| |
| |
| |
| |
Another overarching understanding is that all our experience is a neverending sequence of small events, one leading to another in rapid succession. We dont really have experiences or problems or solutions, we actually have experiencing, probleming, and solutioning. When someone says that they have a problem in a relationship, they are isolating one small event in a sequence, and thinking of it as if it were a fixed thing. When I reply that I understand that there is some aspect of their relating to this person that they dont like, my words are an invitation to start thinking of it as a changing process, rather than as something fixed and unchanging.
When someone thinks of a problem they usually will have a still picture as a representation of it. Simply asking them to allow that still image to become a movie of the event can be a profound intervention, because this will recover the complete sequence of which the problem is only a small part. The movie will have far more information than the still picture, and often this information will be very useful in reaching a resolution. And since the moving image is already moving and changing, it is much easier to introduce additional useful changes than if it were a fixed still image.
Combining the idea of joining with sequencing, we realize that two events can be joined simultaneously, or sequentially, one following the other. Thus when we want to change someone's problematic experience to something more resourceful and useful, we have three fundamental choices about combining the problem state and the resource state. (We really should be saying probleming and resourcing, but that sounds very awkward, at least in English.) We can combine them simultaneously in a moment in time, or we can provide the resource sequentially, just before or just after the problem occurs.
Each choice will have a somewhat different result, which is hard to describe in words, but can be easily experienced. In the basic method known as changing personal history, we anchor a problem state and a resource state. Depending on our timing in triggering the anchors we can combine the states simultaneously, creating a state of integration, or we can create a sequence in which the resource state either precedes or follows the problem state.
If the resource follows the problem state, the person has to first experience the unpleasantness of the problem state, and then the resolution of it enabled by the resource state. Although this will work, it is not very elegant, and leaves the person repeatedly experiencing a brief unpleasantness.
However, if the resource state precedes the difficult situation, the person will not even experience it as a problem. In fact, this is what most of us experience thousands of times a day, without even noticing it. Every day we are faced with a myriad of tasks, from reaching into a pocket or purse for car keys to speaking with someone on the telephone or reading an article such as this. As long as we have robust behavioral resources to deal with these situations, we don't think of them as problems. But if we were still small children, most of these small tasks would be insurmountable problems. Building in available resources before a potential problem occurs is far more generative and enjoyable than making resources available remedially after a problem has already occurred, and of course this is why we plan ahead and have educational institutions, etc. to prepare us in advance for lifes challenges.
| |
| |
| |
| |
