That’s not much of an answer though is it!
I have a certain amount of sympathy for someone who says “it works for me”, but those who are trying to make money by making the claim “neurolinguistic programming works” are just asking for trouble. You know, I can feel a certain sympathy for a scientologist, or someone who falls for crystal healing, but the people selling the stuff do have a certain responsibility to deliver some reliable support for the claims being made.
There are probably some very scientific parts to scientology or crystal healing, but they are still considered as pseudoscientific as neurolinguistic programming. You get the same testimonials from the proponents as you have presented here. It’s funny that the testimonials tend to come from the practitioners.
And leaning on “mysteries” of the mind really doesn’t help at all. It’s appealing to ignorance. It’s like saying, “well god moves in mysterious ways”. Its rather telling that most arguments for neurolinguistic programming tend to be semi-religious.
This thread started with people wanting to reduce the horseshit in NLP. It’s like shoveling horseshit out of your practitioner office. Anything that makes claims and associations with legitimate science, but has no real connection with science should be shoveled out the door. That was the proposed strategy. But what is core to neurolinguistic programming is just horseshit.

The research shows neurolinguistic programming to be both wrong and discredited. So surely it would be a good idea to get your house in order and clear it out for good.
So why the reluctance to finish the cleanup? Is it all down to unbudging belief in pseudoscience, or was your financial investment in neurolinguistic programming too much to discard?

You say it with no holds barred.In a word I agree with you.I came onto this site with the view of doing a practitioners course. My view has changed and what I am getting is well.
Their are a few people on here trying to climb up the metaphorically pole but seeming can't get up for the horse shit.Reading the threads from the people that spout the most horse shit.No-one it seems outside this forum really gives a toss about nlp.I think again what you say is hitting the nail on the head its to do with cost.
Or if I try hard enough

I have watched some of Richard Bandlers dvd and I get the distinctive feeling he is not a happy guy.And John La Valle it seems is only happy by either ridiculing or showing off.
Now these two guys are supposed to be well I m thinking conmen I am not sure now what these guys are.Thier is avoid and NLP for the moment is a qucik fix until something else comes along. I have had a few clients that have went to Nlp Master Practitioners only to get nothing from the techniques.
So in their eys it is horse shit.
I am one of those people that likes to give a dog a equal break well until it bites me.And by what I have read on this site,the people with all the *********** are showing their teeth.

So David its over to you NOW. HA HA HA HA AH

Thank you Alan

Yes, it is an interesting exercise in making sense of things though. There is something so morally corrupt about much of the human potential industry. It’s the same as many religious groups in that it involves a lot of people hijacking natural morally positive aspects of ourselves, and turning them into misleading money making scams.

Of course we want to improve. It is possible to learn by modelling other people. That is a basic fact in the science of psychology and it has a certain specific level of efficacy. The problem comes when you have these self-appointed certified NLP pasters who become gurus, and peddle their “power knowledge” in the most disgracefully fraudulent manner, and where some misguided, desperate, and ill informed people will fall into that money trap. Those fraudsters are the enemy of reason, the enemy of legitimate psychology, the enemy of compassion, and the enemy of knowledge and education in general.

Most people will tend respond to reliable evidence and will learn to see past the bullshit of neurolinguistic programming and its ilk.

The peddlers will see the evidence, get overdefensive and obviously scared (as can be seen by many of the posts here), incongruously and zealously deny it all to keep themselves in that industry. And there will be some who have already inaccurately attached so much false credibility to NLP for solving all their problems, that they are scared about giving it up (ie. If you stop believing you have amazing power, then you will never get it). Its just fraudulence, or childish and desperate reality-dismissing nonsense.

I have met some people who use hypnosis and psychic ideologies in combination. They are the same type of fraudster who uses neurolinguistic programming as if it is some sort of science. They may even deny it’s a science, but the name of neurolinguistic programing itself will come back and bite them whenever mentioned. I’m glad that the majority of people can see past the sidestep.

Horseshit dressed up as science or psychology is not something to be proud of. As for helping people? No, ultimately its just misinformed, narrow minded, vacuous nonsense.



People can be helped to improve without having to feed them horseshit.

I was speaking to a "NLP Trainer" last night and he told me:Alan if modelling worked,I mean really worked, R Bandler and advocates (the in crowd or inner scrotum) of NLP would be multi millionaires.This Trainer is listed on the Society of Nlp web site.
We had a long discusion on the pros and cons of NLP. He actually said: Alan go and check out the listed Trainers on the Society of NLP site,read what is printed with ref to the Trainers ability from R Bandler and J La Valle. He was right they seem to get the same acknowledement. The same wonderful testimoials.You'd think they would come up with something original,or is that were the rub is.The other thing I noticed these Trainers are always updating their skills.As Napolean Hill once said "How does he know".
As far as I am concerned its about the money hioney.Shit I couldn't ressist that.

It looks like this is Richard Bandler road show.As I said I have watched some of R Bandlers videos,the videos of classes and I am thinking how does he know they are getting IT. This stupid statement of "don't worry if your are not getting it on a conscious level " Your unconscious is getting IT all.What a pile of crap. What a get out of jail statement.Why do I say this I say it because there is no way of proving it. Yes I know everything is recored at the unconscious level.............But you try and recall it at will.No way hossay.

Back on to the subject of modeling ,of all the the famous sports men, actors/actresses,scientest and other experts in all the fields of endeavour their give me one name yes one name of someone tht has replicate to the level of the modelled person. I have read about modeling and yet I havn't
actually heard of one being modelled.I include Bandler with ref to Erickson I think he may use the language of Erickson but as far as the thinking it ain't gonna happen so moddeling yes there are some traits but thats were it ends me thinks.

Yes, the problem is some people refer to the subconscious as if it is a great god or inner genius. Genius is as genius does. If it doesn't do anything except grow fat and arrogant then its not a genius at all. Its basically a semi-religious statement or sidestepping fudge.

Modeling is best done explicitly according to the research. Its ususally a basic classroom technique and has some effectiveness in a simple show and tell way. There is no evidence that anyone has ever modeled to any level of claimed success in NLP.

There is a large and growing amount of counter-evidence to the claims of NLPers and other chronic exaggerators. There is no solid support for the concepts or the claimed results. Certainly, eye movements, fancy pseudolinguistic concepts, and mimicry don't have any support whatsoever. Plus, conceptually they have always been highly dubious.

As you can read from the replies given from the peddlers: There's a whole lot more horseshit being generated every day. I thought it was bad a decade ago. I can only imagine how the fringe fraudsters will behave in a decade from now.

Hypnofact wrote:

Yes NLP is too obviously fake, and this is where pseudoscience fails. Placebo is a scientifically verified phenomenon, you don’t need horseshit.

Ok, I'm just about to finish up work and go on vacation--- but I saw this and had to comment.

Whether NLP is real or fake, makes no difference whatsoever. It's not about deception, it's about understanding how your mind works and using it to your advantage.

It's all about, do you have what it takes to induce the state of mind necessary to support or achieve what you want to achieve? --- and maintain it for as long as necessary.

Call it placebo, call it NLP, call it hypnosis, call it magic. If it works, do it... if it doesn't... do something different.

NLP often provides steps that aren't 'logical' --- but because of that, often have the desired effect on one's mentality so the goal can more easily be achieved.

If you care too much about 'HOW' it works before you understand 'WHY' it works, you'll forever be stuck observing things that COULD work, but you lack the discipline and faith to put it into effect where it actually works FOR you instead of with you in resistant ways. In which case, you'll have no problem shrugging it off, and looking for the next pill to pop instead. (I have a friend who's a MD who really needs a new set of golf clubs, so however one thinks is cool, -someone- will benefit)

People say ... "it's just the placebo effect" ... like that's deception, or 'fake'. That should be EMPOWERING! Think about that. You can take NOTHING, and recover completely. Using only what you geared your mind towards. If the results that are produced are -real-... it doesn't really matter how 'fake' the method is... does it?... because suddenly it's not fake.

Placebo effect doesn't require horsesh!t to function? You're right. If you read any of the early books by Bandler and Grinder, you'll even notice most of the time in the beginning they admit they'll be teaching a bunch of lies. You'll either find benefit in them, or you won't. Where's the horsesh!t? Point it out, if you can. I know there's the feeling of 'horsesh!t'... but can you actually point it out.. thinking about it now?

I can easily agree with the statement that NLP Is completely fake... I can also easily agree with the statement that NLP is real. Not because either of those statements are true or false, but because they're both true -and- false. It's simply a choice. Many people don't make a choice that benefits them because they're afraid of being too 'weird' or 'ab-normal' (whatever that means to who) ... NLP techniques often have people doing things like that.

Is it real? or is it fake? It all boils down to:

Do you have enough self control to take something imaginary and make it work in your benefit? Or can you not stop feeling silly while you use it/see it/hear it/talk about it...

If no --- that's not really NLP's problem. (It's someone's problem though.)

Any other method usually requires the assistance of someone else, and usually that's very expensive. You could literally pick up a book on NLP's collection of thoughts/ideas/concepts, and put them to use for as little as a few dollars... but no one is going to force you to make them work, you have to do that.

In support of your argument though --- there's PLENTY of idiot NLPers who would -love- to think of it as 'real'... and 100% effective with everyone. NLP is more an attitude, than anything... and it's as fake as you are. That's a choice, and you're completely entitled to make ones that you're happier with. And if I were exposed to primarily those sorts of people... I would be feeling much in agreement with the stance you've taken on NLP's effectiveness or not.

Well said XX.

Ian

Newbie alert - flames welcome
NLP is not new, we all are aware of that. It's structure and presentation is new, if anything its a hybrid. Some areas work, some better than others and that depends on who you are and how you are applying it.
The same can be said of psychology, counselling, life coaching, CBT - you get the idea.
If it works FOR YOU then it works. You have some extremists who will shout and validate its existence from the rooftops and they may be better in the "Is NLP a cult" thread. Others will sit the opposite side of the fence with indignation running rampant.
Whether or not it is or isn't a placebo is more irrelevance. If you experience change then it works. Controlling yourself and understanding that our states flick like a kaliedoscope when unchecked and can be something within our control is very refreshing and for many people is news.
Self reflection and an awareness on how we impact ourselves and others shows a level of maturity in our interactions and can basically make life happier all round. For many people being that little bit happeir is a good thing to aim for ....... or an outcome

Do things have validity because they have been scientifically tested? Do people use things if they are not scientifically tested? Is NLP, much of which is not scientifically tested valid or not? Is NLP to be used or ignored? Most of the every day models and techniques used in business have not been "scientifically tested" yet they are taken as valid because a well known person has recommended them. Many of these "guru type" recommendations have been shown to be unreliable at best and useless at worst but businesses still use them.

That's a bit like buying Gordan Ramseys cook book when you blatantly can't cook then saying his recipes are awful. I mean, who wants burnt pasta?

what exactly about NLP works? i mean, it's just copying people's actions....we don't know why it works. maybe it's everything, maybe it's nothing. NLP just has a large last name that people get confused as to what it really is. and how come they never tell you where they copied it from? i don't get it. if it is a scam then it's criminal. if it works, horay.

i have to hand it to the nlp practitioners, they have good showmanship. reminds me of darren brown.

also i went to a session with nlp. it didn't do anything. i just went about my business.

Just a thought. Hypnotherapy wasn't accepted as a norm in Freudian style therapy and the whole psychoanalysis gambit for a long time, and now its generally accepted that hypnotherapy has immediate to near immediate results versus the lengthy and year(s) of time consuming "problem gazing," and that's because hypnotherapy focuses on solutions.

Now my point, I find NLP very similar, it finds the root of problems, it finds why someone has a particular behaviour or belief, and then doesn't bother with analyzing and paying overt attention to the problem, but rather, finds the submodalities to enhance to change/alter that behaviour into a more personally desirable trait or manifestation of beliefs.

Now, I've got to say, in the hundreds on NLP patterns (for the example the Big Book of NLP Techniques - Shlomo Vaknin), the majority of them are learned personally to be applied to other humans, using their predicates and strongest representational systems. And whether this is placebo, fact, evidence, or a lack of all three and actually something completely different. IT WORKS! Thousands, tens of thousands have benefitted from NLP, they have become who they were meant to become when they chose this life, they are becoming their best and highest selves, they are becoming more connected to what feels good inside, by being more in tune with their bodies. In a matter of hours over the course of NLP sessions an individual might be able to let go of haunting memories, to transcend their minds to attain a state of relaxation par to a life of lifelong prayer (who has time for that??? I'd much prefer a few hours I pay for for the same result!!)

"There are three main scientific criticisms of NLP. First, critics argue that NLP's claims for scientific respectability are not based on the scientific method. In response advocates of NLP argue that NLP is a pragmatic discipline, largely interested in what "works" rather than existing theory. Second, there is a lack of empirical research or evidence to support the core aspects of NLP or the claim that NLP is an effective and rapid set of techniques for enhancing psycho-therapeutic practice, interpersonal communication and social influence. One of the originators of NLP, John Grinder, retorts that the meta model was based on his expertise in linguistics and empirical work in collaboration with Richard Bandler in the early 1970s. However, critics maintain that the experimental research that does exist has been overall unsupportive of the central assumptions and core models of NLP, and that it is therefore up to the proponents to back up their models and claims of effectiveness with evidence." - HOW DOES THIS EVEN MATTER!?!?!? The evidence is in the results! hook a brain up to that awesome machine that reads it, do a reading while a subject is in a particular negative state, NLP away the memory and change the submodalities and I could guarantee the machine would have if not a brand new picture, a somewhat different one just from a few hours of NLP, nevermind a month of sessions. I digress!

It works, so why knock something that works? Its beneficial to the people that practice it, yes on a personal level this has done amazing things for me. That is fantastic is it not? My life is ten times better!!!! And getting better everyday in everway. I am finally confident, happy, seeing joy. This was my method for getting there and so I am spreading the word, just as a born-again christian would. If it makes you happy then share it.

And to quote you David Huntingdon -

"""It makes no difference whether Grinder was an associate professor or an undergraduate in home economics. The concepts are wrong according to linguists and psycholinguists.

This is another total incompatibility between NLP and science. You look for gurus, personal experience, and confirmation. Science looks for reliable independent evidence because it is well recognized that personal experience can be highly unreliable. The "map is not the territory" in NLP is something that is never followed through. """

The map is not the territory, in NLP, fact. So of course they cant act on reality (Bandler, Grinder, Hall), but they can increase the potential of their maps and the quality of their maps no? Just by having an intention backed by this fact!?

Of course science looks for reliable independent evidence, thats basically a definition of science is it not? That's why religion isn't accept in science, right? There are some things that take a little faith and personal experience. There are alot of religious people (I am not one) who aren't weird and flakey, but rather have found stability joy and enlightenment through god.

If Nlp doesn't work for you, good, that means there is something else out there that does and you just need to find it!!

This may seem a little jumbly and jumpy but have been rushing through the last half as to get out the door on time

Have a wonderful day and I'll be sure to return and reply.

Regards,
Dayten J

As Richard Bandler said .... "you don't have know how it works, all you need to know is .... that it works"

Of course NLP is fake, well as fake as The Placebo Effect Anyway,

My fiancee Jonathan Royle goes into great depth about this on his new home study course

In fact he is so confident of what he teaches in this new set that he offers a full 100% One Year (365 day) money back guarantee on the Home Study DVD course as illustrated in the document you can download free from Jonathan Royle's Training Seminars

Now I know I may be biased being his other half but how many other Hypnosis and NLP trainers are

A) Honest enough to say its all basically the correct use of he PLacebo Effect and similar principles and also

B) So confident in their courses to offer a full one year (365 day) money back guarantee?

Thats right none of them...

A lot of them Rachael, but I won't name them here as that should really go in Advert Forum.

I know of one who offers a full LIFETIME money back guarantee. No questions asked. He even states that if the reason you want a refund is that you are broke and need the money. Thats fine

Please do name them, I've asked the question and would love to know whom offers the same kind of One Year 365 day 100% money back guarantee on a live seminar such as Jonathan Royle's Hypnotherapy Exposed! and also on a home study course such as Jonathan Royle's Training Seminars

What exactly are the crtieria of their guarantees and do they have so many easily checkable testimonials from past delighted customers as those shown at pages in this prospectus Jonathan Royle's Training Seminars

I truly have not heard of anyone else offering a one year guarantee in this manner so please do let me know the peoples names and details of a web link where they lay out clearly and honestly what their guarantee is!

No. It would just be gratuatous advertising.

The person doing the lifetime guarantee also applies it to physical and downloaded products. Does your fiancee do that?

Yes indeed Nick he does as you'd know if you check out the links I gave earlier,

And giving me names of people (if they exist) who do the same would not be advertising it would be answering a genuine question

I only ask because a friend of mine tried to get a refund in the past and was told no. Glad that has changed.