Verbal Acrobatics: The Art of Speaking and Persuasion
This article is based on Ilya Goz’s work, “Verbal Acrobatics or the Art of Speaking.” While it’s a lengthy read, it contains an entire NLP (Neuro-Linguistic Programming) course on not just how to talk, but how to persuade—covering about 15 lectures’ worth of material. If you’re interested, you can tackle it in parts; the article is published here in full.
Introduction
“I am not able to argue with you, Socrates. Let it be as you say.”
“No, my dear Agathon, you are not able to argue with the truth. Arguing with Socrates is easy.”
— Plato, “Symposium”
“I’ll show you something truly new.” That’s what Richard Bandler said, inviting participants to his 1980 NLP seminar in Washington. These were highly trained professionals in neuro-linguistic programming, including Robert Dilts. They settled in, waiting to see what Bandler would do.
Bandler was about to step on stage but tripped on a loose step and changed his mind. Instead, he said, “I have a problem. You solve it for me.” He then sat in the middle of the room on a chair.
For two days, Bandler played the role of a resistant therapy client, while a dozen skilled NLP specialists tried to help him change—but failed completely. Bandler managed to neutralize every method they tried, even making them question their own beliefs. This, despite repeatedly saying he “wanted to change,” “wanted to get rid of his problems,” and was “ready to do what was advised.”
On the third day, Bandler and the participants switched roles—and Bandler won again.
This seminar marked the beginning of what’s now known as the “Verbal Acrobatics” or “Sleight of Mouth” model.
Keep reading to learn all about it…
Trees and the Wind
“Mom, does the wind blow because the trees are swaying?”
— A child’s question
Here are some phrases you may have heard, read, or even said yourself. The specific meaning isn’t important right now—focus on the structure of each phrase. Try to spot common features.
- “You look at the book often, so you must not know the subject well.”
- “Second place is the same as last.”
- “You frowned, so you’re mad at me.”
- “That person has a lot of money, so he must be a thief.”
- “Forgetting our wedding date is the same as forgetting our love.”
Now, a few more phrases, built a bit differently:
- “I’m upset because of how he acts.”
- “I don’t have time for a personal life because I work a lot.”
- “Cancer leads to death.”
- “I can’t easily talk to strangers because that’s how I was raised.”
Did you notice anything in common? Excellent! All the phrases in the first group equate one thing, action, or state with another—they use one phenomenon as a sign or criterion for another. Linguists call these “complex equivalences.”
(A means B. A is B. A is no different from B.)
The second group expresses cause and effect—one thing is the cause, the other is the result. These are “cause and effect statements.”
(A leads to B. B happens because of A. If A, then B.)
These dry linguistic definitions hide some of the most important processes in our minds—how we form beliefs about reality. We all have many beliefs about how the world works, and they’re vital to us.
Remember how Alice in Wonderland reasoned? She knew that if you hold a red-hot poker too long, you’ll get burned; if you cut your finger deeply, it will bleed; and if you drink from a bottle marked “Poison,” you’ll probably get sick or die.
Our brains store information about the world’s laws in this form. We learn by constructing beliefs about cause and effect and equivalence. This lets us create patterns—standard, repeatable sequences of actions, thoughts, words, and so on.
Thanks to these beliefs, we know how to open a door, turn on a TV, tie our shoes… and also how to interpret others’ actions, respond to certain phrases, decide why we got sick, or why a treatment “can’t possibly work,” which detergent to buy, or how to vote.
All these different situations are expressed in similar language forms. At their core are beliefs about cause and effect or equivalence. This is both the strength and weakness of how our minds work. With these beliefs, we can formulate natural laws, navigate a complex world, learn, and discover new things—but we can also limit ourselves, get stuck in stereotypes, argue with loved ones, or block our own ability to change.
What if you could quickly, effectively, and subtly change such beliefs in yourself and others?
The linguistic patterns of the “Verbal Acrobatics” model, developed by Robert Dilts and Todd Epstein, give us just such a tool.
14 Patterns of Verbal Acrobatics
“I have often found that a simple word can have a beneficial effect on many people, and it is not the author, but the word itself, that moves souls, revealing its power.”
— F. Petrarch
We’ll look at fourteen “Verbal Acrobatics” patterns in their classic form, as first described by the model’s creators. Each is a simple yet powerful way to respond to a cause-effect or equivalence statement, weakening, transforming, or even eliminating the limiting belief behind it.
Before we go further, pick two or three of your own cause-effect or equivalence beliefs. As you read about each pattern, try applying it to your own belief.
- Redefinition
- Consequence
- Intention
- Chunk Down (Detailing)
- Chunk Up (Generalization)
- Counter-Example
- Another Outcome
- Metaphor (Analogy)
- Recursion (Apply to Self)
- Hierarchy of Criteria (Values)
- Change Frame (Context)
- Meta-Frame
- Model of the World
- Reality Strategy
1. Redefinition
Redefinition comes in three types:
a) Redefining the cause
b) Redefining the effect
c) Redefining the criterion (sign)
- “I don’t have time for a personal life because I work a lot.”
a) Actually, you don’t have time for a personal life because of how you organize your work.
b) If you work a lot, your life should be improving, right? - “That person has a lot of money, so he must be a thief.”
c) If he has a lot of money, he must have gotten it somehow. Do you know any ways to get money besides stealing?
The general scheme: “It’s not A that leads to B. B is caused by something else, C.” Or, “A doesn’t mean B. A could mean C, D, E…”
Try applying redefinition to your own belief. Ask: “What other causes could lead to this? What else could this sign mean?”
2. Consequence
Even minor beliefs directly affect our behavior. People often don’t realize the consequences of their beliefs.
- “Cancer leads to death.”
— Such beliefs can make a person stop trying to recover, which really can lead to death. - “Second place is the same as last.”
— Thinking this way, you deprive yourself of the reward you earned and lose motivation to improve.
Apply the consequence pattern to your belief. What are the results of holding this belief? Are they positive or negative?
3. Intention
“Every behavior has a positive intention.” This NLP principle means we can focus on the intention behind a belief. Is this belief the most effective way to achieve your goal?
- “I’m upset because of how he acts.”
— If you want him to change, you don’t have to be upset to make that happen. - “You frowned, so you’re mad at me.”
— Do you really want me to get mad?
What’s the positive intention behind your belief? What are other ways to achieve that goal?
4. Chunk Down (Detailing) and 5. Chunk Up (Generalization)
In NLP, “chunking” means moving up or down logical levels. Any object or phenomenon can be broken into parts (chunk down) or seen as part of a larger system (chunk up).
- “I don’t have time for a personal life because I work a lot.”
— Which specific job duties take up your personal time? - “Forgetting our wedding date is the same as forgetting our love.”
— Was our love really just about one day? - “Cancer leads to death.”
— The body is a complex system. Cancer is just one part; you need to understand how it interacts with the immune system and the body as a whole. - “You look at the book often, so you must not know the subject well.”
— I need to know not just this narrow topic, but related ones too.
Practice chunking down and up: What details make up your belief? What larger systems are those details part of?
6. Counter-Example
Find and present a situation where both elements of the belief exist, but are related differently. You’ll be surprised how often you can find a counter-example to almost any statement.
- “I’m upset because of how he acts.”
— Can you recall times you were upset for other reasons, or times you weren’t upset even when he acted that way? - “That person has a lot of money, so he must be a thief.”
— There are plenty of poor thieves and honest rich people. The Queen of England is the richest woman in the world—would you call her a thief?
Try the counter-example pattern on your beliefs.
7. Another Outcome
Instead of refuting the belief, focus on other, positive possible outcomes from the situation.
- “I can’t easily talk to strangers because that’s how I was raised.”
— So before you speak, you’ll gather information carefully. That will make you more effective in communication. - “Forgetting our wedding date is the same as forgetting our love.”
— Sorry. Whether we remember dates or not, what can we do to know we love each other anyway?
What positive results can you find in your situation?
8. Metaphor (Analogy)
A well-timed story, joke, or parable can be powerful. Use metaphors to work with cause-effect or equivalence beliefs. Think of a story where the elements start out related as in your belief, but then the relationship changes.
- “You frowned, so you’re mad at me.”
— That reminds me of an old cartoon about Little Raccoon and the Creature in the Pond. Little Raccoon was told someone scary lived in the pond. When he went there, he frowned to scare the Creature, and saw the Creature frowning back. They kept making scary faces until someone suggested Little Raccoon smile instead…
Try creating a metaphor for your belief.
9. Recursion (Apply to Self)
Take the condition or criterion from the belief and apply it to the belief itself—creating a kind of “verbal short circuit.”
- “I don’t have time for a personal life because I work a lot.”
— How much time did you spend convincing yourself you don’t have time? - “Cancer leads to death.”
— Actually, believing you must die from cancer is what leads to death most often. - “Second place is the same as last.”
— It’s a mistake to confuse two different places.
Practice constructing recursions for your beliefs.
10. Hierarchy of Criteria (Values)
Everyone has a set of criteria or values for evaluating themselves and others. Values are usually hierarchical, and this greatly affects our behavior. Apply a higher-level value to one part of the belief to change its meaning.
- “I’m upset because of how he acts.”
— Isn’t your own well-being more important? - “Forgetting our wedding date is the same as forgetting our love.”
— What’s more important: having a good memory or truly loving?
What values are involved in your belief? What higher values could you apply?
11. Change Frame (Context)
A statement only makes sense in a certain context. By changing the context, you transform its meaning. You can change:
- Time frame
— “I can’t easily talk to strangers because that’s how I was raised.”
— That made sense when you were a child. Now, the reason may be something else. - Broaden/narrow the context
— “That person has a lot of money, so he must be a thief.”
— Maybe he has a lot compared to you or me, but compared to most people, he’s not that rich. - Speaker’s identity
— “Second place is the same as last.”
— Would you think the same if you were the one who came in third?
Try changing the context of your belief.
12. Meta-Frame
This pattern uses the NLP concept of “perceptual positions”:
1. Your own point of view
2. The other person’s point of view
3. Meta-position—seeing yourself from the outside
- “I’m upset because of how he acts.”
— Are you upset that you let others’ behavior affect you so much? - “That person has a lot of money, so he must be a thief.”
— Do you think it’s right to accuse someone of a crime just because they have money?
Try the meta-frame pattern on your belief.
13. Model of the World
People from different cultures, or even different families, can see the same situation very differently. Imagine how someone with a different worldview would see your belief.
- “You look at the book often, so you must not know the subject well.”
— Einstein thought there was no need to memorize information you could easily look up. - “Cancer leads to death.”
— Many oncologists now believe the problem isn’t the tumor itself, but a weakened immune system. That’s why many people recover from cancer.
Use your knowledge of other cultures and perspectives to apply this pattern.
14. Reality Strategy
Everyone has a way to distinguish reality from fiction and decide what’s true. How did you decide your belief is true? Did you read it? See it on TV? Hear it from someone? How did you decide to trust that source?
- “I can’t easily talk to strangers because that’s how I was raised.”
— How did you decide you can’t talk to strangers because of your upbringing?
What reality strategy do you use?
What’s Next?
“Words are not deeds. Deeds are flesh! Words are only shadows. You can talk about pearls for a hundred years, but if you don’t dive in, they’re only yours in a dream.”
— N. Khosrow
Now you’ve learned the fourteen “Verbal Acrobatics” patterns. Some you may have used before, or seen others use, while some may be new to you. As we said, this is a model—a model of what people already do. But now you may start to understand how it’s done.
For the next seven days, observe how people speak—in daily life, in newspapers, on TV, online. Discover which “Verbal Acrobatics” patterns they use. Are they using them to expand choices, show alternatives, help others and themselves live happier lives? Or…?
Watch your own speech. Which patterns do you use often? Which less so? Practice. Take a cause-effect or equivalence statement and apply all fourteen patterns to it. Some will be easier, some harder.
Pay special attention to the patterns you find most challenging.
Good luck!