Bill: Well, would you try telling me about that?

Ken: Well, no. But I could show you.

Bill: Good, good. Go ahead.

OK, now I show him. And at the end of my showing you, Bill, what do you do next? … I think that Bill is going for the same access that Joe was trying to get, but he didn't use what he got. The metaphor he used accessed experiences that I know could be used to answer the truck driver's question «What do you mean by a part of me?» Bill, how could you go on to use what you've gotten so far?

Bill: Well, the reason I'm asking is that sometimes I grind the gears when I drive my car, and I need to know—

Ken: Well, you've only got four or five gears at the most to deal with. If you were a truck driver, you'd know how to do thirteen–gear boxes and stuff. You don't need to know that. The thing I'd suggest when you shift gears is that you remember your timing. Your timing's got to be right. In fact, it will save you gas. When you get ready to shift down, you've got to make sure that you coordinate so that you hit that clutch and then the gas and let out the clutch, «double–clutch» it, and then you are ready to go.

Rose: I rode across the country with a truck driver once, and as we were driving along, I realized that he was listening to his tires, and to the sound of his load shifting, and to music on a tape, and he was talking to me—all at once.

Ken: Yeah, you get real automatic when you've driven a truck for a while. After a while you don't even have to think about it. …

Now I'm going to come out of quotes again. Rose is going for exactly the portion of this metaphor that I would go for in your position. Don't let this opportunity go by. Rose can now say to me, «I want you to notice that there are parts of you that do things automatically. When I say 'parts,' that's just a way of talking. Of course it doesn't mean anything. There are parts of you that know how to shift gears and listen for load shifts and listen for the tone of the engine, so you don't have to consciously think about those things. It's as if a part of you drives the truck automatically, leaving the rest of you free to do things like enjoying talking to your passenger or your partner. It's as if there are parts of you that can be assigned certain responsibilities, but now the part of you that makes you do Y is out of control. We've got to reestablish some contact, because it's doing things that you don't like.»

If you do that, you've relativized your model to the world of a truck driver, without spending twenty–four days teaching him to be an NLP practitioner. You've simply accessed an experience of his that is a counterpart to the notion of «parts.» I'm not saying that this maneuver is the one you «should» make next. It is one way for you to use what Rose did to overcome the difficulty that I presented.

Accessing an experience of doing something well and automatically is also useful in another way. You've accessed a state in which I am resourceful, and you can use that state later on. In addition, this particular auditory resource state involves a representational system shift from the kinesthetic way that I described the problem state Y.

Woman: So how do we anchor that?

At the point that I said «Yeah, it becomes automatic after a while," you say «Good» and slap your hands together lightly, or anchor in some other way.

Woman: What are you anchoring there?

You are anchoring my understanding that there are unconscious parts of me that are useful, and that I don't know much about.

Man: In this case would it be more elegant to anchor auditorily, since you were talking about auditory resources?

I anchor in all systems. When we teach tactile anchoring, we claim we do so because tactile anchors are so obvious. Actually we teach it because if you anchor with a touch, you are likely to anchor simultaneously in all other systems as well. When I'm anchoring, I change my body posture so that I can touch the client. That's a visual anchor if his eyes are open. At the same time, I'm talking in a certain tone of voice; that becomes an auditory anchor. I recommend anchoring in all systems simultaneously, unless you want to be sure that your anchoring stays outside the person's awareness.

Another advantage of tactile anchoring is that it is irresistible. There are survival programs that will interrupt any other sensory input in favor of a tactile input. If you are inside talking to yourself and I use a tonal shift, you may not even register it, and you may not respond to it. If your pupils are dilated and I use a visual anchor, you may not be responsive. But if you are touched, you will respond.

Strictly speaking, you only need an anchor in one system. In general, anchoring in the system that is accessed will be more streamlined. In this case it's auditory. However, unless you have some special considerations, why not use all systems?

Now let's go back to what we just did with reframing: accessing an understanding of the notion of unconscious parts. If someone doesn't think he has «parts," there are lots of approaches you can take. I once worked with a woman who believed that she didn't have an unconscious mind. She came in with every hair meticulously in place, and she thought that everything she did was under conscious control. The idea of «parts» didn't make any sense to her. I first got rapport at the unconscious level by using mirroring, crossover mirroring, embedded commands, metaphors, and other maneuvers. She was puzzled by what I was doing, but I continued until I was getting really good unconscious responses from her.

Then I said «Now I'm going to demonstrate that you are a fool.» That got her attention. «There are parts of you that are very powerful allies, and until you appreciate them, you are going to have lots of difficulties. I want to demonstrate their presence. You have congru–ently stated to me that you do not believe you have an unconscious mind. You think you are in control of your behavior. It's obvious to me that you are not in control of your problem behavior, but I assume that you run your own body. That is, I assume that you know what your body temperature is, and that you can control it to some degree.» She said «Of course.» She couldn't make any other answer, because she thought she didn't have an unconscious mind.

So I said «In a moment I'm going to reach over and touch your left arm from the shoulder to the elbow, and when I do, that arm will turn ice cold. And I request that you resist me with all the conscious force you have.» I waited until I got an unconscious signal «OK, I'm ready.» Then I reached over and touched her arm, and she got chills. Then I said «But notice how warm the other arm is.» The other arm instantly became warmer.

I demonstrated to her that I could actually change the temperature of her body, and that she could not resist. In fact, the more she attempted to resist, the more dramatic the changes were. At that point I had convinced her of the reality of at least one other part of herself.

Man: Why was it necessary to do anything with what she consciously thought was true?

It wasn't. The only value in throwing a bone to the conscious mind every once in a while is to keep the person from raising too many objections. It keeps her from saying «This isn't working. You don't understand what you are doing.»

Now let's go back to reframing. Assume that you've got access to the part of me that makes me do Y. Now continue.

Bill: You know, as you are driving along the highway, you've got a whole bunch of dials in front of you that tell you lots of things. The water gauge is kind of a way for the engine to tell you «Hey, I need water» when the water level is too low and the temperature is getting too high.

Ken: That's a funny way to talk about it!

Bill: Yeah, I know, but just imagine it. You have an oil pressure gauge that lets you know whether or not the engine needs oil. (Ken: Yeah.) And I know it's kind of silly to think about, but I'm wondering, if the part of you that runs Y were a part of an engine, what type of gauge would you need for that part to let you know what it wants? Would it be a visual gauge? Would it be a sound? Would it be some feeling?