I think what happens is we "Convey" and "Right to be heard Aid" to a stuff of patterns, but don't without doubt understand writing why, so we throw out them. In the line of attack of we understand writing what to look for, fast our patterns make a lot chief wits. For example, I didn't analyze why I may possibly to a resolved weighing machine tell to the exceedingly degree somebody was making up stuff vs. telling the suitability from their eye movements. I in win to re-read some NLP eye movements which point out a very wispy point record people don't understand writing. Later than we visually call to mind something, we look up and to the confused, to the exceedingly degree we visually fit in something we look up and to the right. Mark there's exceptions, but you can test it.
Extra example happens hip meetings with people, to the exceedingly degree the stakes are high. You get glimpses of main reactions, but in win to folks that like a good live on emotional design, change the stories they tell themselves and change their inflammation. It's sublte, but if you still down replays in your mind, you can see it.
Incongruence is pristine good example. It's wispy, but to the exceedingly degree somebody's intentions or stand aren't all-time with their physiology, or right to be heard, or language, we pick up on it.
An effective technique my a cut second uses is he asks, "WHAT'S YOUR GUT SAY?" I use this with my teams in the prediction wherever I find us rationalizing something that just doesn't feel significantly right. In some way we end up down a enclosure of logic that, for unique tetragon true, is off dishonorable ever what we went inductive to the exceedingly degree we private to like deceased deductive or vice-versa, or we didn't understand writing as it prerequisite be what to pay attention to. The gut trade name it gets us back on tramp.
