The Structure of Magic (Vols I & II) [Richard Bandler & John Grinder]
Overview
In The Structure of Magic, Richard Bandler and John Grinder explore how language and mental models shape human experience and the process of change. The authors argue that individuals do not interact with the world directly, but rather through subjective maps that are often limited by generalization, deletion, and distortion. These linguistic and cognitive filters can lead to an impoverished model of reality, causing people to feel trapped or paralyzed by a perceived lack of choices. By applying transformational grammar and specific verbal techniques, the book provides a Meta-model for therapists to identify and challenge these restrictive patterns. This systematic approach allows practitioners to help clients expand their internal representations, thereby uncovering new options for behavior and emotional relief. Ultimately, the text demonstrates that the "magic" performed by effective therapists is actually a structured, learnable skill rooted in the syntax of communication.
Volume One
This text introduces a transformational model of therapy that examines how human beings use language to represent experience. The authors argue that people suffer not because the world is limited, but because their internal models of the world are impoverished by linguistic distortions like deletions, nominalizations, and universal quantifiers. By utilizing a specialized Meta-Model, therapists can challenge these restricted "Surface Structures" to recover the richer "Deep Structure" of a client's actual life. This process functions as a map for change, allowing individuals to break through semantically ill-formed generalizations and reclaim a wider range of creative choices and potential.
Volume Two
This seminal work explores how individuals construct internal representational systems—such as visual, auditory, and kinesthetic maps—to interpret their reality, noting that these personal models often limit human potential when they become rigid or incongruent. The authors provide a formal framework for therapists to identify semantic ill-formedness, such as "mind-reading" or "fuzzy functions," where a person's linguistic output fails to align with their sensory experience. By utilizing specific meta-tactics like matching predicates and sorting physical stances, practitioners can help clients bridge the gap between their mental "maps" and the actual "territory" of their lives. Ultimately, the text aims to provide a structural language of growth that enables people to integrate conflicting internal polarities and reclaim a sense of creative agency and self-worth.
Foundation Primer: The Map and the Territory
1. Introduction: Understanding the Mental Model
One of the most profound realizations in the study of human experience is that we do not engage with reality in its raw, unadulterated form. Instead, we inhabit a neuro-linguistic bridge—an active, creative architecture of experience that we build ourselves. We do not operate directly on the world, but rather through our perception or model of the world.
"The map is not the territory." This foundational principle, established in The Structure of Magic I, dictates that any map is necessarily a simplification of a more complex reality. Just as a paper map must omit every blade of grass to be useful, our mental models are necessary reductions that serve as guides, never literal replicas of the territory.
This modeling is not a passive recording; it is a dynamic process of deletion, distortion, and generalization. To master the art of communication, one must first understand the physical tools we use to assemble this internal architecture—the sensory input channels.
2. The Five Sensory Gateways (Input Channels)
Human beings receive an ongoing stream of information through five recognized sensory gateways. These channels are the primary builders of our internal reality, categorized by their frequency of use in gaining information about the world.
| Input Channel | Primary Function/Description |
|---|---|
| Visual (Vision) | A major channel for processing light, color, and movement. |
| Auditory (Audition) | A major channel for processing sound, rhythm, and tone. |
| Kinesthetic (Body Sensations) | A major channel for processing physical feelings, pressure, temperature, and proprioception. |
| Gustatory (Taste) | A less utilized channel for processing chemical flavors. |
| Olfactory (Smell) | A less utilized channel for processing scents and aromas. |
Insight Synthesis: The Precision of Perception
The complexity of our experience arises from a dual-layered process. First, neurophysiologists distinguish between specialized receptors within a single channel—such as the chromatic cones and non-color rods in the visual channel, or the specialized receptors for pressure and temperature in the kinesthetic channel. Second, our brains perceive higher-order complexity through the combination of these stimulations.
For instance, the sensation of "wetness" is not the result of a single receptor; it is a recurring pattern of several different kinesthetic receptors firing in unison. Similarly, "texture" is often a multi-modal synthesis of visual, kinesthetic, and sometimes auditory data. Once this data passes through these gateways, it must be stored and organized within our internal systems.
3. Representational Systems: Filing the Information
The internal models we use to store, organize, and retrieve our experiences are known as Representational Systems. A critical "so what?" of cognitive modeling is that we often represent information in a system entirely different from the input channel through which it arrived.
- Direct Representation: Storing information in the system most closely associated with the input (e.g., remembering a sunset as a visual image).
- Cross-Modal Representation: This is the automatic ability to create a representation in one system based on input from another. When you hear the crackling and hissing of a fire (auditory), you likely create a mental picture of the logs (visual) without conscious recognition of the shift.
- Language System: Language acts as a meta-representation—a map of our other maps. We use words, phrases, and sentences as a digital system to represent our analog sensory experiences.
While we all possess these systems, the "magic" of human individuality lies in the fact that no two people use them in exactly the same way.
4. Why Our Maps Differ: Individual Valuation
Each individual develops a Most Highly Valued Representational System, a primary lens through which they model the world. When two people stand in the same "territory," their primary systems lead to dramatically different experiences.
- The Musician: Detects, represents, and enjoys complex auditory patterns and sound distinctions that a primarily visual person may never consciously perceive.
- The Painter: Perceives subtle distinctions in the colors and light of a sunset that remain unavailable to an individual whose primary system is kinesthetic.
- The Connoisseur: Has cultivated a rich, highly developed system for detecting subtle distinctions in taste and smell that others simply cannot find.
Insight Synthesis: The Limits of the Model
If a person is unable to answer a question or perceive a specific perspective, it is rarely a sign of resistance, "bad" intentions, or pathology. Rather, it is an indicator of the limits of that person's model. If their map does not have a "road" or coordinate for a specific sensory experience, they cannot find it. When these distinct internal landscapes collide in the theater of human relationships, the resulting friction is rarely a matter of intent, but a conflict of maps.
5. Communication and the "Structure of Magic"
In the context of communication, we often mistake our map for the only possible reality. Consider a common relational impasse: A wife with a primarily Visual model feels unvalued because her husband "doesn't notice" (visual) when she dresses up. Meanwhile, her husband is expressing deep affection by "pawing" at her—responding to her according to his Kinesthetic model. He is not being "difficult" or "insensitive"; he is being entirely consistent with the choices available in his map of the world.
Learner Insight: Beyond Judgment to Expansion
Understanding representational systems transforms communication from a "haphazard and tedious" struggle into a precise tool for change. When we realize people are making the best choice available in their model, we can stop diagnosing them as "bad, crazy, or sick." Instead, we can begin the work of "therapeutic wizardry": helping ourselves and others expand the impoverished portions of our maps.
The "Structure of Magic" lies in the ability to challenge and expand these limiting models. By recognizing that "the map is not the territory," we gain the power to recover deleted information and distort rigid generalizations. Our goal as communicators and educators is to enrich our internal maps, providing more options, more opportunities for contact, and ultimately, a life of greater joy and richness.
Decoding Communication Stances: A Student's Guide to Satir Categories
As an educational psychologist, I have observed that we often mistake a person’s defensive reaction for their permanent identity. In reality, the rigid patterns we encounter in high-stress interactions are learned survival mechanisms. Known as the Satir Categories, these stances are choices—albeit often unconscious ones—generated by an impoverished model of the world. By learning to decode these signatures, you gain the agency to move beyond reactive behavior and toward congruent, creative communication.
1. Introduction: The Genesis of Defensive Communication
The four Satir Categories find their origin in early childhood. As a child navigates a "complicated and often threatening world," they adopt specific stances to survive. Over time, these responses become so habitual that the individual can no longer distinguish the defense from their own "feeling of worth." Every time a person defaults to these patterns, they forge another ring in the cycle of low self-esteem.
To master these categories, we must understand the mechanics of Paramessages. Communication occurs on two levels:
- Content (Verbal/Digital): The literal words spoken.
- Relationship (Non-verbal/Analogical): The messages conveyed through tonality, tempo, and posture.
A paramessage is a message expressed simultaneously with another. Communication becomes incongruent when these paramessages do not fit—for example, when the verbal content says "I'm fine" but the analogical tonality is harsh and shrill. These categories are defined by such incongruities.
2. Category 1: The Placater (The "Yes-Person")
The Placater seeks to avoid the threat of rejection by self-erasure. They act as though everyone else’s needs and feelings are the only ones that matter, attempting to please everyone to ensure their own survival.
Internal Narrative: "I am nothing; without him, I am dead. I am worthless."
The Placater’s Linguistic Signature
| Verbal Qualifiers/Patterns | Linguistic Violations |
|---|---|
| Frequent use of qualifiers: if, only, just, even. | Mind-reading: Assuming they know what the other person wants or thinks without asking. |
| Heavy use of the subjunctive mood (e.g., could, would, should). | Deletions: Removing their own desires and needs from the communication entirely. |
Non-Verbal Signature
- Posture: Slumped or even kneeling; feet often close together.
- Hands: Extended outward, palms turned upward in a classic pleading or begging gesture.
- Voice: High-pitched, thin, and whining.
Societal Reinforcement: This stance is bolstered by early warnings like, "Don't impose; it's selfish to ask for things for yourself."
When the weight of self-erasure becomes too heavy, the survival mechanism often flips from submissive yielding to the outward aggression of the next stance: The Blamer.
3. Category 2: The Blamer (The Dictator)
The Blamer adopts the role of the dictator to defend against a deep sense of failure. By finding fault with others, they attempt to reclaim a sense of power and avoid the pain of their own perceived inadequacy.
Internal Narrative: "I am lonely and unsuccessful."
The Blamer’s Linguistic Signature
| Verbal Qualifiers/Patterns | Linguistic Violations |
|---|---|
| Universal Quantifiers: Using all, every, any, each time, never to generalize a person’s "failings." | Cause-Effect Violations: Claiming an external force is the direct cause of their internal state (e.g., "You make me angry"). |
| Negative Questions: Using "Why don't you?" or "How come you can't?" to put others on the defensive. | Mind-reading: Attributing negative intentions to others to justify the attack. |
Non-Verbal Signature
- Gestures: One hand on the hip, the other arm extended with the index finger pointed straight out like a weapon.
- Facial Expressions: Screwed up face, curled lips, and flared nostrils.
- Physiology: Breathing in little tight spurts or holding the breath; bulging eyes and standing-out neck muscles.
- Voice: Harsh, tight, shrill, and loud—described as "someone shoveling coal."
Societal Reinforcement: Blaming is reinforced by the "tough" ideal: "Don't let anyone put you down; don't be a coward."
If the Blamer represents emotional heat and aggressive contact, the next category represents an escape into emotional coldness and total detachment: The Computer.
4. Category 3: The Computer (Super-Reasonable)
The Computer is ultra-reasonable and detached. To protect a fragile inner self from vulnerability, the individual disassociates from their body and feelings, functioning like a dictionary or a machine.
Internal Narrative: "I feel vulnerable."
The Computer’s Linguistic Signature
| Verbal Qualifiers/Patterns | Linguistic Violations |
|---|---|
| Long, abstract words; complex sentences that avoid directness. | Deletion of Experiencer: Removing the "I" as the subject (e.g., "as can be seen" instead of "I see") or as the object (e.g., "X is disturbing" instead of "X disturbs me"). |
| Lack of Referential Indices: Using impersonal words like it, one, people, it is thought. | Nominalizations: Turning active processes into abstract things like frustration, stress, tension, or respect. |
Non-Verbal Signature
- Posture: The spine is held as rigid as a "heavy steel rod"; the neck feels constrained by a "ten-inch-wide iron collar."
- Movement: Keeping the body and mouth as motionless as possible to avoid "leaking" emotion.
- Voice: A dry, dead monotone; the voice goes dead because there is "no feeling from the cranium down."
The "So What?" of the Computer: Society often views this role as an "ideal goal" for intelligence. In truth, it is a state of being "disassociated"—the individual is so busy choosing the "correct" words that they lose touch with their own kinesthetic experience.
The rigid, frozen stillness of the Computer stands in stark contrast to the chaotic, purposeless movement of our final category: The Distracter.
5. Category 4: The Distracter (The Irrelevant)
The Distracter attempts to survive by being "irrelevant." By constantly shifting focus and moving, they hope to avoid the pain of meaningful contact or the heat of conflict.
Internal Narrative: "Nobody cares. There is no place for me."
A Unique Signature
The Distracter’s communication is unique because it is a rapid sequence of the other three categories. They may jump from placating to blaming to computing in seconds. Because they are constantly shifting, they never stay on point and their paramessages are inherently incongruent, making this stance the most difficult to "sort" in a therapeutic context.
Non-Verbal Signature
- Body: Angular and "off somewhere else"; the person resembles a lopsided top constantly spinning.
- Posture: Knees together in a "knock-kneed" fashion, buttocks out, and shoulders hunched.
- Voice: Singsong, going up and down without reason, and often out of tune with the actual words being spoken.
Societal Reinforcement: This behavior is mirrored in the urge to avoid depth: "Don't be so serious. Live it up! Who cares?"
To sharpen your ability to identify these stances in real-time, refer to the synthesis below.
6. Comparative Summary: The Student's Cheat Sheet
| Stance | Internal Feeling | Key Linguistic Pattern | Physical Signature |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placater | Worthless/Helpless | Qualifiers (if, just); Subjunctive mood | Slumped/kneeling, palms up, whining voice |
| Blamer | Lonely/Unsuccessful | Universal Quantifiers (all, never); Cause-Effect | Pointing finger, flared nostrils, "shoveling coal" voice |
| Computer | Vulnerable | Deletion of Experiencer; Nominalizations | Motionless, steel-rod spine, dry monotone |
| Distracter | Purposeless | Irrelevant; Rapid shifting of stances | Angular, knock-kneed, out-of-tune voice |
7. Practical Application: Sharpening Your Observation Skills
To grow beyond these defensive models, you must train your senses to detect incongruity. Conduct the following 30-minute observation exercises in a public place (cafe, park, airport) from a distance of 5 to 20 feet.
Step 1: Isolate the Visual 10 Minutes x 3 People
Observe one person for 10 minutes. Ignore all sound. Focus on these Visual Checkpoints:
- Eye fixation patterns: Are they staring, shifting rapidly, or unfocused?
- The head/neck/shoulder relationship: Look for the "iron collar" rigidity or the "slumped" Placater neck.
- Facial muscles: Watch the eyebrows, mouth, and cheek muscles for subtle "cut short" movements.
- Symmetry: Does the right side of the body move congruently with the left?
Step 2: Isolate the Auditory 30 Minutes Total
Close your eyes or defocus them to ignore visual input. Focus on one person's voice for 10 minutes, repeating for two more people. Use these Auditory Checkpoints:
- Tonality and Volume: Is the voice harsh (Blamer), whining (Placater), or dead (Computer)?
- Tempo and Intonation: Listen for the "singsong" (Distracter) or the "dry monotone" (Computer).
- Linguistic Violations: Listen for the specific words used—quantifiers, nominalizations, or subjunctives.
Step 3: Synthesis
Combine your observations. Notice where the visual paramessages (the pointing finger) contradict the auditory paramessages (the whining voice).
Final Insight: The Map is Not the Territory
Always remember that a person "using the stance" of a Blamer is not "a Blamer." These categories are not identities; they are choices generated by limited models of the world. By recognizing these incongruencies, you can provide the feedback necessary to help yourself and others expand their maps and move toward more fulfilling, congruent lives.
Therapeutic Strategy Guide: Resolving Internal Incongruity via Representational Systems
1. Foundational Theory: The Map, the Territory, and Representational Systems
In the high-stakes environment of clinical intervention, the strategist must operate from the foundational principle that "The Map is Not the Territory." Human beings do not navigate the world directly; we navigate via internal models or "maps" constructed through representational systems. When a client presents as "stuck" or in pain, the diagnosis is clear: their internal map is impoverished, characterized by deletions, distortions, and generalizations that restrict behavioral options. The strategist's primary objective is not to change the external "territory," but to enrich the client's model of the world, thereby recovering the Reference Structure and providing a wider array of choice.
Our experience is organized through three primary input channels. Crucially, information from one channel can be "mapped" into a different representational system—for instance, hearing a fire (Auditory) and creating an internal image (Visual).
Primary Input Channels and Mapping Mechanics
| Representational System | Primary Sensory Receptors | Functional Mapping Description | Complex Pattern/Input Examples |
|---|---|---|---|
| Visual (V) | Cones (chromatic) and Rods (non-color/peripheral). | Storing input as images, colors, movements, or geometry. | Texture: A synthesis of V, K, and occasionally A. |
| Auditory (A) | Ears / Auditory receptors. | Storing input as sounds, rhythms, and language. Distinctly categorized into Digital (the words themselves/content) and Analogical (tonality/tempo). | Natural Language: The mapping of sensory experience into words. |
| Kinesthetic (K) | Proprioceptors (deep senses), pressure, temperature, and pain receptors. | Storing input as body sensations, visceral feelings, or tactile pressure. | Wetness: A recurring pattern of stimulation from multiple K-receptors. |
A practitioner must evaluate the "Most Highly Valued Representational System" (the dominant system) to understand a client's reality. A musician (Auditory dominant) and a painter (Visual dominant) will have fundamentally different experiences of the same sunset. These maps define the limits of the possible; signals of incongruity occur when these internal maps are in conflict.
2. Diagnostic Framework: Identifying Predicates and Paramessages
The strategist must distinguish between the Digital (the linguistic content) and the Analogical (tonality, tempo, posture, and gesture). Identifying a client’s dominant system depends on tracking their Predicates—the verbs, adjectives, and adverbs associated with V, A, or K. We specifically watch for "paramessages," which are simultaneous messages across different output channels. When paramessages conflict (e.g., a "Placating" verbal message delivered with a "Blaming" tonality), the client is signaling internal incongruity.
Practitioner’s Diagnostic Checklist
| Modality | Diagnostic Checkpoints (Analogical Indicators) |
|---|---|
| Visual Checkpoints | • Eye fixation patterns (up/center/down). • Facial muscle tension (eyebrows, mouth, cheeks). • Body symmetry (comparing the right side against the left). • Head, neck, and shoulder alignment. |
| Auditory Checkpoints | • Analogical: Tonality (harsh vs. soft), tempo (rapid vs. slow), volume, and intonation. • Digital: Specific predicates (e.g., "I see," "I hear," "I feel") and syntactic structures. |
Diagnostic Heuristic: Mapping Satir Categories to Representational Systems
The way a client structures their language and posture reveals their internal state. Strategic diagnosis relies on mapping Virginia Satir’s communication categories to their most frequent representational correlates:
- Category 1: The Placater (Kinesthetic Correlate)
- Syntactic Pattern: High use of qualifiers (if, only, just) and the subjunctive mood (could, would). Frequent "mind-reading" violations.
- Posture: Slumped, palms up, whining voice.
- Category 2: The Blamer (Visual Correlate)
- Syntactic Pattern: Universal quantifiers (all, every, always) and negative questions (Why don't you?). Frequent "Cause-Effect" violations.
- Posture: Erect, finger-pointing, harsh tonality.
- Category 3: The Computer / Super-Reasonable (Auditory Correlate)
- Syntactic Pattern: Deletion of the "experiencer" (e.g., "It is disturbing" vs. "I am disturbed"). High use of nominalizations (frustration, stress) and nouns without referential indices (it, people).
- Posture: Motionless, "steel rod" spine, dry monotone voice.
These signals indicate the emergence of internal polarities—disconnected parts of the client's model that are no longer in communication.
3. The Mechanics of Incongruity: Fuzzy Functions and Polarities
A critical clinical target is the "Fuzzy Function." These are neurological short-circuits that bypass conscious processing, specifically "see-feel" or "hear-feel" circuits. When these circuits are rigid, the client loses touch with their actual ongoing kinesthetic experience, instead allowing external visual or auditory input to trigger a feelings-state automatically. These short-circuits are the root of psychosomatic distress, as seen in the case of Martha, who beat her child because a minor visual stimulus (the child doing something "wrong") triggered an uncontrollable "hear-feel" loop of worthlessness and rage.
Semantic Ill-Formedness: Linguistic Reflections of Fuzzy Functions
- Cause-Effect: The client represents a stimulus as causing their internal state (e.g., "I see you smiling, and it makes me feel mocked"). The client has zero choice over their emotional response.
- Mind-Reading: The client distorts input channels to match internal feelings (e.g., "I feel bad, therefore I know you are thinking I'm worthless").
Polarities: The Internal Split
Polarities are inconsistent models of the world held by the same individual. In the case of Ellen, she presented two distinct polarities regarding her father: a Visual Blamer (erect, finger-pointing, yelling "Why don't you ever do what I want?") and a Kinesthetic Placater (slumped, palms up, whining "I try as hard as I can to please you"). These are not "bad" parts; they are disconnected resources that must be sorted before they can be integrated.
4. Strategic Intervention: Utilizing the Meta-Model and Spatial Sorting
Intervention requires Sorting. The strategist must facilitate a "well-formed split," clearly separating the conflicting polarities.
De-nominalizing the Model
The strategist uses Meta-Model techniques to challenge the limits of the client's model. When a client uses Modal Operators of necessity or possibility ("I can't," "It's impossible"), they are identifying a lack of choice. The therapist must de-nominalize these experiences to recover the Reference Structure:
- Challenge: "What stops you?" (Recovering the deleted Cause).
- Challenge: "What would happen if you did?" (Recovering the deleted Effect).
Polarity Questions: Active-Command Checklist
The practitioner must use the following checklist to force contact between the parts:
- "What, specifically, do you want for yourself?"
- "How, specifically, does the other polarity stop you?"
- "Is there any way that you see-hear-feel that the other polarity can be of use to you?"
- "What would happen if the other polarity were to go away completely?"
- "Do you see-hear-feel what the other polarity wants?"
The Chair Switching Technique
The therapist must take an active, disruptive role. The client physically moves between chairs representing different polarities. The therapist must interrupt the client to enforce the predicate shift (ensuring they use V, A, or K words appropriate to that chair) and posture shift. By playing the polarities against each other, the therapist moves the client toward a "Meta-Position." In the case of Tom, the authors played his polarities so aggressively against each other that Tom reached a point of control, screaming "Shut up!"—a pivotal moment where he achieved meta-position by taking control of the parts.
5. Achieving the Meta-Position and Final Integration
The Meta-Position is a state of control where the client recognizes their internal parts as resources rather than sources of pain.
Ritualized Integration Methodologies
- The Parts Party: A psychodramatic technique where group members play the client's parts (using anchors like famous names). The client observes the interactions from the outside, gaining a meta-view of their internal dynamics.
- The Family Huddle: A ritualized kinesthetic integration where family members (or parts) physically touch to signal a new start and sensory-based connection.
The Formal Process of Recoding
The strategist facilitates the final "Recoding." The client takes control of the parts, recognizing the unique abilities of each. The therapist facilitates a ritual—often having the client hold the defined abilities of the parts in their hands—and delicately weaves them together. This integrated representation is then spread throughout the kinesthetic system (the body, the eyes, the breath), ensuring the new, unified model is fully embodied.
Homework and Ecological Validity
To ensure change persists, assignments must be designed by the client or family to ensure ecological validity.
- Assignments must utilize the new choices developed in therapy.
- The process of designing homework is itself a resource, empowering the client to recognize their own creative coping skills.
Conclusion
The therapist is not a traditional healer but a guide using the natural processes of representation. By identifying fuzzy functions, sorting polarities, and enforcing a meta-position, the therapist transforms "stuck," repetitive patterns into generative, creative living. The goal is to move the client from a state of low vitality to one of sensory-based coping and expanded choice.
Systems Intervention Plan: Evolving Family Configurations from Closed to Open
1. Strategic Context: The Mechanics of Family Evolution
The evolution of a family system from a "closed" to an "open" configuration is a strategic imperative centered on the transition from calibration to sensory feedback. In closed systems, family members operate via calibrated communication—fixed, automatic responses governed by rigid rules that delete present-moment data in favor of historical patterns. Shifting to an open system is not a mere behavioral adjustment; it is a fundamental representational recoding. The Strategist is tasked with updating the family’s shared "map" of reality to ensure it no longer dictates experience but reflects it.
The transformative objective is the engineering of a functional overlap between individual input and output channels. When the system is open, members can successfully exchange feedback and appreciation because the message sent via one member's output channel is compatible with the receiver's available input channel. This facilitates a generative cycle of growth rather than a repetitive cycle of pain. Achieving this requires a meticulous diagnostic mapping of the system's current representational limits.
2. Diagnostic Mapping of Representational Systems and Output Channels
The Strategist must immediately isolate the specific representational systems (RS) utilized by each family member to identify the mechanics of systemic friction. Friction is rarely the result of "bad intentions" but is the direct consequence of mismatched input/output circuits.
Primary Representational Systems and Behavioral Predicates
| Representational System | Specialized Receptors | Behavioral Predicates & Indicators |
|---|---|---|
| Visual | Chromatic (cones/fovea) & Non-color (rods/periphery) | see, look, appear, clear, bright, watch, notice, shape up, flash, perspective |
| Auditory | Auditory nerve/cochlea | hear, sound, tell, words, listen, tonality, tempo, loud, soft, harmonize, screech |
| Kinesthetic | Pressure, temperature, pain, and proprioceptors | feel, touch, pressure, texture, warm, cold, tight, relaxed, paws, grasp, solid |
The Impact of "Most Highly Valued Representational Systems"
Systemic conflict is frequently a "Map is Not the Territory" error. When a member’s most highly valued RS is mismatched with another's output channel, the message is deleted. For instance, in a common clinical configuration, a wife with a primary Visual system may seek "attention" defined as eye contact and visual acknowledgement. If the husband’s primary system is Kinesthetic, he may offer attention by "pawing" or physical proximity while looking away. The wife concludes he is "ignoring" her (Visual deletion), while the husband feels his affection is "rejected" (Kinesthetic distortion). The strategist identifies these as indicators of the model’s limits, not as pathology.
3. Analysis of Communication Stances (Satir Categories) as Systemic Limiters
Communication stances are learned survival mechanisms that restrict a family's "pot" (self-worth). Technically, these stances are defined by incongruent paramessages—simultaneous messages expressed in different channels that contradict one another. The system fails when the analogical paramessage (relationship level) contradicts the digital content (words), forcing the receiver to calibrate to the past rather than listen to the present.
The Four Stances as Channel Limiters
- The Placater
- Physical Stance: One hand reached out, the other at the throat; kneeling/slumped, palms upward.
- Verbal/Syntactic Correlates: Heavy use of qualifiers (if, only, just, even) and the subjunctive mood (could, would). Frequent mind-reading violations.
- Internal Feeling: "I feel like a nothing; I am worthless."
- The Blamer
- Physical Stance: One hand on hip, other arm extended with pointed index finger. Eyes bulging, neck muscles tense.
- Verbal/Syntactic Correlates: Universal quantifiers (all, every, always, never) and negative questions (Why don't you?).
- Internal Feeling: "I am lonely and unsuccessful."
- The Computer (Super-Reasonable)
- Physical Stance: Spine like a "steel rod," motionless; a ten-inch iron collar around the neck. Body is dry and cool.
- Verbal/Syntactic Correlates: Deletion of experiencer nouns (using "it" or "one" instead of "I"). Abstract nominalizations (stress, frustration).
- Internal Feeling: "I feel vulnerable."
- The Distracter
- Physical Stance: Angular and off-balance; knock-kneed, arms and hands moving in opposite directions.
- Verbal/Syntactic Correlates: Irrelevant words; a singsong voice out of tune with the content.
- Internal Feeling: "Nobody cares. There is no place for me."
Systemic Synthesis: These stances effectively delete specific input/output channels. The Computer deletes his kinesthetic channel (feelings) to remain "reasonable." The Blamer uses an analogical pointed finger to override digital messages of vulnerability. The Strategist must recognize that these paramessages prevent the system from accessing new resources, leading to the development of "fuzzy functions."
4. Deconstructing "Fuzzy Functions" and Semantic Ill-Formedness
Fuzzy functions are the biological and linguistic foundations of systemic stagnation. These are not merely "bad habits" but are rooted in the polysensory nature of cortical cells. Per the research of Paul Bach-y-Rita, a significant percentage of cells in the visual cortex respond to auditory and skin stimulation. When these circuits become uncontrolled, they manifest as semantic ill-formedness.
Uncontrolled Sensory Circuits
- See-Feel / Hear-Feel (Cause-Effect): External sensory input automatically triggers an internal feeling without conscious choice. An angry tonality (Auditory) automatically causes the receiver to feel pain (Kinesthetic). This "Cause-Effect" circuit ensures the family member is at the mercy of external stimuli.
- Feel-See / Feel-Hear (Mind-Reading): Internal feelings distort external input to match the internal state (forward feedback). If a member feels "worthless," they will "see" a neutral face as a "sneer" or "hear" silence as "disgust."
Strategic Analysis: These biological circuits trap family members in self-fulfilling prophecies. By fighting polysensory cortical responses rather than behavior, the family remains in a "calibrated" state. The Strategist’s goal is to break these circuits, allowing the family to directly experience the world rather than their distortions of it.
5. Intervention Phase I: Breaking Rules and Identifying Limitations
The Strategist is tasked with the immediate disruption of family "rules," which are functionally restrictions on the input and output channels used for contact.
Tactical Commands for the Practitioner
- Identify Rule-as-Limitation: Isolate non-overlapping channels. In the George/Matt case, George (son) monitored only the visual channel (Matt’s smile) and deleted the auditory content ("Yes, that I believe"). Matt (father) was crying softly (Kinesthetic/Auditory), yet George perceived only "making fun." The Strategist must point out that George’s visual-only "map" of his father is not the territory.
- Challenge Linguistic Limits: Identify and de-nominalize terms like "respect" or "love." Challenge Modal Operators of Necessity/Possibility (e.g., "I can't," "It's impossible") and unspecified verbs. Ask: "How, specifically, would you know if he were respecting you? What would you see or hear?"
- Implement Meta-Position Moves: Guide members to describe the process of their communication. For example, have a father describe the physical movements he sees during an argument between his wife and daughter, shifting him from a participant to an observer.
6. Intervention Phase II: Tactical Recoding and Integration
The Strategist utilizes representational switching and the psychodramatic "Parts Party" to integrate polarities.
The "Parts Party" Projective Technique
- Selection: The client identifies famous people (fictional or real) they find attractive or repellent.
- Instruction: The client assigns an adjective to each name and instructs group members to play these "parts" one-dimensionally (e.g., the "Angry" part expresses only anger in every channel).
- Crisis: The group members interact in a party setting until a crisis occurs, mobilizing the parts to recognize their interdependence.
- Integration Ritual: The client "owns" the parts as resources. A kinesthetic ritual is performed where the client stands in the center of the circle, and each part lays a hand on them, stating the resource they represent (e.g., "strength" instead of "anger").
Transformation of Resources: The Strategist employs re-labeling to transform negative circuits into resources. For example, a wife’s "nagging" is re-labeled as "caring." By describing the polarity function (she wouldn't nag if he weren't important), a negative hear-feel circuit is transformed into a usable resource for the system.
7. Operationalizing the Open System: Intercept Signals and Homework
Grounding therapeutic shifts requires the replacement of calibration with sensory feedback in daily life.
Implementation of Intercept Signals
Intercept signals are non-verbal metacomments designed to interrupt calibrated responses.
- Sculpturing as Metacommenting: The Strategist teaches the family to use "sculpturing"—physically moving members into a posture that represents the current tension—to make a visual comment on a kinesthetic or auditory process. This "opens" the system by utilizing an alternative channel.
- Dependable Channel Selection: Signals must be designed based on the family's most dependable input/output channels (e.g., a specific touch for kinesthetically oriented members).
Criteria for Effective Family Homework
- Technical Precision: Homework must exercise the precise new patterns/channels learned in session.
- Systemic Ownership: The family must negotiate the design of the task to ensure it is appropriate for their non-therapeutic context.
- Scheduled Exercises: Tasks must provide a scheduled occasion (e.g., a daily "huddle") to practice new choices.
The Strategist functions as a guide, utilizing the natural processes of deletion, distortion, and generalization to enrich the family’s model. By replacing automatic calibration with present-moment sensory feedback, the family evolves into a generative system where every member is respectable to every other member.