NLP is supposed to be an attitude of curiosity - Bandler says ask people what they do inside, figure out how that is creating a problem for them, teach them to do it different.

So what's with the attitude with so many of NLP (un)professionals?

I am again grrrrr with the judgemental attitude of so many nlp practitioners professing to be people helpers yet think nothing of being openly judgemental about their clients.

And no I am not going to do some tlt on it. I am going to complain in this open forum because I think it is worth complaining about...

Their clients are depressed - so the nlp practitioner complains they are wallowing, their clients are nervous - so the nlp professional complains they are doing anxiety attacks, their clients are stuck - so they go round and round through a wilderness of story ... and these are all problems that people can have yet still function in society.

Isn't the whole point of being a people helper to be interested and curious in how people do it, and helping them change it?

Because I hear practitioners barely out of their nappies, as well as more seasoned (un)professionals being judgemental not only about their clients (!!) but about doctors, psychologists, counsellors, teachers.

What is this about? Is this a way of getting a false sense of elevation?

I believe in change work and don't really care if its called NLP, or DHL, TNT or DDT and I use whatever seems useful I have come across over the years - but I know that the only teachers are those with results. And I have learnt from psychologists, counsellors, social workers, doctors, coaches, but the most I have learn are from my clients.

The first thing you will learn on a counselling course is how to be NON- Judgemental. Some of that would be well practiced in the NLP community.

I think we could all do well with getting back to honouring the attitude of curiosity.

And stop repeating opinions and attitudes like parrots. Modelling is one thing, parrotting is something completely different.

NinaM wrote:

Isn't the whole point of being a people helper to be interested and curious in how people do it, and helping them change it?

Because I hear practitioners barely out of their nappies, as well as more seasoned (un)professionals being judgemental not only about their clients (!!) but about doctors, psychologists, counsellors, teachers.

What is this about? Is this a way of getting a false sense of elevation?

I'm not sure I've noticed the same thing in the NLP 'community' but I probably don't regularly interact with enough NLP'ers to know if there's an actual trend.

I did notice that on leaving university and/or going through additional training to allow them to practice that Doctors and Lawyers (that I knew) tended to develop a significant change in attitude. Becoming almost unbearably arrogant in many cases. This arrogance lasted for months and sometimes years. I put it down to them developing a new sense of 'confidence' in their work, a necessary sense of confidence. In certain disciplines people need to be extremely confident in their thinking and ability. Perhaps the arrogance was a pre-cursor to genuine confidence earned through experience - the elevation you've mentioned.

Hi Nina,

Good to see you posting on NLPC again, and apparently with a full head of steam.

NinaM wrote:

So what's with the attitude with so many of NLP (un)professionals?

I am again grrrrr with the judgemental attitude of so many nlp practitioners professing to be people helpers yet think nothing of being openly judgemental about their clients.

I tend to agree with your observations but try to maintain a detached sense of disappopintment rather than the grrrrr response. FWIW I tend to think that the display of attitude is not unique to NLPers and is in some ways human nature, but for sure, just because someone trained in NLP does not mean they are exempt from this trait.

It has been said many times before, and here goes again, that an NLP Training is not a counseling, therapy or even personal change training in and of itself. Just because a seminar participant has been introduced to, and given a handout of NLP Operating Principles does not make them congruent with them, of course.

My interpretation of the (un)professional attitude you describe is as a defence mechanism that pops up when clients start to behave outside the scope covered or "allowed" in the training room. It is easier in many ways to discriminate against clients than it is to critically examine the personal reality gap between having a knowledge of what can be done with NLP (by others) and our own behavioural competence. For example, I fully accept theoretically what Dilts wrote in his book about beliefs about taking control of white cell blood counts with leukemia patients, but never having done that myself, I am not sure I could, nor would I claim to be able to do so. To then say that the leukemia patient is in denial, or attached to their problem or otherwise not ready to work would clearly be unfair.

In a general sense I have often thought that NLP (and some other approaches like CBT) is attractive to some folk initially who want to do stuff to other people preferentially to working on themselves. In my experience, practitioners with that orientation can only get so far in terms of applications before their competence flattens out rather than continues to grow. That's when the attitude problems arise because to be curious about clients and how they do stuff,I believe we also have to retain and at least match that with curiosity about ourselves and our limitations. This is hard I think without ongoing professional support, supervision or other developmental activities that the would be changeworker can continue to participate in.

You go on to say,

Because I hear practitioners barely out of their nappies, as well as more seasoned (un)professionals being judgemental not only about their clients (!!) but about doctors, psychologists, counsellors, teachers.

What is this about? Is this a way of getting a false sense of elevation?

Perhaps it is about false elevation for some. I think it is also a projective mechanism that seeks lowest common denominator equality. Again, the issue is a defence of personal competence in actually being able to do some of what is talked about in the NLP frame. Rather than look introspectively and seek to empower myself, I can be critical of the efforts of others and we can all have parity in ineffectiveness. There's a certain comfort in being the same as, you know ? Even if it is not very good. This is one of the ways in which NLP has generated its poor reputation in certain other circles, I think because by talking about what can be done (by others again) with NLP, there is an implied if not explicit criticism of the best efforts of other disciplines.

I think we could all do well with getting back to honouring the attitude of curiosity.

Agreed

MH

Not sure if I'm raising the same thing, but I also get a bit fed up with some NLP-ers, some of whom are just at the start of their journey, who get a sudden 'superior-than-thou'-ness and/or a premature arrogance about all things.

I was discussing with someone the notion that linguistics has moved on a lot since the deep structure / surface structure thing and they, with all their few days of training behind them, said with disdain, "Yeah, but what do linguists know?". My internal voice was screaming, "Well, on the subject of linguistics, way more than you mate". My external voice was more diplomatic.

Have you had that one of: "Doctors? What they hell do they know about cancer?" Well, sure I think there are some limiting ideas in conventional medicine that could be freed up with a bit of NLP in the medical curriculum. But a bit of NLP doesn't suddenly turn everyone into consultant medical practitioners.

And I was assisting in a class where a discussion broke out about the "Don't Drink And Drive" campaign. Y'know, how stupid it was because, of course, the government was actually commanding people to drink and drive. So, I had to ask everyone, "So how many of you saw that poster and obeyed the command?" The answer was: none of them. Hmmm, funny that.

I think NLP is great. And I think the top people in NLP are amazing. And I have no problem at all with people being made confident, curious, challenging, unaccepting of conventional limiting beliefs and 'up for it'.

I just wish some people would think a bit more. And some could do with having "I don't know everything, so I should continue to look, listen and observe" installed as part of their map too.

Cheers

One particular major gripe I still have and will continue to have unless I decide to do trainers trainers and probably will still have that gripe is the amount of unconscious installation that occurs so I wouldn't be quite as quick to judge the judgemental. I agree with Steve you simply do not get taught to think for yourself - you are taught what a trainer wants you to learn. On the other hand not knowing the context in which "they" complain, everyone needs to let off some steam and lets face it some clients are stubborn little shits... That is not to say you shouldn't learn an ever increasing flexibility in the face of it but if it is born out of frustration then I would say its ok. If it is born out of pure arrogance then unfortunately in my short lustful affair with NLP it attracts "that" sort of person...

The best thing I have got from NLP is the "aikido" of NLP. Not aikido on people, but aikido on moving through the relative negative towards the relative positive.

The reason I have stuck with it is because it goes some way towards an "acceptance" philosophy. As you might have read from my post on anxiety attacks, I have had hands on experience using acceptance with reframing techniques to drive it.

To me, NLP is NOT an attitude that leaves a trail of techniques.

NLP (well met) is a way of acceptance that leaves a trail of constructive activities.

Cheers
Daniel

Emerging the importance to value and respect other fields and the understandings developed and given the name tag NLP do not exist in contradiction to other fields.

I agree with the installing and find it problematic. I think much is done unconsciously by trainers such as negative attitudes towards other professionals, and much is consciously - such as installing the feeling of uncertainty and lack of confidence only to be resolved by purchasing next training course.

In my opinion, now since I have charged ahead with this opinionated threat the tag nlp is too limiting and creates a sense of separation of what we do from just being and acting and doing what works. I keep thinking about the modelling and how they modelled Satir, Erikson, etc and got this together calling it NLP - and all they were doing was modelling the stuff that worked.

Good to be observant and to withdraw judgement of the judgemental curious about the stubborn clients... find some brains are not as stretchy as others, a bit like yoga - some are more stiff than others, and movement is always in relation to where they were ... stubborness comes from lack of trust, fear of trying something different in my experience, all our material as therapists/ healers/ people helpers, fear of change is no less worthy or deserving than any other fear me thinks... etc etc

Nina, I think you are being a bit judgemental here.

There are certainly some oddballs working in NLP - people who enjoy the power they get from influencing others, and people who like to feel big by making others feel small.

But those people are a teeny tiny minority and easy to avoid.

Much more often you'll find that people are trying their best to do what they think will help their client. Maybe their way of helping isn't the same as yours. Maybe they don't buy into the presuppositions of counselling the same way you do. But they are trying to help nonetheless. And judging them because you think their approach is too judgemental... well that's a confusing spiral to get into.

The much bigger problem with NLP (I think) is lack of competence. Renne hit on something important with the university example. The lawyers I know did tend to become more confident after their years of training, but it was backed up by knowledge and skill and experience. NLPers tend to get their extra confidence by moving pictures and spinning feelings. It's a hollow kind of confidence. And that makes it easier to jump into situations without sufficient preparation, trying a Bandler-style provocative intervention or a Grinder-style put down... but without the skills to do that thoroughly.

The biggest problem I see is not people being willfully judgemental or disrespectful but, by being unaware or half-trained, they make mistakes. A lot of people can't hold their own intention. They can't focus. They can't think more than a few steps ahead. And they cause problems by biting off more than they can chew, taking on the attitude of their trainer but not the skillset.

All kinds of things can be effective... when they're done well. Innocent attempts to help can also go wrong when you aren't prepared.

So I agree with some of what you say, but from a different perspective. And I think there are lots of good things that you could focus on too.

Chris, I think you're being a bit judgmental about her being a bit judgmental here.

Is there a way out of this regressive loop? While NLP teaches that experience is subjective and map is not the territory, it tends to IMO lead one to become judgmental about people who BELIEVE that experience is objective and the the scientific method = true.

simpcore wrote:

Chris, I think you're being a bit judgmental about her being a bit judgmental here.

Really, or you just thought it sounded clever?

chris_morris wrote:

Really, or you just thought it sounded clever?

A lil' bit of both

Hey ho there I go mirroring the behaviour I am complaining about... and you both ignored me retracting being judgemental abt the judgemental

My post was actually prompted by being sad for someone that I like and seeing him change attitude over time as he trained with certain people and started to adopt this dismissive attitude towards his clients... and that made me sad

But in no means the only attitude out there

simpcore wrote:

Is there a way out of this regressive loop? While NLP teaches that experience is subjective and map is not the territory, it tends to IMO lead one to become judgmental about people who BELIEVE that experience is objective and the the scientific method = true.

I guess the first step is to realize that "the map is not the territory" is, itself, a map.

Chris Johnson wrote:

I guess the first step is to realize that "the map is not the territory" is, itself, a map.

If we only had a map of reality, and no access to reality directly, we couldn't claim to REALIZE anything.

And how do I know that even the above statement is "true"?

simpcore wrote:

If we only had a map of reality, and no access to reality directly, we couldn't claim to REALIZE anything.

Well, we can CLAIM anything we want.

And how do I know that even the above statement is "true"?

How do you know what you were doing a minute ago? 30 seconds ago? 1 second ago? How do you know you didn't just wink into existence with a bunch of bogus memories? Isn't this like, the first lesson of philosophy 101? That we can't prove anything about the world?

Is knowing what's "true" something that's going to get you out of that regressive loop you mentioned? I'd rather say that's the loop's entry point! As soon as we believe something is "true," we can begin to be judgmental of those who do not also believe that it's true. ('Course, we can be judgmental without that, but most people won't bother so wasting their time.)

NinaM wrote:

Emerging the importance to value and respect other fields and the understandings developed and given the name tag NLP do not exist in contradiction to other fields.

There are some basic understandings in NLP that contradict diametrically some basic understandings of other fields, as Bandler found out with his curious approach.

Just wanted to point that out, even if not necessary after you clarified where your post was coming from.

R

NinaM wrote:

curious about the stubborn clients... find some brains are not as stretchy as others, a bit like yoga - some are more stiff than others, and movement is always in relation to where they were ... stubborness comes from lack of trust, fear of trying something different in my experience, all our material as therapists/ healers/ people helpers, fear of change is no less worthy or deserving than any other fear me thinks... etc etc

To be honest Nina I put that in because I was interested whether you would "bite". You didn't and I really respect that . I think the reason I posted is because I am barely out of my nappies myself. What I have found absolutely fascinating is observing all the processes occurring within myself. On my first training I thought Psychology? What a waste of time that was. I know now that it is actually an asset in terms of certain thinking styles and what to "buy into". I have only had a vicarious taste of what you have mentioned as I trust my trainers significantly (but I would say that ) and haven't met "one of them" yet. I can see how it can happen though as I have read or seen some of Bandler's stuff and thought YEAH - bloody whoever's then suddenly clock on to the fact that his experience and skill is extensive and he is in a position to say that although it can be easy to forget. I think Chris M is spot on saying its easy to carry the attitude lacking the skillset - this I suspect could explain the irony of a practitioner moaning about someone being stuck or wallowing beyond just getting it off their chest. Oh the irony . Regards your friend I am sure you can bring him back down to earth. A good old fashioned kick up the arse springs to mind but that's me. Good luck for you and your friend

Chris Johnson wrote:

Well, we can CLAIM anything we want.



How do you know what you were doing a minute ago? 30 seconds ago? 1 second ago? How do you know you didn't just wink into existence with a bunch of bogus memories? Isn't this like, the first lesson of philosophy 101? That we can't prove anything about the world?

Is knowing what's "true" something that's going to get you out of that regressive loop you mentioned? I'd rather say that's the loop's entry point! As soon as we believe something is "true," we can begin to be judgmental of those who do not also believe that it's true. ('Course, we can be judgmental without that, but most people won't bother so wasting their time.)

How do you know that you don't know?

Steve_W wrote:

Not sure if I'm raising the same thing, but I also get a bit fed up with some NLP-ers, some of whom are just at the start of their journey, who get a sudden 'superior-than-thou'-ness and/or a premature arrogance about all things.

Is there an an appropriate time to be arrogant about all things?

Seek first to understand, then to influence