Welcome to cd one track to the power of context.

We're going to begin this

adventure by inviting you to develop your emotional awareness. I'd like you to
begin to think of all of us to think of people in general as being deeply
driven by feelings. Most of us versed in nl p would agree that many people are
far to reliant on logic. Logic can convince, but it's emotions that drive
decisions. In n lp. We study human behavior, language, thinking processes,
values, and more. And the more deeply we immerse ourselves in this study, the
more we keep coming back to this same conclusion that people are ruled by
their emotions.

Logic can help evoke emotions. That's true, but it is always the emotions that
went out. If we feel a certain way, we have an extraordinary gift for
inventing reasons to support our feelings. In a given matter, we will
rationalize until we're blue in the face, inventing one new reason or another.
That sounds good, but it was most often the emotion behind the choice that
drove the choice. So if human beings are so emotionally driven, that means
that if you can create an effective emotional appeal, then you can influence
human decisions powerfully.

Never was this more apparent than the election of george w bush to the
presidency of the united states twice. Please note that i'm leaving politics
out of this example. I'm going to focus on the aspect of emotional influence
in these elections. Never mind that in both cases, in two thousand, and in two
thousand four, george w bush was pitted against two different men who were far
better speakers than he was. Logically speaking, never mind that george w bush
has been the least popular you s president in recent history. The bush
campaign's happen to be very, very good at one specific thing, scaring people.

His campaigns were very effective at eliciting fry to cross the voter base and
attaching that fright to his opponent. We saw it most evidently in a series of
advertisements on television which showed wolves quietly running through a
wooded background. And they linked the idea with wolves in the forest with
terrorists, then finally implying that their opponents were not as committed
as he was to fighting the wolves in the forest. Al gore in two thousand and
then john kerry in two thousand for both tried to fight george bush with
logic, clarity and calm, bush would return their arguments with a poorly
worded but emotionally powerful appeal to the american public.

Time and time again, bush was more emotionally appealing to enough people that
he was arguably able to win his presidential elections twice, hours after
listening to candidates in a debate. No one remembers specifically what was
said. But everyone remembers how they felt the power of feeling should be
embraced, not ignored, or downplayed. The democrats would have done better in
the two thousand or two thousand four elections. If they truly understood that
point. We would do well to consider emotion as a central part of our
constantly changing human context. We have an external context which changes
as we go from home to car to work, or to the gym, to restaurants, or into an
airplane, etc.

External contexts certainly play a role in decision making. After all, how
many of you know any business people that don't like to talk business until
they're playing golf? I know several, but no less important. And in my
opinion, far more important is our internal context. How do we feel on the
inside? If we always keep that concept in mind, that decisions are often made
only when all external and internal contacts are optimal, then we can begin to
plan some effective strategies. And since n lp is all about what works best, I
can assure you that what i'm beginning to explain to you works like mad. It
works wonderfully because IT's only a model. IT's not necessarily factual that
all these things are always true. IT's only a way of thinking about things.

Even when it may be wrong. It may still be a useful distortion that still
helps us create desired results. And it turns out that if you adopt this way
of thinking about things, this particular model of influence, you end up
influencing more people more often. And for more of the right reasons, as
might be a useful thing to play with. I guarantee you that if you spent even a
moment trying to come up with counter examples to this way of thinking or of
reasons why it might not work, i'm already ahead of you.

I can come up with more counter examples and reasons why it might not work.
Then you can at the moment, because i've made this way of thinking my
lifestyle already, however, even though counter examples and reasons why it
might not work exist, i'm still using this mindset daily, and i'm getting
extraordinary results daily. Are you yet? So we've made the point that our
internal context or emotional state is centrally involved in our decision
making processes. Remember that how we feel not only helps us determine what
we'll agree to or not, how we feel is sometimes directly it cause for whether
or not we'll decide something.

Knowing this opens up the observation that every major decision we or other
people have made in the past were all made in any of a certain category of
emotional states. Think about this. I guarantee you that if you scan through
your own memories of when you made major, major decisions, the best ones you
can remember were absolute no brainer choices. I would imagine that at the
time you made those choices, you felt so powerfully strongly about them, that
not making that decision then would have been ridiculous, silly, not even
worth discussing.

So whenever we're trying to influence people, whenever we want to create the

automatic yes, response, we might best think of doing so as doing whatever it
behavior early or linguistically takes s thickly speaking, to elicit the
emotional states from which the automatic yes is the only obvious choice. Is
that even possible? IT's not only possible, I do IT regularly. I do IT daily.
And if you immerse yourself in this skill set, you'll be able to do IT
consistently to.