map002 wrote:

So I'm not sure that anyone in the thread this far has posed the idea that someone's NLP trainer predisposed them to committing rape, statutory or otherwise, when using NLP in a therapeutic context.

Whilst, strictly speaking what you say is true, I still can't help wondering how far short of that line this statement falls.

tomvizzini wrote:

I also know of other victims of his brand of sexual therapy.

I think this is only the tip of the iceberg and a huge black eye for NLP.

John

You are only young once but you can be immature for a whole lifetime

Hi John,

Well, I don't doubt that what Tom says re: 'huge black eye' will be true for some people that find themselves making that kind of wholesale complex equivalence (actions of small number of individuals within a group [in this case 1]=actions of many, most or all people within that group).

Then again, sometimes the mob mentality takes over and 'the wisdom of crowds' flips into 'the masses are asses', so Tom may well be right.

Let's hope our (metaphorical) better angels prevail, shall we?

Be Well,

Michael Perez

There is a problem beginning to occur in Scotland at he moment with a refinery that will shut down because of an impending strike over a pensions issue. The official line is that the system is such that even with this shutdown, stocks and production can take care of the shortfall.

However there are some in the media who say there will be shortages even though it need not be the case. As a result the masses flock to the service stations and fill up there cars as a precaution.

As a result the system which is designed to serve the average needs cannot cope with a short term high demand.

As a result there are shortages and the masses tell themselves that they were right to panic and fill their cars up even though they are not travelling anywhere.

Which goes to prove the media people who said there would be shortages were correct after all weren’t they?

John

I took a test in Existentialism once and left all the answers blank, I got 100%

The old 'self-fulfilling prophesy' eh?
I don't actually think NLP or hypnosis has that much significance, respect or importance to the general public that many will change views over this. Paul Mckenna is still going despite that 'schizophrenia-causing' allegation.

It's like complementary medicines and alopathic medicine, you either support one side or the other, or you don't care and then there's another fluid population that swings between the two. Publicity temporarily affects the balance, but then it swings back the other way again.
Most intelligent people will realise these are personal actions, not indicative of NLP as a whole. Unintelligent ones won't, but they probably didn't like hypnosis and NLP stuff in the first place...

:cool:

Tom is very exited by this issue and has posted all over the net on this. He is again trying to flog 3D mind products which were inspired by NLP. He has consistantly slammed NLP which makes may wonder why he posts thousands of coments on NLP forums

hypnoben wrote:

Whatever gets proven in the court case, the media scare is going to feed right into the fears a lot of folks have about hypnosis being manipulative.

Manipulation: skillful in influencing or controlling others to your own advantage;
I think it is manipulative! As is great acting, singing, writing, NLP, parents threatening to inflict violence on their children (in the name of love), or bribing them with promises of sweets later as a reward for compliance, or with sulking...

Even rapport building is, in my opinion, a form of manipulation, or speed seduction, which, seems to start from the premise that people's disinclination needs to be redirected so that the Seducer can get his end away.

I think that the ability to manipulate skilfully is very desirable.
At the beginning of my training sessions, I tell delegates that I will be manipulating them by using my observation skills, my sensory acuity, my linguistic dexterity, my ability to 'read' people, etc., etc.

I explain that can teach them nothing because each individual is responsible for hir own learning; all I can do is offer them lots of opportunities for learning - and what's on offer is to learn how to manipulate so effectively that we can recognise other people's attempts to manipulate us and choose whether or not to be 'at the effect of' (there are, are there not, many people whose influence on us is desirable and beneficial), because it might be foolish to discount and deny them and to deprive ourselves?)

Of course, I hope to influence them in a positive way, and that my influence will serve them well.

And I constantly reinforce the message (my belief) that, if we know how other people are trying to manipulate us, we can opt out, or stand back and notice their technique, or join in a duel Techniques at Ten Paces, or add something new to our repertoire, or playfully join in and see if they notice.
Certainly, unless there is a 'good' reason to do so, I no longer say, "I know what you're doing!" That might deny me of access to all sorts of information about that manipulator's patterns, paradigms, motives, strategies, beliefs and values, capabilities, sense of self, sense of other sense of relationship and so very much more.

Do I seek to trick or cheat people for my own devious ends? Not as far as I know! Am trying to steal their money or seduce them into a false sense of security e.g. "I promise to love honor and obey..."? Certainly not, although, if I were out to con or convince as a smoke-screen, Isppose I'd say that anyway, wouldn't I?

And there is always the possibility that I'm fooling myself because I never get deeper than the 'principles' of, say, NLP, or never get over the profound, existential level of cultural conditioning that says, for example, there is something fundamentally wrong with (any body's) feelings, especially anger, fear or sadness.

When this belief prevails for at least one person in, say, a counselling, coaching, training, therapeutic, teaching, parenting or other context in which, generally speaking, a power imbalance is at least implicit, the affect-aversive party, albeit without conscious awareness, is very likely to attempt some tried and tested form of manipulation to stem the flow of tears, suppress the raging (s)urge of anger, get the person to see that there is nothing frightening hiding in the shadows.

Will I be advantaged or benefit from the relationships that I seek to influence (with integrity)?? Of course! I am being paid, positive word of mouth will generate more work and income, my ego gets warm-fuzzies, I hone my skills and most importantly, I stand the chance of contributing in a way that makes a positive difference in the world.

gotta go
go well

Michael M,

You're tottally of-topic and look like a pompous ass to me, but I guess that's you manipulated me to see it this way.

alexk wrote:

Michael M,

You're tottally of-topic and look like a pompous ass to me, but I guess that's you manipulated me to see it this way.

thank you Alex, I couldn't disagree with you less !