new concept in educational TV, isn’t it….

joel@scs-matters.com
www.scs-matters.com

Today’s Headlines:

• On Force 29 Minutes, Squad Car Wrecked [The car evidently needed more training. ]
  
• Dead Doctors Used in Scams [Perhaps the live ones wouldn’t cooperate.]

But … on to today’s subject:

Jonathan Swift raised eyebrows and tempers in 1729—when many in Ireland were starving—with an essay entitled “A Modest Proposal: For Preventing the Children of Poor People in Ireland from Being a Burden to Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Publick.” Swift’s “Modest Proposal” was that the Irish could ease their economic difficulties by selling children born into poverty as food for rich ladies and gentlemen. To support his argument, Swift includes a list of preparation styles and calculations showing the financial benefits of his suggestion.

Today’s Headlines:

• FBI Crime Down [How much crime did the FBI have before it went down? ]
  
• Don’t Fear the Vista from Your Windows [Don’t think of elephants….]

But … on to today’s subject:

One of the best-known comedy routines of all time is “Who’s on First,” by Abbott and Costello. In rounding the bases of a baseball team, Abbott and Costello go from Who to What to I Don’t Know. Abbott says that Who is on first, What is on second, and I don’t know is on third. He then asks, “Who’s on first.” Costello replies, “I don’t know.” Abbott says, “He’s on third. We’re not talking about him now.” It’s a Dizzy Dean of a trip.

Today’s Headlines:

• Two-armed Suspect on the Loose [As opposed to a one-armed bandit?]
  
• Midwest Floods Devastate May Raise Food Prices [Midwest flood devastation?]

But … on to today’s subject:

Yes, this is another blog about the way politicians (and their kissing cousins, “political operatives”) use language. Even though they may not always avoid the inappropriate use of negative commands, (such as, “Don’t vote for my opponent!”), they tend to be pretty crafty at using presuppositions.

Today’s Headlines:

• Cindy’s Cookie Copied
  
• Science proves bikinis turn men into boobs

But … on to today’s subject:

If John McCain had remembered what people thought when Richard Nixon said, “I am not a crook,” he probably would have avoided saying, “I am not George Bush.” The strange way the brain interprets negative language has been well known for years, and yet negative constructions—in places with undesirable consequences—abound. Among the common examples of what are considered negative commands are the following:

Today’s Headlines:

• Clinton, Osama meet to discuss unity
  
• Teen points gun as school bus driver

But … on to today’s subject:

In some ways, the headlines I select for “Today’s Headlines” are examples of Metamodel violations. In other ways, they are just bad grammar or typographical errors, but—for those not familiar with the vocabulary of NLP—let’s start with a brief overview of the Metamodel.

Today’s Headlines:

• Cardinal Condemns Clinton Mocking Priest
  
• The Dems except the deal

But … on to today’s subject:

Have you ever wondered how much of what you say and do is designed to persuade someone to do something or to influence what he or she thinks or believes? Have you ever wondered how much of what others say and do is designed to persuade you to do something? Whether we are consciously aware of it or not, most communication—both verbal and nonverbal—is intended to persuade, either overtly or covertly.

Today’s Headlines:

• Car-pedestrian accident shuts down Ottawa County
  
• Michigan bloating deaths at all-time high

But … on to today’s subject:

As many of you already know, I am a veteran of the war in Vietnam. I was not an enthusiastic participant in the war, and my feeling at the time was that the U.S. was wrong to engage in what was essentially a civil war. I did not believe in what was called the “Domino Theory,” which basically said that if Vietnam “fell” to the Communists, the rest of Southeast Asia would fall as well. I did not believe that if we failed to fight “them” in Vietnam, we’d be fighting "them" in Hawaii.

Today’s Headlines:

• Sorry I called you, ”Sweetie.”
  
• Gas prices are driving scooters

But … on to today’s subject:

Stephen Hawking reportedly asked the question, if time began with The Big Bang, what was before The Big Bang? My principal concern here isn’t with the Big Bang so much as it is with “before.” One of the challenges of time is that we have no way to think about it other than using metaphors. For many in Western cultures, we think of the past as being behind us, while the future lies ahead (or in front of us).