Reframing Beliefs It Opinions - Examples

HERE ARE A FEW examples of reframing. When you read the conversation below, notice how one simple shifting of perception can change a person's belief or opinion. This script is a transcript of a recorded conversation between two of my friends in one of our NLP practice group meeting. We recorded all meetings, and luckily for us, we got some great materials out of. This is one:

George: "I can't imagine living in China, everything there is disgusting!"
Natasha: "What do you mean, disgusting? Have you been there?"

George: "No, but I read a touristic article about China, and they had quite a lot of warnings on the Chinese strange habits"
Natasha: "What kind of strange habits?"

George: "Well, they spit everywhere, in front of you, on the street, in restaurants, on the bus .. . "
Natasha: "They spit everywhere. And you know why?"

George: "The article didn't say"
Natasha: "I've been in China. I lived in Beijing for about a year. I started spitting everywhere myself after a few weeks"

George: "WHY?!"
Natasha: "Too much rapport, I guess" (laughing)

George: "No, seriously, why do they spit? That's a disgusting manner, certainly not something tourists would be happy to experience"
Natasha: "Well, I'm sure your article mentioned the extremely polluted air in China. Yes, the Chinese government is the source for this hazard, but the Chinese people are there to suffer it. In such a high polluted environment, you get quite a lot of mucus in your throat. .. what should they do, swallow it?"

George: "There's no Kleenex in China?!"
Natasha: "There are more than 1,500 million people in China! Can you imagine how many tissue papers they would consume in a day this way?! There would be no trees left after a year!"

George: "Alright, so maybe that's reasonable ... still disgusting, but reasonable. I guess that's why they don't use diapers ... "
Natasha: "Exactly why! You'd have million of dirty diapers standing around"

George: "Alright, toilet paper is one thing. But the article said they eat blood! And bones!"
Natasha: "Of animals, George! Not of human ... "

George: "Yes, of course, but why?!"
Natasha: "Same reason as before, it's really economical. Imagine how many animals would have to be butchered if they only ate the animal parts that we eat... they use the blood, by the way, for hotdogs, and they don't really eat the bones, they put them as extra flavor in soups"

George: "Yes, I can imagine how it saves money, and it's probably better without all the biological waste"
Natasha: "Indeed. Did you change your mind yet?"

George: A bit. Still strange though. They don't have normal toilets. .. they have holes instead of a bowl?"
Natasha: "Yes, and this is for hygienic purposes. This way even the public toilets are relatively safe because there is no contact between your skin and the toilet.. You don't need to worry who was there before you. Even the handle for water is operated by foot"

George: Alright, so many it's not that disgusting there"

Did you make note of the simple reframing Natasha used here? She didn't even use "facts" as the basis for convincing George. She used known shared values, such as saving the environment, reducing excessive waste and so on. Did you notice the presupposition Natasha gave George in the middle of their short conversation?

"Stiff in opinion, always in the wrong"~ John Dryden

(Page 142 of "The Big Book Of NLP")