Yet more NLP BS

[Lothario]

What do you think of these two characters:

Ross Jeffries, whose website is speedseduction.biz
Kenrick Cleveland, maxpersuasion.com

The first one claims to be able to hypnotize any woman into bed by using hypnotic patterns full of embedded commands (ericksonian hypnotic suggestions), which will describe a state (like arousal, for instance) and then link it to yourself by means of an anchor (if i understand correctly, the "anchor" has its origin in pavlovian psychology). I've looked through some forums and found guys claiming to have "created a hypnotized sex slave by using Speed Seduction", and stuff like that. Sounds like BS, but the reasoning behind it is quite clever.

The second guy has applied the same principles to sales. He has some videos on youtube where he's setting an "amnesia anchor" and his products claim to be able to destroy any objection from costumers, etc, etc.

The two nlp-spawns need debunking. What do you guys think?

[ArthurWilborn]

Huh.

Well, there's no doubt that you could replicate the results. It's less complicated then many people think to create a love slave or do well in sales, and you can achieve these results quite rapidly if you use the right techniques. NLP isnt the way I would do it, since what words are relevant to people vary so significantly between people.

Hate to say it, but emotional dependency is still the most reliable method and generally the way to go.

[MikeSun5]

What do you think of these two characters:

Ross Jeffries, whose website is speedseduction.biz
Kenrick Cleveland, maxpersuasion.com

The first one claims to be able to hypnotize any woman into bed by using hypnotic patterns full of embedded commands (ericksonian hypnotic suggestions), which will describe a state (like arousal, for instance) and then link it to yourself by means of an anchor (if i understand correctly, the "anchor" has its origin in pavlovian psychology). I've looked through some forums and found guys claiming to have "created a hypnotized sex slave by using Speed Seduction", and stuff like that. Sounds like BS, but the reasoning behind it is quite clever.

The second guy has applied the same principles to sales. He has some videos on youtube where he's setting an "amnesia anchor" and his products claim to be able to destroy any objection from costumers, etc, etc.

The two nlp-spawns need debunking. What do you guys think?

NLP is garbage. It's simply a magic bean for self-help gurus and a misdirection tool for mentalists. I began reading about that stuff a long time ago, curious about psychology and intent on learning NLP. Most of the common techniques they claim (anchoring, swishing, etc.) aren't effective if your "target" isn't aware of what you're doing.

Those speed seduction techniques of Ross Jeffries are just silly ways of breaking the ice in bars just like all the other cornballs in the "Pickup Artist" community. Getting drunk girls into bed is a matter of finding the dumb ones, not hypnosis.

Here's Derren Brown "using" NLP for mind-control (edit: Watch for the "anchors"):
www.youtube.com/watch?v=befugtgikMg

NLP's only real practical application is entertainment.

[krayon]

After browsing through Jeffries's site, I suddenly feel the need to let off some steam, so here goes.

Whether it works or not, I find his product ethically questionable to say the least. His disciples' claims of success are in violation of the basic tenets of human dignity, to the point of literally making my stomach churn.

He's also offering a home study program on "kick-butt magick" and psychic influence ("The Secret" of pick-up artistry, if you will) for the bargain price of $439.77. What a gem of rape culture.

[Lothario]

I am familiar with Derren's work. Some of it is questionable, though.

I've heard somewhere that Derren Brown does common magic tricks and then disguises them as NLP, the same way mentalists before him disguised them as some sort of psychic power. Is that what you mean when you say mentalists use it as a misdirection tool?

Also, if you look around youtube, NLPers seem to find anchors in everything, from Obama's speeches to Chris Rock's stand-up performances.

Take care

[firecoins]

I am familiar with Derren's work. Some of it is questionable, though.

I've heard somewhere that Derren Brown does common magic tricks and then disguises them as NLP, the same way mentalists before him disguised them as some sort of psychic power. Is that what you mean when you say mentalists use it as a misdirection tool?

Also, if you look around youtube, NLPers seem to find anchors in everything, from Obama's speeches to Chris Rock's stand-up performances.

Take care
ding ding ding, we have a winner! Mentalists do not use NLP for real.

[Ashles]

I am familiar with Derren's work. Some of it is questionable, though.

I've heard somewhere that Derren Brown does common magic tricks and then disguises them as NLP, the same way mentalists before him disguised them as some sort of psychic power. Is that what you mean when you say mentalists use it as a misdirection tool?
Derren Brown is himself quite critical of the claims and practitioners of NLP. He outlines his feelings about it in his book Tricks of the Mind.

[Lucian]

What do you think of these two characters:

Ross Jeffries, whose website is speedseduction.biz
Kenrick Cleveland, maxpersuasion.com

The first one claims to be able to hypnotize any woman into bed by using hypnotic patterns full of embedded commands (ericksonian hypnotic suggestions), which will describe a state (like arousal, for instance) and then link it to yourself by means of an anchor (if i understand correctly, the "anchor" has its origin in pavlovian psychology). I've looked through some forums and found guys claiming to have "created a hypnotized sex slave by using Speed Seduction", and stuff like that. Sounds like BS, but the reasoning behind it is quite clever.

The second guy has applied the same principles to sales. He has some videos on youtube where he's setting an "amnesia anchor" and his products claim to be able to destroy any objection from costumers, etc, etc.

The two nlp-spawns need debunking. What do you guys think?

Wow, what an incredible slime-bucket (Ross Jeffries, I mean, not you Lothario).

If you don’t get laid, I don’t get paid! It’s that simple.
You Must Sleep With At Least 3 Hot Women Within 90 Days Of Using My Home Study Course Or You Pay Nothing…I’ll Refund Every Penny!
Classy! If it were true that you could hypnotize a woman into having sex with you or becoming your sex-slave--against her better judgment and perhaps against her will--wouldn't that be a form of rape?

[Lothario]

Wow, what an incredible slime-bucket (Ross Jeffries, I mean, not you Lothario).


Classy! If it were true that you could hypnotize a woman into having sex with you or becoming your sex-slave--against her better judgment and perhaps against her will--wouldn't that be a form of rape?

Yes, if it worked and if you could prove it was against her will, it would be a form of rape. The true problem is, if it's a form of "covert" hypnosis, how do you prove it?

It would be great if someone with knowledge in the field of hypnosis could step in and explain if it can be used for these purposes.

[Senex]

Yes, if it worked and if you could prove it was against her will, it would be a form of rape. The true problem is, if it's a form of "covert" hypnosis, how do you prove it?

It would be great if someone with knowledge in the field of hypnosis could step in and explain if it can be used for these purposes.

I have knowledge concerning hypnosis. Hypnosis is a placebo. There is no such thing as covert hypnotism. Covert manipulation will always be alive and thriving -- but not hypnotism.

The problem with hypnotism is no one can define it. It's kind of woo but I can't argue against someone who says their experience trumps my own research and performance.

However, trust me, the President of the United States doesn't use hypnosis. Hypnosis doesn't work on people who don't agree to have it performed on themself. Manipulating a woman to have sex with you may rise to the category of research -- but it doesn't equal hypnosis.

[foxholeatheist]

Oh yeah, around here we have plenty of MMA mags laying around and out of sheer and mind numbing bor-dumb I have flipped though them.

It's the same old advertising trick: Play on human insecurity. It's the most sure fire way to make money ever. Soldiers buy all sorts of quack products intended to make them "ripped" or "cut" or some other weird adjective that describes what should be done with all those mags.

Frame it around a sorta-sceintific frame work and it's all over. Dudes will be forking over the money faster than you can say "Dynamic Tension!"

[dann]

Whether it works or not, I find his product ethically questionable to say the least. His disciples' claims of success are in violation of the basic tenets of human dignity, to the point of literally making my stomach churn.

But it is important to know whether it works or or not, isn't it?
If you criticise alleged telepaths of being unethical when they read other people's minds, you actually support the woo sentiment! They themselves enjoy these discussions and always swear that they would not use their 'powers' with bad intentions. But the dishonesty is that they pretend to be able to read the minds of other people - and charge a price to do so.
So would you be able to convince somebody who isn't really into you to have sex with you?
Well, maybe, sometimes.
But would you want her to?
The number of Johns show us that a lot of people would.

[thrombus29]

I Like using the "Seduce And Destroy" method, by Frank T.J. Mackey.

[UNLoVedRebel]

What do you think of these two characters:

Ross Jeffries, whose website is speedseduction.biz
Kenrick Cleveland, maxpersuasion.com

The first one claims to be able to hypnotize any woman into bed by using hypnotic patterns full of embedded commands (ericksonian hypnotic suggestions), which will describe a state (like arousal, for instance) and then link it to yourself by means of an anchor (if i understand correctly, the "anchor" has its origin in pavlovian psychology). I've looked through some forums and found guys claiming to have "created a hypnotized sex slave by using Speed Seduction", and stuff like that. Sounds like BS, but the reasoning behind it is quite clever.

The second guy has applied the same principles to sales. He has some videos on youtube where he's setting an "amnesia anchor" and his products claim to be able to destroy any objection from costumers, etc, etc.

The two nlp-spawns need debunking. What do you guys think?


Ah, old NLP crap. Haven't heard that garbage in a while. This crowd seems to be social scientific-literate so we should be able give it a good debunking. Though there's not much substance to their claims. Just bare assertions backed with no scientific evidence. They do not even attempt to describe the methods they used to gain the knowledge.

[Lothario]

I Like using the "Seduce And Destroy" method, by Frank T.J. Mackey.

That character is actually based on Jeffries from what I read.

Any more comments?

[Lothario]

So... nobody can provide a straight answer on whether it works or not? I am rather concerned.
I keep running into the most outrageous and unethical claims (things along the lines of creating sex slaves and stalkers, increasing sales, persuasion, etc). I've looked around for studies and i can only find studies on PRS and eye-acessing cues, which have been proven wrong. Nothing on the so called embedded commands and the efficiency of anchoring in the terms NLPers propose.
I know that testimonial evidence is not, by any means, evidence, but there's lots of it.

[MikeSun5]

So... nobody can provide a straight answer on whether it works or not? I am rather concerned.
I keep running into the most outrageous and unethical claims (things along the lines of creating sex slaves and stalkers, increasing sales, persuasion, etc). I've looked around for studies and i can only find studies on PRS and eye-acessing cues, which have been proven wrong. Nothing on the so called embedded commands and the efficiency of anchoring in the terms NLPers propose.
I know that testimonial evidence is not, by any means, evidence, but there's lots of it.

Concerned? Don't waste your concern on a d-bag like Ross Jeffries. He claims all this covert hypnosis crap because he's got enough guts to talk to girls despite his retarded Art Garfunkel jewfro haircut. I'd be claiming paranormal reasons, too!
A friend of mine turned me on to that speed seduction nonsense and had me read The Game and The Revelation. It's all crap for nerds to be able to talk to women. Of course it's all the same stuff over and over: Be confident. Don't lurk. Act like you don't care. Women love it.
I think the hypnosis link comes in because of "non-verbal inductions." If I remember this garbage correctly, it has something to do with trances. When you have an experience you haven't had before, you enter somewhat of a trance... similar to when you're really into a TV show while someone says something to you that you didn't hear.
Anyway, long story long, Ross Jeffries claims that if you can hold a girl's attention long enough, you can ask questions and bring up experiences that conjure up feel-good or sexual memories, anchor them, and deploy those anchors later when you want her to feel like doing it. How drunk the target-girl has to be never gets mentioned...

While some of the pickup artist techniques are funny (and therefore somewhat effective at ice-breaking), for the most part it's bogus.

[tsig]

What do you think of these two characters:

Ross Jeffries, whose website is speedseduction.biz
Kenrick Cleveland, maxpersuasion.com

The first one claims to be able to hypnotize any woman into bed by using hypnotic patterns full of embedded commands (ericksonian hypnotic suggestions), which will describe a state (like arousal, for instance) and then link it to yourself by means of an anchor (if i understand correctly, the "anchor" has its origin in pavlovian psychology). I've looked through some forums and found guys claiming to have "created a hypnotized sex slave by using Speed Seduction", and stuff like that. Sounds like BS, but the reasoning behind it is quite clever.

The second guy has applied the same principles to sales. He has some videos on youtube where he's setting an "amnesia anchor" and his products claim to be able to destroy any objection from costumers, etc, etc.

The two nlp-spawns need debunking. What do you guys think?

Candy is dandy but liquor is quicker.

(Ogden nash?)

[Kevin_Lowe]

So... nobody can provide a straight answer on whether it works or not? I am rather concerned.
I keep running into the most outrageous and unethical claims (things along the lines of creating sex slaves and stalkers, increasing sales, persuasion, etc). I've looked around for studies and i can only find studies on PRS and eye-acessing cues, which have been proven wrong. Nothing on the so called embedded commands and the efficiency of anchoring in the terms NLPers propose.
I know that testimonial evidence is not, by any means, evidence, but there's lots of it.

It's pretty much an unfalsifiable hypothesis, without large-scale controlled tests. If someone has sex with someone else, there's no way of telling whether they did so only because of NLP or whether they would have done it anyway just because they found them attractive.

Ideally you'd recruit sets of identical triplets, train one in NLP, another in basic social skills, leave the last untrained as a control, turn them loose in bars and see what their hit rates were.

The burden of proof for these sorts of claims should be on the claimant, not everybody else.

[MikeSun5]

It's pretty much an unfalsifiable hypothesis, without large-scale controlled tests. If someone has sex with someone else, there's no way of telling whether they did so only because of NLP or whether they would have done it anyway just because they found them attractive.

Especially since all the supporting data is in the form of testimonials on their websites. I'm sure none of which have quotes of girls saying, "I'm a former Miss America and I had sex with this weird old man the day I met him. He must have hypnotized me."

Those guys don't use NLP, hypnosis, pheromones, or anything else. Their techniques are quite simple, indeed: :alc:

[Lothario]

Concerned? Don't waste your concern on a d-bag like Ross Jeffries. He claims all this covert hypnosis crap because he's got enough guts to talk to girls despite his retarded Art Garfunkel jewfro haircut. I'd be claiming paranormal reasons, too!

Hahahaha. Good point, good point.

As for the testimonial evidence, i didn't find it only on his website. I found it all over forums related to the "pick-up artist" community.

[remirol]

So... nobody can provide a straight answer on whether it works or not? I am rather concerned.

Rest easy: It doesn't work.

I keep running into the most outrageous and unethical claims (things along the lines of creating sex slaves and stalkers, increasing sales, persuasion, etc). I've looked around for studies and i can only find studies on PRS and eye-acessing cues, which have been proven wrong. Nothing on the so called embedded commands and the efficiency of anchoring in the terms NLPers propose.

This is how you know it doesn't work. If I was selling snake oil I'd make a gazillion ridiculous claims too, as well as...

I know that testimonial evidence is not, by any means, evidence, but there's lots of it.

...fabricate as much testimonial evidence as I could to deceive the dumbasses who don't know that testimonials are meaningless.

Then, I'd go out and sell it on the Internet, which is chock full of lonely guys who can't figure out how to talk to a woman in real life and are looking for something, _anything_, to blame for it other than their own refusal to learn social skills. (And who are also coincidentally all looking for a "magic bullet" fix, rather than actually learning social skills.)

I'd make buckets of money. I'd want to bathe in bleach afterwards because of how scummy it'd make me feel, but buckets of money buys a lot of bleach.

[remirol]

Those guys don't use NLP, hypnosis, pheromones, or anything else. Their techniques are quite simple, indeed: :alc:

Actually, I can sum up their "technique" very simply:

* Clean yourself up and put some decent clothes on so you look presentable.
* Learn some basic social skills so you aren't totally hopeless.
* Go somewhere where there are a lot of single girls looking to get laid (nightclub, whatever).
* Proposition all of them. Stop when someone says "yes".

Presto! You are now a "pick-up artist". And you probably will end up with Creeping Dick Rot if you don't start using condoms, you dumb:talk034:.

:D

[Lothario]

...fabricate as much testimonial evidence as I could to deceive the dumbasses who don't know that testimonials are meaningless.


Even from psychologists and doctors? I've seen them believe in this crap too.

But I suppose you are right. I'm being absurd. I guess I was almost fooled by Derren Brown's misleading use of NLP and by the fact that NLP draws some elements (very few apparently) from valid psychology, which made me wonder whether it could work or not.

Thanks for all your opinions. Take care guys.

[remirol]

Even from psychologists and doctors? I've seen them believe in this crap too.

Sure. It can be even easier to con people like that, who can mistakenly assume their knowledge about a specific subject carries over to all subjects.

I guess I was almost fooled by Derren Brown's misleading use of NLP and by the fact that NLP draws some elements (very few apparently) from valid psychology, which made me wonder whether it could work or not.


Yep. At the core of all good BS is a nugget of almost-truth.

[MikeSun5]

Actually, I can sum up their "technique" very simply:

* Clean yourself up and put some decent clothes on so you look presentable.
* Learn some basic social skills so you aren't totally hopeless.
* Go somewhere where there are a lot of single girls looking to get laid (nightclub, whatever).
* Proposition all of them. Stop when someone says "yes".


Wow! That IS accurate!

remirol, you should sell that on a pamphlet for $50.00 a pop to wannabe pickup artists. Free money.

[remirol]

Wow! That IS accurate!

remirol, you should sell that on a pamphlet for $50.00 a pop to wannabe pickup artists. Free money.

See above remark about "bathing myself in bleach". For now, I'll pass. Maybe if things go completely south I'll cross over to the Dark Side. :D

[Moochie]

Wow, what an incredible slime-bucket (Ross Jeffries, I mean, not you Lothario).


Classy! If it were true that you could hypnotize a woman into having sex with you or becoming your sex-slave--against her better judgment and perhaps against her will--wouldn't that be a form of rape?

That's exactly how my relationship with my wife works. I've hypnotized her into having sex with me, and she's hypnotized me into doing the dishes, mowing the lawn, etc.

Works a treat.


M.

[Lothario]

That's exactly how my relationship with my wife works. I've hypnotized her into having sex with me, and she's hypnotized me into doing the dishes, mowing the lawn, etc.

Works a treat.


M.

If you ever found yourself wondering why you got married in the first place, Jeffries is probably the reason why :).
Someone should start a thread so we can discuss NLP in general to find out if there's any merit in their techniques or not.

[Senex]

Someone should start a thread so we can discuss NLP in general to find out if there's any merit in their techniques or not.

NLP is pseudoscience and as such does not lend itself to well-defined anything. It would be easier if you picked what you believe to be an NLP technique and we can discuss the merit of the technique instead of the meaningless term NLP.

I used to be a student of suggestion techniques. If you want to defend yourself against being manipulated the book Influence by Cialdini is the best resource I have come across. You're in luck, I found this website that breaks the basics down. I recommend buying it or going to the library (most libraries have this book).
http://www.rickross.com/reference/brainwashing/brainwashing20.html

[Lothario]

NLP is pseudoscience and as such does not lend itself to well-defined anything. It would be easier if you picked what you believe to be an NLP technique and we can discuss the merit of the technique instead of the meaningless term NLP.

I used to be a student of suggestion techniques. If you want to defend yourself against being manipulated the book Influence by Cialdini is the best resource I have come across. You're in luck, I found this website that breaks the basics down. I recommend buying it or going to the library (most libraries have this book).
http://www.rickross.com/reference/brainwashing/brainwashing20.html
Hey Senex thanks for replying to the PM the other day.

I have that book in my computer. I've only flipped through it so far but it seems to be good.

As for NLP, i'm curious about two particular aspects: 1) embedded commands; 2) anchoring, particularly the latter as it is taken from Pavlov's conditioning studies.

[Senex]

As for NLP, i'm curious about two particular aspects: 1) embedded commands; 2) anchoring, particularly the latter as it is taken from Pavlov's conditioning studies.

Let's look at embedded commands. Reputable mentalists (that's not neccessarily mutually exclusive) like Luke Jeremy have published effects in which he suggests you can increase the odds of manipulating a spectator's choice by using an embedded command and raising your voice on a particular word. I think that might be possible but it's use as a manipulation tool doesn't go past increasing the odds of a person on stage who is nervous choosing a black face card instead of a red card or the number 57 instead of 37. It has very little and very short-term potential if any at all.

I'm not certain how anchoring can help manipulate anyone. I guess if you ask someone a favor while the smell of baked bread or bacon is in the air might increase your odds of them saying yes if they like bread or bacon. You can't touch someones right shoulder at some point and expect them to be manipulated some time in the future when you touch their right shoulder again if that's what you are wondering.

I think you've been watching too much Darren Brown. There was a video on Youtube (since taken down) in which he gets some British actor named Simon something (popular from some Zombie movie) to write down a birthday wish on a piece of paper he puts in an envelope and carries around for a week in which he then sees Darren Brown and receives the present that was written in the envelope but Simon denied writing but stated was in his handwriting. Pages and pages of comments were written on Youtube about this effect where people were writing the particular time of the video he was using embedded commands and anchoring and Ericsonian handshakes (that Ericsonian handshake I can say with certainty is a crock). If you are familiar with mentalism effects it was painfully obvious the truth was he used a very mundane easy to see through method but people would prefer to believe he used mind control techniques that are not at all possible. I wrote my theory and had some interesting discussions with people who just refused to believe the simplist explanation was the correct one.

Look at it this way -- the most succeful people in society do not use embedded commands or anchoring to persuade people. Only entertainers and people trying to sell woo books use it. That must tell you something.

[Moochie]

Let's look at embedded commands. Reputable mentalists (that's not neccessarily mutually exclusive) like Luke Jeremy have published effects in which he suggests you can increase the odds of manipulating a spectator's choice by using an embedded command and raising your voice on a particular word. I think that might be possible but it's use as a manipulation tool doesn't go past increasing the odds of a person on stage who is nervous choosing a black face card instead of a red card or the number 57 instead of 37. It has very little and very short-term potential if any at all.

I'm not certain how anchoring can help manipulate anyone. I guess if you ask someone a favor while the smell of baked bread or bacon is in the air might increase your odds of them saying yes if they like bread or bacon. You can't touch someones right shoulder at some point and expect them to be manipulated some time in the future when you touch their right shoulder again if that's what you are wondering.

I think you've been watching too much Darren Brown. There was a video on Youtube (since taken down) in which he gets some British actor named Simon something (popular from some Zombie movie) to write down a birthday wish on a piece of paper he puts in an envelope and carries around for a week in which he then sees Darren Brown and receives the present that was written in the envelope but Simon denied writing but stated was in his handwriting. Pages and pages of comments were written on Youtube about this effect where people were writing the particular time of the video he was using embedded commands and anchoring and Ericsonian handshakes (that Ericsonian handshake I can say with certainty is a crock). If you are familiar with mentalism effects it was painfully obvious the truth was he used a very mundane easy to see through method but people would prefer to believe he used mind control techniques that are not at all possible. I wrote my theory and had some interesting discussions with people who just refused to believe the simplist explanation was the correct one.

Look at it this way -- the most succeful people in society do not use embedded commands or anchoring to persuade people. Only entertainers and people trying to sell woo books use it. That must tell you something.


I agree with all you've written, Senex. It seems to be a form of woo that appeals particularly to people of a certain psychological disposition, whereas regular folks, if they want something from someone, simply ask for it, whether it's butter, a drink, or sex. In my experience, only minds that want to be controlled can be controlled, as I alluded to in a previous post about the relationship between my wife and I. (Incidentally, in December we will be celebrating 24 happy years together -- 24 happy woo-free years. :) )


M.

[Axiom_Blade]

There was a video on Youtube (since taken down) in which he gets some British actor named Simon something (popular from some Zombie movie) to write down a birthday wish on a piece of paper he puts in an envelope and carries around for a week in which he then sees Darren Brown and receives the present that was written in the envelope but Simon denied writing but stated was in his handwriting. Pages and pages of comments were written on Youtube about this effect where people were writing the particular time of the video he was using embedded commands and anchoring and Ericsonian handshakes (that Ericsonian handshake I can say with certainty is a crock). If you are familiar with mentalism effects it was painfully obvious the truth was he used a very mundane easy to see through method but people would prefer to believe he used mind control techniques that are not at all possible. I wrote my theory and had some interesting discussions with people who just refused to believe the simplist explanation was the correct one.

That's this video:
befugtgikMg
So, how did he do it? You might think it's "easy to see through", but I can't see it. But, then, I do miss a lot.

[MikeSun5]

Look at it this way -- the most succeful people in society do not use embedded commands or anchoring to persuade people. Only entertainers and people trying to sell woo books use it. That must tell you something.

Thank you! I've been saying that for years. If NLP worked, more people would know about it. Not just Derren Brown, Ross Jeffries and Tony Robbins.

I think the NLP crowd gets such great results with that crap because they and those who they use it on believe it works. Just like all other woo.

[Lothario]

Thanks for your opinions guys. This NLP thing had me worried for a while now. BTW, how do you explain that trick where Derren Brown confuses the girl into thinkin that red is black?

[Axiom_Blade]

Thanks for your opinions guys. This NLP thing had me worried for a while now. BTW, how do you explain that trick where Derren Brown confuses the girl into thinkin that red is black?

Yeah, I'd like to know more about how these tricks are really done. I don't know much about mentalism, except for cold reading.

By the way, I wonder how Brown proposes that you use NLP in a normal, everyday conversation. I think most people wouldn't be too happy about being you tapping them on the shoulder and touching their arm all the time, and you'd probably get punched in the face a lot.

[Iknoweverything]

Thank you! I've been saying that for years. If NLP worked, more people would know about it. Not just Derren Brown, Ross Jeffries and Tony Robbins.

I think the NLP crowd gets such great results with that crap because they and those who they use it on believe it works. Just like all other woo.

Incorrect.

When you say "NLP" you cover a rather large array of techniques. Many are "woo" as you put it, but some are not. Feel free to find out for yourself which parts are useful.

[Axiom_Blade]

Feel free to find out for yourself which parts are useful.

Um, how about NO. Who has time to try out 100 techniques, just to see which of the 5 actually work? Especially when there's a science of the mind, called psychology, which uses testing and peer review...as far as I can tell, NLP does not.

[Iknoweverything]

Um, how about NO. Who has time to try out 100 techniques, just to see which of the 5 actually work? Especially when there's a science of the mind, called psychology, which uses testing and peer review...as far as I can tell, NLP does not.

Yes and I have a degree in psychology, thank you for your eye opening reply

You also stated you know nothing about mentalism, I do.

That makes your replies even more amusing

[remirol]

You also stated you know nothing about mentalism or cold reading either, I do.


Excellent. So which NLP techniques do you claim work, and why?

[Senex]

I agree with all you've written, Senex. It seems to be a form of woo that appeals particularly to people of a certain psychological disposition, whereas regular folks, if they want something from someone, simply ask for it, whether it's butter, a drink, or sex. In my experience, only minds that want to be controlled can be controlled, as I alluded to in a previous post about the relationship between my wife and I. (Incidentally, in December we will be celebrating 24 happy years together -- 24 happy woo-free years. :) )

M.

Well, you must have thrown the woo around a little bit 25 or so years ago to bait the trap ;) I'm thinking about rubbing myself with bacon before hitting the bars -- this pheremone stuff seems to have been overhyped or the women in my neighborhood have clogged noses due to allergies because I need a stronger plan B. Congrats on the 24 years. That's something in todays day and age.

So, how did he do it? You might think it's "easy to see through", but I can't see it. But, then, I do miss a lot.
Your Youtube video didn't work for me but I'm familiar with it. Unlike on Youtube I agreed not to reveal tricks here but I will ask you what is more likely; Simon got psychologically whammied and misremembered what he wrote, or he clearly remembered what he wrote and you were tricked into believing woo over common sense.

Thanks for your opinions guys. This NLP thing had me worried for a while now. BTW, how do you explain that trick where Derren Brown confuses the girl into thinkin that red is black?

I saw that video (on the conjurer's corner I think. You probably posted it.). I watched it just once and have a pretty good guess how he did it. It's just a guess and since it is more of a TV editing effect than magic or mentalism I think I wouldn't break the rules offering my guess. I think it would be educational for some of you NLP believers to understand how TV entertainers actually work.

Brown doesn't confuse anyone into thinking red is black -- he got her to agree to call the color black "red" and the color red "black." He set the groundwork for it at the table with those colored cards when he said what you see as green I might see as orange but he asked her to exchange red and black while speaking off camera while they were walking to the parking lot. Shame on him -- that wasn't very fair to the TV watchers :rolleyes: When they reached the parking lot and she said "that is my car but it is the wrong color" the car in front of her wasn't actually her own car but the same make and model as her car (she was actually saying you guys pulled the right type of car to the front of the bar but that's not mine because the color is wrong). Her agreeing to juxtapose the colors red and black made it seem she couldn't recognize her own car because of the color but she was darn well able to recognize her own car but that car wasn't hers. The woman who Brown used as a subject for the effect never understood she was involved in a seemingly successful mentalism stunt. Only the TV audience (and maybe those women who came out to the parking lot with them who didn't know what car the subject woman drove may have been set up the same as the TV audience.) No NLP was used at all. It was just an effect that took advantage of the TV audience not knowing all the conditions the subject of the effect was working under. No NLP, not even a real mentalism trick -- it was a TV editing out some instructions to the subject trick. Pretty lame but Brown is a master showman. He is not a master teacher in what is possible. He is a master misleader (but that is his job). If you purge the thought someone has miracle manipulation powers you can pretty much see through most of his effects (and the few I can't figure out I believe he is resorting to something more unfair than even crafty editing.)


Thank you! I've been saying that for years. If NLP worked, more people would know about it. Not just Derren Brown, Ross Jeffries and Tony Robbins.

I think the NLP crowd gets such great results with that crap because they and those who they use it on believe it works. Just like all other woo.

Those three people call what they do NLP but they have three entirely different audiences. Brown just uses it as misdirection for mentalism tricks. Jeffries uses it as mumbo-jumbo to give you confidence to pick up girls (but I did feel uncomfortably attracted to that 400 lbs guy in the video on jeffries' website who was a virgin before watching jeffries video and now gets some every time he waddles out the door. I think he used embedded commands on me) like MikeSun said. Robbins might be different. He calls his self-help stuff NLP but it really is harmless (and perhaps even helpful) repackaging of positive thinking is good for you. Tony Robbins doesn't say NLP manipulates others, he says it can bu used to manipulate your own thinking. His intentions are more noble than Jeffries'.

Incorrect.

When you say "NLP" you cover a rather large array of techniques. Many are "woo" as you put it, but some are not. Feel free to find out for yourself which parts are useful.

Let's stick to techniques that manipulate others. We give up finding out for ourselves. Which parts are useful?

[Iknoweverything]

Excellent. So which NLP techniques do you claim work, and why?

Learn and try for yourself thats the only way to be sure.

[Toke]

Learn and try for yourself thats the only way to be sure.

That´s mighty helpfull:rolleyes:

[remirol]

Learn and try for yourself thats the only way to be sure.

No, sorry, that won't cut it. If you're going to claim any of it works at all, then you need to be able to back those claims up.

Otherwise, how would I know it was the NLP, as opposed to just my stunning good looks and boyish charm?

So tell me again -- which forms of NLP *specifically* do work? We can even go with Senex' restriction; which forms that I can use to manipulate others are _not_ woo and actually do work?

[Iknoweverything]

No, sorry, that won't cut it. If you're going to claim any of it works at all, then you need to be able to back those claims up.

Otherwise, how would I know it was the NLP, as opposed to just my stunning good looks and boyish charm?

So tell me again -- which forms of NLP *specifically* do work? We can even go with Senex' restriction; which forms that I can use to manipulate others are _not_ woo and actually do work?

Hey Remirol sorry if my "claim" doesn't cut it. My first statement was to argue the sweeping generalization that ALL NLP is worthless. That is incorrect in my experience.

There are many specific things that are useful to me and that have helped me enormously but they are subjects not specific to this thread.

The only thing I will say is that People are more likely to like you and more willing to agree with what you say if you do build a strong sense of rapport with them.

Thanks

[remirol]

Hey Remirol sorry if my "claim" doesn't cut it. My first statement was to argue the sweeping generalization that ALL NLP is worthless. That is incorrect in my experience.

And yet you do not offer any evidence to back up this assertion, nor are you even willing to specify which forms of NLP work. No, again, this just doesn't cut it.

There are many specific things that are useful to me and that have helped me enormously but they are subjects not specific to this thread.

Which specific forms of NLP do work? No, actually, that would be _precisely_ on topic for the thread. Most threads should be so happy to get such an on-topic reply.

So, again, what specific things from NLP are you talking about?

The only thing I will say is that People are more likely to like you and more willing to agree with what you say if you do build a strong sense of rapport with them.

This has nothing to do with NLP, which is what we are discussing.

[Lothario]

The only thing I will say is that People are more likely to like you and more willing to agree with what you say if you do build a strong sense of rapport with them.



This is common sense. Any child knows this. We don't need Bandler to come and tell us that we'd better get to know people before we start asking them for favors.
It would be helpful if you could say what techniques you believe are valid so we can try them for ourselves.

[JFrankA]

Well, you must have thrown the woo around a little bit 25 or so years ago to bait the trap ;) I'm thinking about rubbing myself with bacon before hitting the bars -- this pheremone stuff seems to have been overhyped or the women in my neighborhood have clogged noses due to allergies because I need a stronger plan B. Congrats on the 24 years. That's something in todays day and age.


Your Youtube video didn't work for me but I'm familiar with it. Unlike on Youtube I agreed not to reveal tricks here but I will ask you what is more likely; Simon got psychologically whammied and misremembered what he wrote, or he clearly remembered what he wrote and you were tricked into believing woo over common sense.



I saw that video (on the conjurer's corner I think. You probably posted it.). I watched it just once and have a pretty good guess how he did it. It's just a guess and since it is more of a TV editing effect than magic or mentalism I think I wouldn't break the rules offering my guess. I think it would be educational for some of you NLP believers to understand how TV entertainers actually work.

Brown doesn't confuse anyone into thinking red is black -- he got her to agree to call the color black "red" and the color red "black." He set the groundwork for it at the table with those colored cards when he said what you see as green I might see as orange but he asked her to exchange red and black while speaking off camera while they were walking to the parking lot. Shame on him -- that wasn't very fair to the TV watchers :rolleyes: When they reached the parking lot and she said "that is my car but it is the wrong color" the car in front of her wasn't actually her own car but the same make and model as her car (she was actually saying you guys pulled the right type of car to the front of the bar but that's not mine because the color is wrong). Her agreeing to juxtapose the colors red and black made it seem she couldn't recognize her own car because of the color but she was darn well able to recognize her own car but that car wasn't hers. The woman who Brown used as a subject for the effect never understood she was involved in a seemingly successful mentalism stunt. Only the TV audience (and maybe those women who came out to the parking lot with them who didn't know what car the subject woman drove may have been set up the same as the TV audience.) No NLP was used at all. It was just an effect that took advantage of the TV audience not knowing all the conditions the subject of the effect was working under. No NLP, not even a real mentalism trick -- it was a TV editing out some instructions to the subject trick. Pretty lame but Brown is a master showman. He is not a master teacher in what is possible. He is a master misleader (but that is his job). If you purge the thought someone has miracle manipulation powers you can pretty much see through most of his effects (and the few I can't figure out I believe he is resorting to something more unfair than even crafty editing.)




Those three people call what they do NLP but they have three entirely different audiences. Brown just uses it as misdirection for mentalism tricks. Jeffries uses it as mumbo-jumbo to give you confidence to pick up girls (but I did feel uncomfortably attracted to that 400 lbs guy in the video on jeffries' website who was a virgin before watching jeffries video and now gets some every time he waddles out the door. I think he used embedded commands on me) like MikeSun said. Robbins might be different. He calls his self-help stuff NLP but it really is harmless (and perhaps even helpful) repackaging of positive thinking is good for you. Tony Robbins doesn't say NLP manipulates others, he says it can bu used to manipulate your own thinking. His intentions are more noble than Jeffries'.



Let's stick to techniques that manipulate others. We give up finding out for ourselves. Which parts are useful?

Listen to Senex. He's (or she, sorry, I don't remember. :( ) got it exactly right.

I can answer the hypnosis question that was asked on page one in this thread. i do stage hypnosis from time to time. The main reason why hypnosis works is simply because the audience/participants desire it to work. In fact, before each show, I explain hypnosis to the audience in the following way:

Hypnosis is exactly like going to the movies. I tell them that they sit in a comfortable seat, in a dark room, ready and willing to be swept up in a story. And when you are at the movies, your heart pumps when there is an exciting scene, you laugh at the funny bits, you cry at the sad parts, you boo the bad guy and you cheer when the good guy wins. All this happens while you are unaware of the guy two rows ahead of you eating his popcorn loudly.

And always, the hypnosis still works. There's nothing more going on other than me suggesting what they should be daydreaming. Nothing magical, nothing woo, just overactive imaginations, suggestions, and mostly, the people participating want it to happen.

NLP is pretty much bunk. It works for people like Derren Brown because, quite frankly, he uses a lot of what is called "dual-reality". In other words, he makes it appear to the audience that something is happening, but to the person who is part of the effect, their perception is different. Again, nothing woo. It's all part of misdirection and suggestion.

Someone mentioned it before, but it's worth mentioning again. Read Derren's book Tricks of the Mind. For more of a magician's view on suggestablity, which honestly, this is all this is, take a look at Banachek as well as Luke Jeremy's books.

[Iknoweverything]

Rapport Building
This has nothing to do with NLP, which is what we are discussing.

Really ? NLP has nothing to do with Rapport Building ?You obviously know about it I can tell.

In regards to your other statements and requests;
Did you notice the other sentence I put together said that I was responding to the argument that all NLP is useless not the fact that Erickson speech patterns were effective.

Basically you argued against an argument that did not exist and then made a statement about NLP having nothing to with rapport. A+

[Iknoweverything]

This is common sense. Any child knows this. We don't need Bandler to come and tell us that we'd better get to know people before we start asking them for favors.
It would be helpful if you could say what techniques you believe are valid so we can try them for ourselves.

You may of seen the target but your arrow went nowhere near it. I am not here to give you techniques then argue about them. If you want to learn that is what you should do, learn.

If you were indeed exposed to or have been in a competitive high level sales environment over many years you would probably understand more about different people and how deep and important rapport is. This is your chance to open your mind and maybe learn something. If your choice is to dismiss what i say then that is your choice and I do not wish to argue about it.

My initial response was only to the statement that all NLP was "woo"

From what I have seen on this thread so far not one of you has enough experience or an understanding of this subject, and yes that claim is verified by your responses.

[Iknoweverything]

Listen to Senex. He's (or she, sorry, I don't remember. :( ) got it exactly right.

I can answer the hypnosis question that was asked on page one in this thread. i do stage hypnosis from time to time. The main reason why hypnosis works is simply because the audience/participants desire it to work. In fact, before each show, I explain hypnosis to the audience in the following way:

Hypnosis is exactly like going to the movies. I tell them that they sit in a comfortable seat, in a dark room, ready and willing to be swept up in a story. And when you are at the movies, your heart pumps when there is an exciting scene, you laugh at the funny bits, you cry at the sad parts, you boo the bad guy and you cheer when the good guy wins. All this happens while you are unaware of the guy two rows ahead of you eating his popcorn loudly.

And always, the hypnosis still works. There's nothing more going on other than me suggesting what they should be daydreaming. Nothing magical, nothing woo, just overactive imaginations, suggestions, and mostly, the people participating want it to happen.

NLP is pretty much bunk. It works for people like Derren Brown because, quite frankly, he uses a lot of what is called "dual-reality". In other words, he makes it appear to the audience that something is happening, but to the person who is part of the effect, their perception is different. Again, nothing woo. It's all part of misdirection and suggestion.

Someone mentioned it before, but it's worth mentioning again. Read Derren's book Tricks of the Mind. For more of a magician's view on suggestablity, which honestly, this is all this is, take a look at Banachek as well as Luke Jeremy's books.

I agree with you thouroughly on the hypnosis, I to have done many stage hypnosis shows and I will agree the word Hypnosis as we know it does not exist. Social Compliance is all that is

I would also like to state that I have read the books you suggested and the authors you mentioned ( all Banachek books and 10+ Luke Jermay )

I think the confusion here is that no one really has a understanding of what NLP is. Its not just Erickson hypnosis and it seems that is the opinion some people have on here. The closed minded "Iknowitall" is what stops humanity and people learning and growing. That has been shown on this thread many times already

It is possible to be an open minded skeptic.

[Toke]

What a horrible shame that we do not grasp your wisdom. And you are too far above us simpletons to dumb down the message sufficiently.

Too bad, try find a forum with more intelligent people on it.:D

[Iknoweverything]

What a horrible shame that we do not grasp your wisdom. And you are too far above us simpletons to dumb down the message sufficiently.

Too bad, try find a forum with more intelligent people on it.:D

Have you ever heard that statement "fight fire with fire"

[remirol]

Really ? NLP has nothing to do with Rapport Building ?You obviously know about it I can tell.

Correct me, then. What specifically does NLP have to do with -- or at least, what do the parts of NLP that are effective have to do with?

In regards to your other statements and requests;
Did you notice the other sentence I put together said that I was responding to the argument that all NLP is useless not the fact that Erickson speech patterns were effective.

Since this is the first you have mentioned "Erickson speech patterns" in this thread... no, I did not notice it. You should be more clear with your wording in the future.

That said, are Erickson speech patterns something you consider to be part of NLP? If yes, then how are they effective? What can I use these speech patterns for, and what can I expect to accomplish?

[remirol]

If you were indeed exposed to or have been in a competitive high level sales environment over many years you would probably understand more about different people and how deep and important rapport is. This is your chance to open your mind and maybe learn something. If your choice is to dismiss what i say then that is your choice and I do not wish to argue about it.

Well, the problem is -- you haven't actually said anything yet. You've just spoken in vague terms and generalities, except for this Erickson speech patterns thing just now, and you DID ttry to pretend that "rapport building" is NLP-specific, rather than just common sense.

If you would like to say something about NLP, then perhaps we can discuss it. But currently you simply haven't made much effort at all to back up your original assertion -- which is that "not all NLP is woo". Still looking for those parts of NLP which aren't woo, and, perhaps, how I can tell them apart from the parts which are. Do they come with a certificate?

I think the confusion here is that no one really has a understanding of what NLP is. Its not just Erickson hypnosis and it seems that is the opinion some people have on here.

You are the first person who has brought up Erickson at all, so I am not sure where you got that statement from. Again, if you feel we do not have an understanding, you are certainly welcome to correct us. Please! We are all ears. (OK, I am only two ears. But there can be others.)

[Senex]

Really ? NLP has nothing to do with Rapport Building ?You obviously know about it I can tell.



We may not have been sent to NLP seminars because we haven't been in a high competitive sales environments for many years like other people :rolleyes: but you seem to have failed in the rapport department yourself despite taking these seminars. I don't feel the rapport -- do you remirol? Can your company get a refund for the days you were supposed to be learning NLP rapport building?

This NLP stuff just doesn't seem to work and you're not helping make a case with your defending it without providing evidence/examples. Lack of detail makes us think all those seminar hours were time wasted. You might have better spent the time on phrenology courses or something.

[Lothario]

You may of seen the target but your arrow went nowhere near it. I am not here to give you techniques then argue about them. If you want to learn that is what you should do, learn.

If you were indeed exposed to or have been in a competitive high level sales environment over many years you would probably understand more about different people and how deep and important rapport is. This is your chance to open your mind and maybe learn something. If your choice is to dismiss what i say then that is your choice and I do not wish to argue about it.

My initial response was only to the statement that all NLP was "woo"

From what I have seen on this thread so far not one of you has enough experience or an understanding of this subject, and yes that claim is verified by your responses.

I don't claim to be an expert by any means, but I read Frogs into Princes and a couple more books on NLP and i am familiar with most of the jargon and techniques NLP proponents use.
The problem is, you're really not saying anything. You're accusing us of being close minded and you state that some techniques within NLP work, but then you refuse to back that up. We don't even know what techniques you are talking about.
About rapport - what exactly did NLP come up with? Mirroring? I have a hard time believing that you build rapport just by copying someone's body language. The whole matching PRS idea has failed in scientific studies. I really don't see what you're refering to.

Let me play the devil's advocate here. From what i remember reading about NLP, the concept of reframing seems sound. I also remember some goal setting parts which might have some value in self-improvement.

However, all of this is not, IMO, specific to NLP. It's glass half-full\glass half-empty type positive thinking. It's more common sense than it is NLP. A few gold nuggets in the middle is hardly enough to validate an entire science.

[Iknoweverything]

We may not have been sent to NLP seminars because we haven't been in a high competitive sales environments for many years like other people :rolleyes: but you seem to have failed in the rapport department yourself despite taking these seminars. I don't feel the rapport -- do you remirol? Can your company get a refund for the days you were supposed to be learning NLP rapport building?

.

oh I didn't see that one coming. Congratulations on the obvious.

[Moochie]

I was hoping to learn something positive about NLP here, but it seems the only voice with such claims is determined to remain schtum.


M.

[remirol]

I was hoping to learn something positive about NLP here, but it seems the only voice with such claims is determined to remain schtum.


But he did drop in to make a snarky comment. So that means he's still reading the thread. Unfortunately, lacking any evidence presented, I'm going to have to say that my opinion of NLP remains unchanged as "it's all woo".

[JFrankA]

oh I didn't see that one coming. Congratulations on the obvious.


I think the confusion here is that no one really has a understanding of what NLP is. Its not just Erickson hypnosis and it seems that is the opinion some people have on here. The closed minded "Iknowitall" is what stops humanity and people learning and growing. That has been shown on this thread many times already

It is possible to be an open minded skeptic.

Please take no offense to this, but this is exactly the problem. Skeptics are open-minded. We start with "I don't know - please show us evidence" and then go from there.

There has been no evidence from you. None. Just telling us that we don't know then providing no evidence or even an explaination.

Okay, here's a piece of what I know from NLP that I use, and my own personal (i.e. anecdotal) experience from it:

One aspect of NLP is the hypothesis that if in a conversation, you were to tell the subject a series of facts to the subject will agree with you. There's no harm in that, because you are stating obvious facts. After a few of them, you say something that could be true, most likely is true, but not definitively true. The subject would probably agree with you, because it's most likely true. Finally, after a couple of those kinds of statements, you say something you want the subject to believe. After agreeing with you so many times, the subject would be more open to believe you and agree.

That's one hypothesis. Does it work in my stage hypnosis performances? Yes. But, again, that's a performance. The people there WANT it to work. Half my work is done already. In real life, it doesn't really work all that much.

In fact, I've noticed some commercials and some speeches by different people who employ this technique. As far as I can see, (again, this is my own observation), it doesn't work, otherwise everyone would be buying a particular brand of margarine and all other brands would be out of business.

If the subject has the desire for something to happen with you, is not thinking critically, and maybe a little confused, it might improve your chances to persuade your subject to your desires. But, for example, to pick up the hot chick in the bar who is "out of your league"? Not by a long shot.

And, (this is the point), there is no evidence otherwise. Absolutely none.

[Lothario]

Please take no offense to this, but this is exactly the problem. Skeptics are open-minded. We start with "I don't know - please show us evidence" and then go from there.

There has been no evidence from you. None. Just telling us that we don't know then providing no evidence or even an explaination.

Okay, here's a piece of what I know from NLP that I use, and my own personal (i.e. anecdotal) experience from it:

One aspect of NLP is the hypothesis that if in a conversation, you were to tell the subject a series of facts to the subject will agree with you. There's no harm in that, because you are stating obvious facts. After a few of them, you say something that could be true, most likely is true, but not definitively true. The subject would probably agree with you, because it's most likely true. Finally, after a couple of those kinds of statements, you say something you want the subject to believe. After agreeing with you so many times, the subject would be more open to believe you and agree.

That's one hypothesis. Does it work in my stage hypnosis performances? Yes. But, again, that's a performance. The people there WANT it to work. Half my work is done already. In real life, it doesn't really work all that much.

In fact, I've noticed some commercials and some speeches by different people who employ this technique. As far as I can see, (again, this is my own observation), it doesn't work, otherwise everyone would be buying a particular brand of margarine and all other brands would be out of business.

If the subject has the desire for something to happen with you, is not thinking critically, and maybe a little confused, it might improve your chances to persuade your subject to your desires. But, for example, to pick up the hot chick in the bar who is "out of your league"? Not by a long shot.

And, (this is the point), there is no evidence otherwise. Absolutely none.


This is what they call a yes ladder isn't it?

[JFrankA]

This is what they call a yes ladder isn't it?

Yes.


....that's one! :)

[MikeSun5]

My first statement was to argue the sweeping generalization that ALL NLP is worthless. That is incorrect in my experience.

Then you're going to have to relate your experience. All NLP is worthless in my experience. Your posts assume that everyone who thinks NLP is crap have no knowledge of the subject.
In my experience, NLP works on very few people. Most of the people it "worked" on had all heard of NLP and were aware of it's results/benefits.

There are many specific things that are useful to me and that have helped me enormously but they are subjects not specific to this thread.

Au contraire. A simple list of specific NLP things that you think actually work wouldn't be off topic.

The only thing I will say is that People are more likely to like you and more willing to agree with what you say if you do build a strong sense of rapport with them.

Agreed. Unfortunately, that statement doesn't exclusively apply to NLP (and if it did, it'd render a lot of their stuff obsolete). I'm with remirol on this one. Rapport building is a huge part of NLP, but building rapport doesn't require NLP. I can build rapport with someone with using a bunch of methods, but NLP claims such nonsense as matching a subject's breathing and vocal tone, or looking at their left eye with your left eye, etc. Personally, that stuff wouldn't build rapport, it would creep me out.
Actually reminds me of an Office episode where two guys shook hands for like 3 minutes because both had been trained to "never be the first to break a handshake."

[Senex]

I think this is typical. NLP is alternative psychology like homeopathic is alternative medicine. Skeptics, who would love to be the center of attention on an alternative website, get tossed off the alternative sites by those moderators who don't want alternative opinions to those they espouse on their site. On the JREF you only have to represent yourself as a believer in something alternative and you get to be the most popular person on the thread you are posting to. Unfortunately, alternative believers (with the exception of visionfromfeeling) quit our site when detailed questions are asked of them.

It's enough to make me feel I'm on the right side of this discussion.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I think this is typical. NLP is alternative psychology like homeopathic is alternative medicine. Skeptics, who would love to be the center of attention on an alternative website, get tossed off the alternative sites by those moderators who don't want alternative opinions to those they espouse on their site. On the JREF you only have to represent yourself as a believer in something alternative and you get to be the most popular person on the thread you are posting to. Unfortunately, alternative believers (with the exception of visionfromfeeling) quit our site when detailed questions are asked of them.

It's enough to make me feel I'm on the right side of this discussion.
;)

[Iknoweverything]

I think this is typical. NLP is alternative psychology like homeopathic is alternative medicine. Skeptics, who would love to be the center of attention on an alternative website, get tossed off the alternative sites by those moderators who don't want alternative opinions to those they espouse on their site. On the JREF you only have to represent yourself as a believer in something alternative and you get to be the most popular person on the thread you are posting to. Unfortunately, alternative believers (with the exception of visionfromfeeling) quit our site when detailed questions are asked of them.

It's enough to make me feel I'm on the right side of this discussion.

Quit the Site ? Sorry my friend, I have been traveling. You want to know exactly what I have been doing ?. I fly to Australia on business then spend a day on the beach where I meet two nice ladies. One of the ladies I get on really well with and end up spending the night with her. I am now about to fly to NewYork for a weekend on company expenses and am meeting another lady friend there. I could go on and detail more about how much I earn and how successful and like I am as a person but I do not wish to.

I do not wish to be the center of attention on a Internet forum and I did find this initial post by accident, i find that comment particularly funny.

I could see a lot of negativity about things that I know work and I did not want someone else to come here read the negativity and be put off learning and growing.

My success and how I am liked in the REAL WORLD is a clear demonstration of what I have learned and use .

MikeSun your post is probably the only valid one I have seen and I do agree with a lot of what you have said, although not all of it. What I would like to know Mike is have you tried aspects of NLP over and over for many years and in many situations. If you have not I find it hard to accept your judgment unless you are as successful and have achieved as much as me.

I will not be back on this forum for a while as I am traveling a lot over the next few weeks, its not because I am scared of closed mind negativity or the fact that an "internet epenis" talks as if he knows better.

I do not sell NLP stuff and my business dealings are noway related to it but as I travel around I do like to make people feel better about themselves I encourage them to grow more as people and achieve as much as they can out of this one life.

To all the flame throwers I would suggest thinking about what is possible and what you can achieve in your life rather than focusing on what cannot be achieved.

As I said before if you want examples go out LEARN and TEST then LEARN and TEST some more.

Good Luck!

[Iknoweverything]

Yes.


....that's one! :)

Or Pacing and Leading


Pace Pace Pace Lead

Pace Pace Lead Lead

Pace Lead Lead Lead

Try it

[remirol]

I could go on and detail more about how much I earn and how successful and like I am as a person but I do not wish to.

Just as well, I wouldn't believe a word of it anyway.

I could see a lot of negativity about things that I know work and I did not want someone else to come here read the negativity and be put off learning and growing.

Ah, you _know_ they work, but you can't provide any _evidence_ for that. I see...

To all the flame throwers I would suggest thinking about what is possible and what you can achieve in your life rather than focusing on what cannot be achieved.

Odd, I've been asking you to actually tell us what _is_ possible, but you don't seem to be able to do that.

As I said before if you want examples go out LEARN and TEST then LEARN and TEST some more.

No, sorry, I'm not wasting money on garbage. Unless you can tell me which parts aren't garbage...?

[Toke]

I think this is typical. NLP is alternative psychology like homeopathic is alternative medicine. Skeptics, who would love to be the center of attention on an alternative website, get tossed off the alternative sites by those moderators who don't want alternative opinions to those they espouse on their site. On the JREF you only have to represent yourself as a believer in something alternative and you get to be the most popular person on the thread you are posting to. Unfortunately, alternative believers (with the exception of visionfromfeeling) quit our site when detailed questions are asked of them.

It's enough to make me feel I'm on the right side of this discussion.

Beautifully put.
And nominated

[Iknoweverything]

Just as well, I wouldn't believe a word of it anyway.



Ah, you _know_ they work, but you can't provide any _evidence_ for that. I see...



Odd, I've been asking you to actually tell us what _is_ possible, but you don't seem to be able to do that.



No, sorry, I'm not wasting money on garbage. Unless you can tell me which parts aren't garbage...?

I wish you the best of luck no matter what you believe. As long as I know thats enough. I really must be off now!

[remirol]

I wish you the best of luck no matter what you believe. As long as I know thats enough.

Well, it's _not_ enough, that's the point. You may be happy, but that doesn't speak one way or the other about the efficacy of NLP.

Avoiding the questions, however, says rather a lot, but it's nothing unusual.

[JFrankA]

Or Pacing and Leading


Pace Pace Pace Lead

Pace Pace Lead Lead

Pace Lead Lead Lead

Try it

Interesting how you responded to this post instead of my other one. The one I explained to you that you evidence. Instead, you tried to instruct me in NLP and doing a very bad job of dodging the fact that there is no clear evidence.

By the way, I am well aware of Pacing and Leading. I use it all the time in my shows. But, again, those are people who WANT to be paced and lead.

Let me put it this way. Let's say a guy goes into a microwave store, with the intent of buying a microwave, and tells the salesperson "I want to know more about the $50 microwave". The salesperson can NLP the customer and the customer might be convinced to but the $70. microwave instead. Of course, that's no proof that NLP did that. Especially since another salesperson, who doesn't use NLP at all, could upsell the same customer.

However, it can proved that, to continue this example, if a customer goes to a DVD store, with the intent to buy a DVD. That same microwave salesman can NLP that customer until he is blue in the face and he won't be able to convince that customer to spend his money on a microwave instead of a DVD.

It's kind of a weird way of making the example, but the point of what I am saying is that NLP will never ever convince someone to do something that they don't want to do.

You are prime example of it here. You have been trying to convince us, trying ways, except for the way we are asking for, and you have not been successful at all. The fact is with all your postering, you haven't proven a thing.

Here's the real secret, the thing that beats NLP without question. It's called listening to the person, trying to understand what they are saying and meaning, then responding.

It's a new method called "Communication"......

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Interesting how you responded to this post instead of my other one. The one I explained to you that you evidence. Instead, you tried to instruct me in NLP and doing a very bad job of dodging the fact that there is no clear evidence.

By the way, I am well aware of Pacing and Leading. I use it all the time in my shows. But, again, those are people who WANT to be paced and lead.

Let me put it this way. Let's say a guy goes into a microwave store, with the intent of buying a microwave, and tells the salesperson "I want to know more about the $50 microwave". The salesperson can NLP the customer and the customer might be convinced to but the $70. microwave instead. Of course, that's no proof that NLP did that. Especially since another salesperson, who doesn't use NLP at all, could upsell the same customer.

However, it can proved that, to continue this example, if a customer goes to a DVD store, with the intent to buy a DVD. That same microwave salesman can NLP that customer until he is blue in the face and he won't be able to convince that customer to spend his money on a microwave instead of a DVD.

It's kind of a weird way of making the example, but the point of what I am saying is that NLP will never ever convince someone to do something that they don't want to do.

You are prime example of it here. You have been trying to convince us, trying ways, except for the way we are asking for, and you have not been successful at all. The fact is with all your postering, you haven't proven a thing.

Here's the real secret, the thing that beats NLP without question. It's called listening to the person, trying to understand what they are saying and meaning, then responding.

It's a new method called "Communication"......

AKA, "Would you like fries with that?" ;)

[MikeSun5]

By the way, I am well aware of Pacing and Leading. I use it all the time in my shows. But, again, those are people who WANT to be paced and lead.

:clap:

Here's the real secret, the thing that beats NLP without question. It's called listening to the person, trying to understand what they are saying and meaning, then responding.

:clap:

NLP is the same as any other nonsense like talking to the dead or bending spoons. When the results it claims can be replicated by non-NLP methods (see above quote), it casts doubt on NLP as a practice.
--also, I use the word "results" loosely... I don't count Jeffries' sex slaves or Iknoweverything's success as "results" --
NLP makes a bunch of big claims and if something doesn't work, they have convenient outs like "lack of rapport" or "lack of client desire."
NLP is psychology like Scientology is a church. If I could tell what someone was thinking by where their eyes were looking, or make someone quit smoking by waving my hands and making swishing noises, I'd be a billionaire.

By it's own admission (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therapeutic_use_of_Neuro-linguistic_programming), NLP is set up to "help people overcome self-perceived and subjective" problems, not to treat or cure any mental problems. Exactly the "for entertainment purposes only" type of disclaimer so common to New Age hooey.
Seriously. Look here (http://www.nlpcenter.com/index.php) and here (http://www.nlp.com/). Browse around just a little.
And these people are trained psychologists, huh? NLP, hypnosis, and huna all taught together, huh? Science, huh? :rolleyes:
Of course the go-to response would be my two examples aren't representative of NLP practitioners at large. I disagree. If you're into NLP, those sites would be two pretty popular domain names. It's no wonder why they're owned by crazies and not universities.

[Pup]

The funny part of all this, is that NLP seems to be designed from the viewpoint that there are NLP users, and then there's a fertile field of non-NLP users to manipulate with it. (I mean in its woo form and not just normal good human relations).

But what happens when two NLP-users try to use it on each other, unaware? I can just picture a guy using NLP to try to get a girl in bed with him, while the girl, meanwhile, is using NLP to get this creep to do something to really embarrass himself in front of everyone and then leave her alone. I'm sensing sitcom gold here.

[Lothario]

Yes.


....that's one! :)

You are now willing to send me all your money, aren't you? :)


Another website for you guys:

http://www.kevinhogan.com/index.htm

I've browsed through this guy's website and he's selling products like "Covert Hypnosis"; "Covert Influence"; "Secrets of Body Language", etc. Apparently, he's even made his way into some magazines like Cosmopolitan and Men's Health (he also has some pictures with Heidi Klum and a couple of Playmates. I must confess i am thinking about quitting my current job and starting my own NLP company).
How does a pseudo-scientific subject become a widespread business? Why are major companies sending their workers to NLP courses so they can learn all these rapport and influence techniques that don't even work?
A simples search on Yahoo for NLP will produce several pages of results. Some of them are just plain funny, like this NLP Jedi Master (http://modernjedi.com/), others appear more credible.
Isn't there some sort of governing body watching over this?

[remirol]

How does a pseudo-scientific subject become a widespread business?

By selling to people who are gullible.

Why are major companies sending their workers to NLP courses so they can learn all these rapport and influence techniques that don't even work?

Because a CEO who is smart about running a business isn't necessarily smart about knowing that NLP is a bunch of crap -- and from where he sits, the courses' cost may be chicken feed.

Isn't there some sort of governing body watching over this?

Why would there need to be? NLP doesn't work, so there are no issues involving human rights violations WRT the actual 'product' itself. As far as the rest, you'll find that there are gallons of disclaimers built in everywhere so that someone who spends the money, takes the courses, and gets no success can easily be told that he should blame himself for not using the tools correctly. Classic hallmark of woo.

As always, part of the free market includes Caveat emptor.

[Moochie]

You are now willing to send me all your money, aren't you? :)


Another website for you guys:

http://www.kevinhogan.com/index.htm

I've browsed through this guy's website and he's selling products like "Covert Hypnosis"; "Covert Influence"; "Secrets of Body Language", etc. Apparently, he's even made his way into some magazines like Cosmopolitan and Men's Health (he also has some pictures with Heidi Klum and a couple of Playmates. I must confess i am thinking about quitting my current job and starting my own NLP company).
How does a pseudo-scientific subject become a widespread business? Why are major companies sending their workers to NLP courses so they can learn all these rapport and influence techniques that don't even work?
A simples search on Yahoo for NLP will produce several pages of results. Some of them are just plain funny, like this NLP Jedi Master (http://modernjedi.com/), others appear more credible.
Isn't there some sort of governing body watching over this?

The trouble is, when I come across someone who is practicing these "techniques," they're so transparently obvious. Rather than come across as building rapport, the just appear creepy, as in exhibitionist creepy. :D


M.

[Iknoweverything]

Sorry for the late reply, I had a great time in NY thanks.

JFranka I don’t disagree with you.. I will ignore the fishing.

I would like to reiterate that initially in this thread I said that I was responding to the statement that all NLP is BS

I was never here to defend various parts of NLP just the limiting statement that ALL NLP is bs. I think that is an unfair statement. Are speech patterns BS ? I don’t honestly know nor have I claimed to.

I never once stated you can get someone to do something they don’t want to.

Maybe the way this could be tested would be to have a telesales teams make 1000 calls a day, a team using a NLP Scripts and another team doing what ever they usually do. I honestly have no idea if it would have any impact at all. If a speech pattern can be used as effectively as any other sales technique it would be just as valid, as a technique not some mystical theory. It would be a lot easier to train staff quickly and have many other business implications. If indeed it did prove to be more detrimental than a standard sales team then of course, the results would be easier to judge. So on from the microwave

What about a 500k contract as an example? a contract that the customer could take from any three of the company sales people. Who is he most likely to buy from if they all offer the same level of service ?. Through my experience it would be the person who they get on best with, the person they feel they can trust, the person that makes them feel good.

How is that achieved ? is that just natural are we just programmed a certain way and that’s it ? I don’t believe that for a second.

Surely human interaction is more “scientific” than that ? how else can we judge if we like someone or not? Isn’t it based on the way they speak, act and look?

Here is where NLP or what I consider in my learning experience as NLP is good.
Its about asking your mind what is possible. Once you give it the chance to create new outcomes it will be more likely to spot signs and opportunities congruent with the mental goals/outcomes you have in mind. If you are not focused on the positive outcomes you may be more likely to see negative signs thus putting you into a negative doubtful state and acting in accordance with those perceptions. I could put this in a sales context but I am tired. And this is not exclusive to NLP I just used this as an example of where it helps ME.
.
I make no Scientific claim within this text nor do I make any claim at at all. I am just telling you what works for me.

All I can say to you remirol is what is your experience? what have you done in your life? What jobs have you had ? how many people have you helped ? how much do you contribute to charity monthly ? How much do you actually do for humanity. I can guarantee not nearly as much as me and I am pretty sure my judgement on that is correct.

[remirol]

I would like to reiterate that initially in this thread I said that I was responding to the statement that all NLP is BS

I was never here to defend various parts of NLP just the limiting statement that ALL NLP is bs. I think that is an unfair statement.

You can defend it, as a start, by pointing to a part of NLP which you do not feel is BS. Then we can dig into that part.

All I can say to you remirol is what is your experience? what have you done in your life? What jobs have you had ? how many people have you helped ? how much do you contribute to charity monthly ? How much do you actually do for humanity. I can guarantee not nearly as much as me and I am pretty sure my judgement on that is correct.

Yeah, I'll take "Poisoning the well" for 100, Alex.

Sorry, but who I am, what I do, and what I have done is not relevant to the topic, which is whether or not there are any parts of NLP that work. What _is_ very relevant is how evasive you become when asked about specific techniques or portions of NLP that work, to the point of being willing to commit ad hominems rather than actually respond.

[Iknoweverything]

You can defend it, as a start, by pointing to a part of NLP which you do not feel is BS. Then we can dig into that part.



Yeah, I'll take "Poisoning the well" for 100, Alex.

Sorry, but who I am, what I do, and what I have done is not relevant to the topic, which is whether or not there are any parts of NLP that work. What _is_ very relevant is how evasive you become when asked about specific techniques or portions of NLP that work, to the point of being willing to commit ad hominems rather than actually respond.

Remirol the reason I said this was not because of ego it was to gain an understanding of how your belief system manifests in your life.

I did respond with some things I said the internal questions you can ask yourself allow you to create better mental outcomes in your mind. Once you have good mental pictures in your mind you will act in congruence with that picture thus producing better results.

No need to be aggressive all the time mate we all are here to learn including me.

[remirol]

Remirol the reason I said this was not because of ego it was to gain an understanding of how your belief system manifests in your life.

And everything about me is still irrelevant to the question of whether NLP is just a bunch of BS.

I did respond with some things I said the internal questions you can ask yourself allow you to create better mental outcomes in your mind. Once you have good mental pictures in your mind you will act in congruence with that picture thus producing better results.

What specific technique from NLP do you claim this is?

[Iknoweverything]

And everything about me is still irrelevant to the question of whether NLP is just a bunch of BS.

Thats fine Remirol think as you wish its a freeworld!

How about if we just say you are right and I am wrong and you can agree with that.

[remirol]

How about if we just say you are right and I am wrong and you can agree with that.

I've got a better idea. Would you like to mention any specific techniques from NLP that you feel _aren't_ a bunch of BS?

See, this is the forum of an _educational_ foundation. And if any of this stuff actually works (which I doubt, because things go _very_ well for me and I can assure you I know no NLP techniques), then I'd certainly be curious to learn how and why. Also, I think it would raise some very interesting discussions about legal and social aspects of using NLP.

However, all these worthwhile discussions are running into one stumbling block: nobody in this thread seems to be willing to say that any specific part of NLP actually works! One certainly starts to believe that some posters would rather have a feel-good backpatting session where we all reassure ourselves, as opposed to actually learning something.

[Iknoweverything]

I've got a better idea. Would you like to mention any specific techniques from NLP that you feel _aren't_ a bunch of BS?

See, this is the forum of an _educational_ foundation. And if any of this stuff actually works (which I doubt, because things go _very_ well for me and I can assure you I know no NLP techniques), then I'd certainly be curious to learn how and why. Also, I think it would raise some very interesting discussions about legal and social aspects of using NLP.

However, all these worthwhile discussions are running into one stumbling block: nobody in this thread seems to be willing to say that any specific part of NLP actually works! One certainly starts to believe that some posters would rather have a feel-good backpatting session where we all reassure ourselves, as opposed to actually learning something.

That is a fair post remirol. I would spend 3 hrs of your life reading a nlp book that covers every aspect of it. Try some things out and see what parts of it you think are useful and what is utter bs. You may still be of the opionion that it is all BS. The only problem is if you attempt to learn anything with a preconception of BS i doubt you would have much luck as you would want things to fail. I spose you could describe some parts of NLP pure Placebo drivers and we know how powerful that is.

[remirol]

That is a fair post remirol. I would spend 3 hrs of your life reading a nlp book that covers every aspect of it. Try some things out and see what parts of it you think are useful and what is utter bs.

So... you don't know which parts are useful and which parts are BS? See, I don't want to spend my hard-earned money on a book I suspect may be entirely BS (though to be honest I value the 3 hours more than I value the ten bucks, or whatever).

Also, there's a problem here -- how would I tell the difference between the parts that are supposed to work (but I'm just doing them wrong) and the parts that are BS? This just doesn't seem to be a good way to learn anything, honestly. I mean, can you imagine a science textbook that came with the disclaimer "Half the experiments in here will never work"? That wouldn't be very productive at all, would it?

[Iknoweverything]

I never expected that as a reply. Especially the 3hrs of my life bit :)

[Toke]

I never expected that as a reply. Especially the 3hrs of my life bit
Something more substantial would help.

[remirol]

I never expected that as a reply. Especially the 3hrs of my life bit :)

Time is one of the few irreplaceable resources. I'm not averse to wasting mine (I post on webforums, for ghod's sake), but I do like to at least be aware on the way in that I'm wasting it, and I prefer to waste it in ways that _i_ choose, rather than discover later in "Oh, all that was a bunch of wasted time."

[JFrankA]

Sorry for the late reply, I had a great time in NY thanks.

JFranka I don’t disagree with you.. I will ignore the fishing.



I wasn't fishing. I was being straight-forward. You are making a claim that we don't know enough - that it does work. We are asking for evidence, and you are providing none.



I would like to reiterate that initially in this thread I said that I was responding to the statement that all NLP is BS

I was never here to defend various parts of NLP just the limiting statement that ALL NLP is bs. I think that is an unfair statement. Are speech patterns BS ? I don’t honestly know nor have I claimed to.

I never once stated you can get someone to do something they don’t want to.


Perhaps not. However, you were saying that it does work, period. And saying that without providing any evidence.

In fact, up until this point, you never ever mentioned that I NLP can't get people to do what they don't want to do. Up until this point, you've never agreed with me. In fact, you still haven't agreed with me. You've just sidewinded yourself in case you need to backpedal a bit without making seem like you have.


Maybe the way this could be tested would be to have a telesales teams make 1000 calls a day, a team using a NLP Scripts and another team doing what ever they usually do. I honestly have no idea if it would have any impact at all.


Yet you still advocate it. It works for you, but you don't know if it would work for someone else, or a group of people. So how do you not know emphatically that NLP is really working for you or if it's something else?


If a speech pattern can be used as effectively as any other sales technique it would be just as valid, as a technique not some mystical theory.


I've been in several customer service jobs which includes sales or not, as well as performing on the side. Let me tell you, there are HUNDREDS of different sales techniques. A lot of which I had to sit through and do while I worked. In one year, I was trained in three completely different sales techinques, which include using speech patterns by one company. One included flip charts that you had to access while you were talking to the customer!

So there are tons of "sales techinques". Some that include NLP and some do not. So if so many may or may not work over a broad spectrum of people, then NLP is not really THE method.

That's the arguement. If NLP works just as well as "Bob's Brand New Speech Pattern/Sales Technique", then why should NLP be cost hundreds of dollars to learn whereas "Bob's Brand New Speech Pattern/Sales Technique" which provides the same result, sells for $20?

Also, anything that does work in NLP can easily be found free on the internet or a magic book (read: perfomance magic - not the woo kind), or even a psychology101 text book. There are basic psychology tricks that do work, but again, I must stress this, only on the willing or maybe the confused.


It would be a lot easier to train staff quickly and have many other business implications. If indeed it did prove to be more detrimental than a standard sales team then of course, the results would be easier to judge. So on from the microwave


I've been through quite a few. They all say basically the same thing: listen to your customer. Respond honestly and tactfully. Be yourself.


What about a 500k contract as an example? a contract that the customer could take from any three of the company sales people. Who is he most likely to buy from if they all offer the same level of service ?. Through my experience it would be the person who they get on best with, the person they feel they can trust, the person that makes them feel good.


I'll go along with you there up to a point. A really shewd businessman wouldn't care whether he liked the salesperson or not, but would care more about "how does this contract benefit my company?" Especially at the 500K contract level.


How is that achieved ? is that just natural are we just programmed a certain way and that’s it ? I don’t believe that for a second.

Surely human interaction is more “scientific” than that ? how else can we judge if we like someone or not? Isn’t it based on the way they speak, act and look?


I'll agree with you there. However, what NLPer's who sell this stuff are claiming that it will work everytime with anyone. That's the rub. That kind of "techinque" doesn't work. The basics psychology does work. But not all the time, and it's not NLP.


Here is where NLP or what I consider in my learning experience as NLP is good.
Its about asking your mind what is possible. Once you give it the chance to create new outcomes it will be more likely to spot signs and opportunities congruent with the mental goals/outcomes you have in mind. If you are not focused on the positive outcomes you may be more likely to see negative signs thus putting you into a negative doubtful state and acting in accordance with those perceptions. I could put this in a sales context but I am tired. And this is not exclusive to NLP I just used this as an example of where it helps ME.


That's all very well and good, but then, that could apply to anything. For example, I lost 120 pounds in two years via weight watchers and going to the gym. I could say that weight watchers was the thing that gave me the "positive attitude to accomplish my goals". But honestly, it wasn't. It was a good aid in helping me keep track of what I ate, i.e. calorie intake, fat intake, nutritional value of the food I was eating, etc, but it wasn't.

I kept to the diet because I decided to keep to it. It had nothing to do with NLP, hypnosis, god, motivational speakers, etc, etc. I decided to do it, I made decisions, so I did it.


I make no Scientific claim within this text nor do I make any claim at at all. I am just telling you what works for me.


And that's the trouble: there is no scientific claims that these NLP salespeople can use as evidence. It's all anidotal evidence. Experience alone is not evidence.

By saying "it works for me, you should experience it", you are making statements that are no different than saying "praying works for me, you should experience it".

[Iknoweverything]

I expected a little better than that from you Jfranka. Good Luck with what ever you believe. I don't have the will or energy to get into a long discussion with you, its pointless.I am back pedalling and changing my
story all the time and I think I can make people do what ever I want with NLP, your right. All NLP is BS You are right and I am wrong so there is nothing else for you to be right about.

Thanks

[JFrankA]

I expected a little better than that from you Jfranka. Good Luck with what ever you believe. I don't have the will or energy to get into a long discussion with you, its pointless.I am back pedalling and changing my
story all the time and I think I can make people do what ever I want with NLP, your right. All NLP is BS You are right and I am wrong so there is nothing else for you to be right about.

Thanks

And I expected more from you.

Here's the discussion in a nutshell: We are saying that these people who are selling NLP instructions for $100 or more a pop are frauds. NLP is not powerful enough to get girls to go to bed with you, to make people buy their product, etc.

NLP, or any other "speech pattern technique" works on some basic psychological techniques that are easily found in any psychological text book. The basic psychological tricks do work, but then again, they are tricks. They can be easily avoided if the subject on the receiving end is a) aware of what is happening, or b) thinking critically or c) is not confused or d) is unwilling to fall for it, or a combination of some of these.

As a performer, I use hypnosis and NLP and some other techniques to achieve the effect I am going for, but in my case it works because no one I chose to interact with is doing any of the list above. Indeed, I actually pick out who I want to work with based upon their willingness to participate. Even then, I sometimes, though rarely, miss.

Now you tell us to "try it ourselves" and we are telling you, "we have and the results aren't good'. Now you're saying we aren't doing it right or don't have enough experience or just find the bits that work for you. And we are saying that those statements are the same statements we hear from people who tell us that prayer works or The Secret works, or anything like that.

Yes, NLP is different because it is based on some very basic psychological facts that can be repeated, however, the idea that it can change a person into some kind of super-salesman and another person it makes no difference means that there's more than likely another thing going on. And those basic psychological techniques can be learned anywhere. A lot of the times for free and not as a way of "getting that sale" or "bagging that girl".

I'm sorry if I insulted you, but if we are going to have a discussion, we have to cover all the bases. I don't know why you are quitting so easily, because I've been up front and complete with you. I know I have been "wordy" but that's the way I am. But, I haven't been hiding what the disagreement was. I may have been thick in understanding what you are saying, and I'm sorry if I have. But if we are going to have a pro-con discussion, then it has to be upfront, open and complete.

[Iknoweverything]

And I expected more from you.

Here's the discussion in a nutshell: We are saying that these people who are selling NLP instructions for $100 or more a pop are frauds. NLP is not powerful enough to get girls to go to bed with you, to make people buy their product, etc.

NLP, or any other "speech pattern technique" works on some basic psychological techniques that are easily found in any psychological text book. The basic psychological tricks do work, but then again, they are tricks. They can be easily avoided if the subject on the receiving end is a) aware of what is happening, or b) thinking critically or c) is not confused or d) is unwilling to fall for it, or a combination of some of these.

As a performer, I use hypnosis and NLP and some other techniques to achieve the effect I am going for, but in my case it works because no one I chose to interact with is doing any of the list above. Indeed, I actually pick out who I want to work with based upon their willingness to participate. Even then, I sometimes, though rarely, miss.

Now you tell us to "try it ourselves" and we are telling you, "we have and the results aren't good'. Now you're saying we aren't doing it right or don't have enough experience or just find the bits that work for you. And we are saying that those statements are the same statements we hear from people who tell us that prayer works or The Secret works, or anything like that.

Yes, NLP is different because it is based on some very basic psychological facts that can be repeated, however, the idea that it can change a person into some kind of super-salesman and another person it makes no difference means that there's more than likely another thing going on. And those basic psychological techniques can be learned anywhere. A lot of the times for free and not as a way of "getting that sale" or "bagging that girl".

I'm sorry if I insulted you, but if we are going to have a discussion, we have to cover all the bases. I don't know why you are quitting so easily, because I've been up front and complete with you. I know I have been "wordy" but that's the way I am. But, I haven't been hiding what the disagreement was. I may have been thick in understanding what you are saying, and I'm sorry if I have. But if we are going to have a pro-con discussion, then it has to be upfront, open and complete.

Thats great Jfranka, The speech patterns are a small part of what I have learned and I have expressed my opinion on them in many of my replies. I learned that Ross Jeffries and Kenrick Stuff well over 5 years ago. I tried it out for a few weeks and came to the same conclusions as you. So I really do agree with you on the specific points mentioned above, I dont think I said anything different.

There are however other things that in my experience work for me. Questions you can ask yourself to create better visual pictures of outcomes

We talk about preying and the secret here. I think you are right, in my understanding there is a mechanism in place here but its nothing mystical or supernatural as explained in religion and other pseudo science.

What i do find annoying since I have been here is that many people seem to assume I am a quack or am part of the BELIEVER crowd. If I was selling NLP or my business had anything to do with it I to would be questioning my stance, but I'm not. Maybe we should create another thread where we can discuss the entire subject of NLP.

Good luck

[Eddie Dane]

[QUOTE=MikeSun5;4733272
A friend of mine turned me on to that speed seduction nonsense and had me read The Game and The Revelation. [/QUOTE]

I read the Game. In bed, next to my wife.
To be honest I found it hugely entertaining. Perhaps one of the funniest books I read that year.

Most of it is just social skills, though. All written out in "patterns" so that even an autistic person could remember the drill.

If you see an attractive woman in group, make contact with men in that group and work your way towards her.
If you see an ugly girl with a pretty one, start talking to the ugly one and ignore the pretty one for half an hour. Then start talking to her.
Make sure you stand out a little. Nobody notices a nerdy wallflower.
Etc Etc Etc.

I might even have tried out some of that stuff if wasn't so afraid to get castrated in my sleep by Mrs Dane.

[Axiom_Blade]

I read the Game. In bed, next to my wife.
To be honest I found it hugely entertaining. Perhaps one of the funniest books I read that year.

Most of it is just social skills, though. All written out in "patterns" so that even an autistic person could remember the drill.


The problem is, I know people who've read that book, and they didn't think it was funny. They tried everything in there, and when it didn't work, instead of quitting and trying something else, they bought more books, and even started going to seduction seminars that cost hundreds of dollars.

When you're already in a hole, the first thing to do is quit digging.

[Lothario]

What i do find annoying since I have been here is that many people seem to assume I am a quack or am part of the BELIEVER crowd. If I was selling NLP or my business had anything to do with it I to would be questioning my stance, but I'm not. Maybe we should create another thread where we can discuss the entire subject of NLP.

Good luck

It seems we all agree that NLP cannot be used to manipulate anyone. I think a more general discussion about NLP would be interesting.
However, in the absence of large-scale controlled tests, there isn't much we can use to prove any particular aspect of NLP. We'll be left with our own personal experience, which really isn't evidence.

I read the Game. In bed, next to my wife.
To be honest I found it hugely entertaining. Perhaps one of the funniest books I read that year.

Most of it is just social skills, though. All written out in "patterns" so that even an autistic person could remember the drill.

If you see an attractive woman in group, make contact with men in that group and work your way towards her.
If you see an ugly girl with a pretty one, start talking to the ugly one and ignore the pretty one for half an hour. Then start talking to her.
Make sure you stand out a little. Nobody notices a nerdy wallflower.
Etc Etc Etc.

I might even have tried out some of that stuff if wasn't so afraid to get castrated in my sleep by Mrs Dane.

I agree. I also read The Game and i think that apart from Jeffries, most pick-up artists are just really good at what they do. What they sell is plain old social skills dressed up like some super-powerful method. I have no problem with that (the prices they charge their customers are ridiculous, though). What i've seen happen is that you give The Game to an internet nerd and he will think he's found a "magic bullet" that will solve all his problems. All he needs to do is "neg" or "takeaway" his way into some girl's pants, while his real problem is that he is still an internet nerd.

The problem is, I know people who've read that book, and they didn't think it was funny. They tried everything in there, and when it didn't work, instead of quitting and trying something else, they bought more books, and even started going to seduction seminars that cost hundreds of dollars.

When you're already in a hole, the first thing to do is quit digging.

Like i said, no amount of social skills will help if you don't work on yourself first. And yeah, paying hundreds of dollars for something you can learn elsewhere for free is a waste of money.

[Eddie Dane]

In the Game there is a scene where Ross Jeffries seduces a waitress in a diner with NLP. Just like that, out of the blue.

It's one of the few scenes that made me go 'yeah right'.

I was sorta into Tony Robbins in the late eighties, but I never tried any of the NLP stuff on people because I just knew that it would be weird. You'd just come across as nuts, giving people anchors an looking at them funny.

Question: is the theory of "reading eyes" a scientific theory, or did it originate with the NLP crowd? You know, if someone looks up to the left they are accessing their visual memories etc?

I swear that some customs guy used that on me when I visited the States in 1997.
First I had to fill in that stupid questionnaire that asks if you're a terrorist or a drug dealer, then the guy asked me similar questions and stared into my eyes.

Does customs in California use NLP?

[Lothario]

In the Game there is a scene where Ross Jeffries seduces a waitress in a diner with NLP. Just like that, out of the blue.

It's one of the few scenes that made me go 'yeah right'.

I was sorta into Tony Robbins in the late eighties, but I never tried any of the NLP stuff on people because I just knew that it would be weird. You'd just come across as nuts, giving people anchors an looking at them funny.

Question: is the theory of "reading eyes" a scientific theory, or did it originate with the NLP crowd? You know, if someone looks up to the left they are accessing their visual memories etc?

I swear that some customs guy used that on me when I visited the States in 1997.
First I had to fill in that stupid questionnaire that asks if you're a terrorist or a drug dealer, then the guy asked me similar questions and stared into my eyes.

Does customs in California use NLP?

This is Jeffries doing his stuff - it's a video taken from a BBC show:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xn_oqEOtLYU

It could be faked. It could be that it worked despite NLP and not because of NLP, i really don't know. It's the only video of him outside of a seminar room, so it's a little questionable. The same goes for the scene from "The Game".

I like Tony Robbins because i think he's a pretty good speaker, not because of NLP (which, i think, he doesn't use anymore).

As for the "eye acessing cues", as NLPers call it, they ran some tests a couple of years ago and it's pretty much bunk.

This is Kenrick, i'm not sure what he's doing here but seems like he's setting anchors:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSS0i7ehGpE

Thoughts, opinions?

[JFrankA]

Question: is the theory of "reading eyes" a scientific theory, or did it originate with the NLP crowd? You know, if someone looks up to the left they are accessing their visual memories etc?

I don't know the specifics of the scientific study, but I think that this whole eye thing came from a psychological study before NLP was introduced. If I remember correctly, it was one of the ideas that the originators of NLP based it on. I'll check on that later.

Generally, the psychological theory states, if someone is right handed, looking to their left means that they are remembering something, looking to their right means they are imagining something. This is switched if the person is left-handed. The theory basis is from the left/right brain idea. That one hemisphere of the brain works on intelligence while the other works on emotion.

NLP goes on to say that not only is this true, but (basically) looking up means a visual memory (left for a right handed person) or imaging (right for a right handed person), straight is auditory, and downward right is feeling and emotions, downward left is kind of an internal dialog. And once again, left-handed people mirror this entire thing.

Of course, you're getting more subjective here. Not everyone does that. For example, I tend to stare straight ahead in one spot whether I am imaging or remembering, even in conversation. (Yeah, creepy huh? :) )

I think that this is something some people generally tend to do, but it's not foolproof at all. Not even NLPers say that this is 100% accurate.

[Lothario]

"The assertion that a person has a PRS which can be determined by the direction of eye movements found even less support (Heap 1988) (Morgan, 1993) (Platt 2001). The assertion that matching PRS will increase rapport with the client has also been found to be false. Research has indicated that therapists who match their clients' language using techniques proposed within NLP were rated by the client and external observers as being untrustworthy and ineffective (Heap1988) (Morgan, 1993)".

I found this article that sums it up.
http://www.angelfire.com/art3/inextricablylinked/NLP.htm

[JFrankA]

"The assertion that a person has a PRS which can be determined by the direction of eye movements found even less support (Heap 1988) (Morgan, 1993) (Platt 2001). The assertion that matching PRS will increase rapport with the client has also been found to be false. Research has indicated that therapists who match their clients' language using techniques proposed within NLP were rated by the client and external observers as being untrustworthy and ineffective (Heap1988) (Morgan, 1993)".

I found this article that sums it up.
http://www.angelfire.com/art3/inextricablylinked/NLP.htm

Wow. Thanks for the great article. :-)

[remirol]

This is Jeffries doing his stuff - it's a video taken from a BBC show:

It could be faked.

Gee, ya think? :oldroll:

OK, that sounds a bit cynical. Let me point some things out though:

1) There's a camera and cameraman present. THERE IS A CAMERA PRESENT. And that woman doesn't look at the camera _once_ in the first minute of their "conversation", _or_ when the camera passes by beforehand. This is not how amateurs respond to a camera; they stare directly at it and ask questions about it, usually "what's the camera for" or "am i on TV?" That woman is a professional actress.
2) They are using her likeness on TV -- so where's the signed release? I'm not saying there wasn't one -- I'm saying there is _surely_ one. When you do things like this, you have to get a release, so we can also chalk that up as another mark against this being a "happenstance" meeting.

I could go on about the convenient guy who happens to stop to talk to the women _just_ before Ross is ready to do his 'demonstration' (showing Ross who to talk to), about how Ross has selected the filming location (making it easy to set something up and have a plant waiting beforehand), but really, it mostly just goes to show why Youtube "demos" aren't worth squat as evidence. It could be exactly what it appears to be, but -- I would bet money against it, and I certainly wouldn't take this as an example of NLP actually being effective; it's a test without any controls whatsoever, and GIGO applies in these circumstances.

[Moochie]

Remirol the reason I said this was not because of ego it was to gain an understanding of how your belief system manifests in your life.

I did respond with some things I said the internal questions you can ask yourself allow you to create better mental outcomes in your mind. Once you have good mental pictures in your mind you will act in congruence with that picture thus producing better results.

No need to be aggressive all the time mate we all are here to learn including me.

A New Guide To Rational Living (1975) by Ellis and Harper, and based on an earlier (1961) book teaches pretty much the same thing, only they don't call it NLP. And it's as rational as all get-out. :)

If something you've tried works for you then that is a good result. But I wouldn't be too hasty in apportioning the cause of your success to NLP. Perhaps something you read in the literature just helped unleash something in you that was there all the time? Proving cause and effect can be exceptionally difficult.


M.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

"The assertion that a person has a PRS which can be determined by the direction of eye movements found even less support (Heap 1988) (Morgan, 1993) (Platt 2001). The assertion that matching PRS will increase rapport with the client has also been found to be false. Research has indicated that therapists who match their clients' language using techniques proposed within NLP were rated by the client and external observers as being untrustworthy and ineffective (Heap1988) (Morgan, 1993)".

I found this article that sums it up.
http://www.angelfire.com/art3/inextricablylinked/NLP.htm

Thanks for the article Lothario. I tried looking for something like this analysis a couple of weeks ago and could not find anything as complete or succinct.

The only error I see is that it blames NLP for expression "The map is not the territory", whereas it was coined by Alfred Korzybski, the inventor of General Semantics.

I find General Semantics to somewhat less wooish than NLP but, as with so many things in life, it is like the Curate's_egg. :(

[Prometheus]

A New Guide To Rational Living (1975) by Ellis and Harper, and based on an earlier (1961) book teaches pretty much the same thing, only they don't call it NLP. And it's as rational as all get-out. :)

If something you've tried works for you then that is a good result. But I wouldn't be too hasty in apportioning the cause of your success to NLP. Perhaps something you read in the literature just helped unleash something in you that was there all the time? Proving cause and effect can be exceptionally difficult.


M.

About 10 years ago, someone showed me a print interview with Ross Jeffries which had him admitting that his NLP claims were bogus and what he really did was give guys a false sense of self-confidence. Can't remember which periodical it was in, though.

[Lothario]

The only error I see is that it blames NLP for expression "The map is not the territory", whereas it was coined by Alfred Korzybski, the inventor of General Semantics.


Read a little further, it's correct.

"All 3 were considered by Grinder and Bandler to be highly competent in their fields, and the patterns they detected in their therapy became the basis of NLP, along with influences from Korzybski and Bateson (who coined the NLP expressions "The map is not the territory", and "the difference that makes the difference", respectively)".

I just don't get this part:
"Ethical concerns of manipulation have also been voiced: “so long as the influenced party's outcome is achieved at the same time as the influencer, this is "influencing with integrity." However, "Achieving your own outcome at the expense of or even without regard for the other party constitutes manipulation. What makes this particular 'informed manipulation' so frightening is that people with these skills acquire such personal power that they are able to affect people deeply, and their capacity to misguide others is thereby increased to the point of evil."

On one hand, it doesn't work. On the other hand, it's an effective manipulation tool? Doesn't make any sense. Other than that, the article seems pretty solid.

About 10 years ago, someone showed me a print interview with Ross Jeffries which had him admitting that his NLP claims were bogus and what he really did was give guys a false sense of self-confidence. Can't remember which periodical it was in, though.

Really? I imagine all the guys who paid thousands of dollars to attend his seminars would be laughing their asses off if they knew they've been fed a placebo. Haha. Really funny.
If you find that periodical, let me know. I've had a couple of interesting discussions with people who strongly believed they had done some nasty stuff to women with Speed Seduction.

[Moochie]

About 10 years ago, someone showed me a print interview with Ross Jeffries which had him admitting that his NLP claims were bogus and what he really did was give guys a false sense of self-confidence. Can't remember which periodical it was in, though.

Unsurprising. Jeffries was running a business, after all, so had all the motivation necessary to sell it. I don't know whether it's native know-how or something else, but I recognized a long time ago that certain kinds of people characteristically undervalue themselves, and that if you can help them to "see" that, they would often become bolder in their self-expression. It's like, the quality and ability was there all the time, but somehow the brakes were applied even after any brakes were needed or necessary.

On the other hand, there seem to be certain kinds of people that have never learned to apply any brakes of any kinds. They're the ones that perplex me, and frighten me a little.


M.

[Moochie]

Read a little further, it's correct.

"All 3 were considered by Grinder and Bandler to be highly competent in their fields, and the patterns they detected in their therapy became the basis of NLP, along with influences from Korzybski and Bateson (who coined the NLP expressions "The map is not the territory", and "the difference that makes the difference", respectively)".

I just don't get this part:
"Ethical concerns of manipulation have also been voiced: “so long as the influenced party's outcome is achieved at the same time as the influencer, this is "influencing with integrity." However, "Achieving your own outcome at the expense of or even without regard for the other party constitutes manipulation. What makes this particular 'informed manipulation' so frightening is that people with these skills acquire such personal power that they are able to affect people deeply, and their capacity to misguide others is thereby increased to the point of evil."

On one hand, it doesn't work. On the other hand, it's an effective manipulation tool? Doesn't make any sense. Other than that, the article seems pretty solid.



Really? I imagine all the guys who paid thousands of dollars to attend his seminars would be laughing their asses off if they knew they've been fed a placebo. Haha. Really funny.
If you find that periodical, let me know. I've had a couple of interesting discussions with people who strongly believed they had done some nasty stuff to women with Speed Seduction.


The thing is, we're all influencing each other all the time, whether intentional or not; peer-group pressure doesn't stop during the teen years.


M.

[JFrankA]

The thing is, we're all influencing each other all the time, whether intentional or not; peer-group pressure doesn't stop during the teen years.


M.

That is true. We all do it without NLP everyday. But, in IMHO, the bottom line is always always always this: you cannont make someone do what they don't want to do.

.....unless you put a gun to their head or something....

[vIQleS]

How does a pseudo-scientific subject become a widespread business? Why are major companies sending their workers to NLP courses so they can learn all these rapport and influence techniques that don't even work?

The same way any business does. A certain percentage of the population have a natural talent for working hard, marketing, charisma etc (or all of the above).

These people would probably have become just as successful in any business or job...

[vIQleS]

That is a fair post remirol. I would spend 3 hrs of your life reading a nlp book that covers every aspect of it. Try some things out and see what parts of it you think are useful and what is utter bs. You may still be of the opionion that it is all BS. The only problem is if you attempt to learn anything with a preconception of BS i doubt you would have much luck as you would want things to fail. I spose you could describe some parts of NLP pure Placebo drivers and we know how powerful that is.

Translation:

"None of it works, but if any given person tries the techniques they may find that some of them appear to work.

I can't list them here though, as the techiniques which appear to work will vary from person to person."

Is that more or less what you were trying to say?

Candy is dandy but liquor is quicker.

(Ogden nash?)

Willy Wonka... :D

[Moochie]

That is true. We all do it without NLP everyday. But, in IMHO, the bottom line is always always always this: you cannont make someone do what they don't want to do.

.....unless you put a gun to their head or something....

Sometimes peer pressure can seem like that. :)


M.

[JFrankA]

Sometimes peer pressure can seem like that. :)


M.

:)

very true. In fact, peer pressure is a very helpful aid in my stage hypnosis shows... :)

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Read a little further, it's correct.

"All 3 were considered by Grinder and Bandler to be highly competent in their fields, and the patterns they detected in their therapy became the basis of NLP, along with influences from Korzybski and Bateson (who coined the NLP expressions "The map is not the territory", and "the difference that makes the difference", respectively)".

<snip>



Ha. My bad. Either I read slower or think faster. :o

[MikeSun5]

What about a 500k contract as an example? a contract that the customer could take from any three of the company sales people. Who is he most likely to buy from if they all offer the same level of service ?. Through my experience it would be the person who they get on best with, the person they feel they can trust, the person that makes them feel good.

...all of which can be achieved without using NLP techniques...

How is that achieved ? is that just natural are we just programmed a certain way and that’s it ? I don’t believe that for a second.

Are you JOKING??? That's the ENTIRE concept of NLP!!! According to NLP's nonsense literature, we ARE programmed a certain way, and if you practice NLP like you say you do, you must certainly belive that. For a second. Either that or you're misleading this thread just like you are your "clients."

My whole point is that everyone is "programmed" different. Therefore, NLP can't possibly work as general techniques applied to everyone. NLP works by the power of suggestion, just like homeopathy. If a person isn't aware that NLP is being "used" on them, it won't work.

Surely human interaction is more “scientific” than that ? how else can we judge if we like someone or not? Isn’t it based on the way they speak, act and look?

Exactly. It has nothing to do with watching eye movements, breathing cues, subtle body language, "establishing a PRS," etc. Maybe a scratch on the nose is simply a scratch on the nose, but an NLP practitioner will see deception or avoidance of the subject. Speech patterns and eye movements are as arbitrary as shirt color when it comes to creating rapport with someone.


Here is where NLP or what I consider in my learning experience as NLP is good.
Its about asking your mind what is possible. Once you give it the chance to create new outcomes it will be more likely to spot signs and opportunities congruent with the mental goals/outcomes you have in mind. If you are not focused on the positive outcomes you may be more likely to see negative signs thus putting you into a negative doubtful state and acting in accordance with those perceptions...
...I make no Scientific claim within this text nor do I make any claim at at all. I am just telling you what works for me....

Ahh, perfect! Try this:
Take this entire quoted section and replace the term "NLP" with a term like "homeopathy," "magic crystals," or "Miracle Spring Water." Any number of them will do, and they'll all fit perfectly.
It's all in your MIND! You said it yourself!
Iknoweverything (and other NLP believers) just need to keep talking to thoroughly demolish NLP. That last post was a doozy!

[Iknoweverything]

I asked a question and you never helped with it you just spouted aggressive assumptions

...all of which can be achieved without using NLP techniques..

REALLY ?? Oh my you are a ray of enlightenment ! I never would of thought that was true lol

Are you JOKING??? That's the ENTIRE concept of NLP!!! According to NLP's nonsense literature, we ARE programmed a certain way, and if you practice NLP like you say you do, you must certainly belive that. For a second. Either that or you're misleading this thread just like you are your "clients.

ARE YOU DEMENTED PERHAPS, I was asking the question rather than making a statement for me to answer. Blame my grammar and your aggressive output method. I suggest exercise

Exactly. It has nothing to do with watching eye movements, breathing cues, subtle body language, "establishing a PRS," etc. Maybe a scratch on the nose is simply a scratch on the nose, but an NLP practitioner will see deception or avoidance of the subject. Speech patterns and eye movements are as arbitrary as shirt color when it comes to creating rapport with someone.

Are you able to answer the question instead of talking negative bull ? that would be more helpful. I asked how does it work, how does a person judge another, what is the mechanism

Ahh, perfect! Try this:
Take this entire quoted section and replace the term "NLP" with a term like "homeopathy," "magic crystals," or "Miracle Spring Water." Any number of them will do, and they'll all fit perfectly.
It's all in your MIND! You said it yourself!
Iknoweverything (and other NLP believers) just need to keep talking to thoroughly demolish NLP. That last post was a doozy!

This is your best sentence so far. You FINALLY understand it. Shame about the continual arrogant aggressive attitude but of COURSE I SAID IT MYSELF. You understand it, but I am still sure you don't get it

[Iknoweverything]

Hang on Mike I think I am getting it now, you attempted to get girls using special NLP patterns and you got nothing "as usual". As you were unable to get some action using these secret NLP speech patterns your frustration built, you saw other guys with all the girls and you kept on getting nothing. Now your frustration has reached boiling point and it all has to come out on here. Its ok my friend

[Lothario]

This is your best sentence so far. You FINALLY understand it. Shame about the continual arrogant aggressive attitude but of COURSE I SAID IT MYSELF. You understand it, but I am still sure you don't get it

So you've spent all this time trying to convince us NLP isn't just woo and now you admit it's just a placebo? Drinking your own urine can be a placebo too if you believe in it. The fact that NLP can have a placebo effect doesn't make it any good.

[Lothario]

Hang on Mike I think I am getting it now, you attempted to get girls using special NLP patterns and you got nothing "as usual". As you were unable to get some action using these secret NLP speech patterns your frustration built, you saw other guys with all the girls and you kept on getting nothing. Now your frustration has reached boiling point and it all has to come out on here. Its ok my friend

Ad hominem arguments don't help either. Everybody's treated you with respect so far.

[Toke]

A few years ago I read a NLP book of my fathers. It was quite entertaining and decriped it as a therapy form, there was ridicule of gestalt therapy and others, plus some derision of others who claimed to know NLP, (the author claimed to be the inventor of it).

I was wondering "If it is so good, why is everyone not using it"

[Iknoweverything]

next..

[Iknoweverything]

The fact that NLP can have a placebo effect doesn't make it any good.

I don't agree with that. That is the whole point of it.

[Lothario]

I don't agree with that. That is the whole point of it.

No. The whole point of any form of therapy is to do better than a mere placebo.

[Axiom_Blade]

Hang on Mike I think I am getting it now, you attempted to get girls using special NLP patterns and you got nothing "as usual". As you were unable to get some action using these secret NLP speech patterns your frustration built, you saw other guys with all the girls and you kept on getting nothing. Now your frustration has reached boiling point and it all has to come out on here. Its ok my friend

Wow, NLP sucks at trolling, too.

I don't agree with that. That is the whole point of it.


If NLP is all in your mind, why have all the seminars and books and stuff? Why not just use positive affirmations? Or, heck... a lucky rock?

[vIQleS]

Wow, NLP sucks at trolling, too.



If NLP is all in your mind, why have all the seminars and books and stuff? Why not just use positive affirmations? Or, heck... a lucky rock?

Or homeopathy. It's got to be cheaper - specially if you DIY.

[JFrankA]

I don't agree with that. That is the whole point of it.

I'm sorry, that's your oddest response yet.

If you are such a propent of NLP, saying that we must experience it in order to know what would work and how it would work for ourselves, why now would you try to convince us it works if you admit it is a placebo?

Especially since the only "evidence" that you have given us are ancedotes that are about yourself. You seem to be saying that you KNOW it's a placebo, and yet it still works on you.

I'm sorry, but you have just completely invalidated yourself.

[Senex]

Quit the Site ? Sorry my friend, I have been traveling. You want to know exactly what I have been doing ?.
Hmmm... I didn't ask but whatever you did must have been a big NLP success for you to wish to share here...
I fly to Australia on business then spend a day on the beach where I meet two nice ladies. One of the ladies I get on really well with and end up spending the night with her. I am now about to fly to NewYork for a weekend on company expenses and am meeting another lady friend there. I could go on and detail more about how much I earn and how successful and like I am as a person but I do not wish to.
Far be it from you to brag. How do we know what you consider nice ladies, company expense and success are what regular non-NLP people consider as such. You can be be keeping company with tired transvestites, paddling a canoe and feel a happy meal is a score.
My success and how I am liked in the REAL WORLD is a clear demonstration of what I have learned and use .
I guess our experience with you is the non-real world. You're not succeeding in proselytizing NLP or particularly being liked.


All I can say to you remirol is what is your experience? what have you done in your life? What jobs have you had ? how many people have you helped ? how much do you contribute to charity monthly ? How much do you actually do for humanity. I can guarantee not nearly as much as me and I am pretty sure my judgement on that is correct.
This is your argument for NLP? State you are a better person than the person you are arguing with. I can't guarantee a lot, but I can guarantee remirol can put a logical argument together where you fail.

So you've spent all this time trying to convince us NLP isn't just woo and now you admit it's just a placebo? Drinking your own urine can be a placebo too if you believe in it. The fact that NLP can have a placebo effect doesn't make it any good.

I don't agree with that. That is the whole point of it.

This admission has just exploded your entire life. Now that you know and admitted that all your success has been because of a placebo you will undoubtedly be doomed to failure now that you have admitted the truth. Your clients will see through your mirroring techniques. They will feel you are mocking them when you try to reproduce their respiratory timing. Forget about rapport. Anchoring will now and forever be an embarrassment when you try it. Your life will be reframed into discovering your inner woo. Swish will be just as woo as it was ever (even you didn't buy into swish).

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. You should have stuck to woo sites.

[MikeSun5]

Hang on Mike I think I am getting it now, you attempted to get girls using special NLP patterns and you got nothing "as usual". As you were unable to get some action using these secret NLP speech patterns your frustration built, you saw other guys with all the girls and you kept on getting nothing. Now your frustration has reached boiling point and it all has to come out on here. Its ok my friend

:D Wow, you got me! I'm so busted!
Wait, I get it - that post was a value reframe, right? It was meant to place me in a less likeable social frame, thereby decreasing my value, right? Well sorry... I don't believe in NLP so I still feel pretty valuable.

If my aggressive tone offended you, I apologize. I don't think you're stupid, I think NLP is. Unfortunately, you admitting that NLP is a placebo means we no longer have anything to argue about. We seem to be in agreement. NLP is BS, and treating someone with NLP is the same as treating with reiki, crystal therapy, or prayer groups. If you had simply come on here and said "NLP makes some people feel better," you wouldn't have been met with such "aggression."

...either way, I'm sure if we were all face to face with you and you were using your NLP mirroring techniques or whatever, we'd love you.

[Lothario]

Far be it from you to brag. How do we know what you consider nice ladies, company expense and success are what regular non-NLP people consider as such. You can be be keeping company with tired transvestites, paddling a canoe and feel a happy meal is a score.


If you're really talented using embedded commands you can manipulate your way to a big mac and a middle-aged divorcée. Throw in some punctuation ambiguity and you might even get a company paid Fiat Punto.


This admission has just exploded your entire life. Now that you know and admitted that all your success has been because of a placebo you will undoubtedly be doomed to failure now that you have admitted the truth. Your clients will see through your mirroring techniques. They will feel you are mocking them when you try to reproduce their respiratory timing. Forget about rapport. Anchoring will now and forever be an embarrassment when you try it. Your life will be reframed into discovering your inner woo. Swish will be just as woo as it was ever (even you didn't buy into swish).

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. You should have stuck to woo sites.

This will be an interesting case study: does placebo effect cease when the subject becomes aware that it's a placebo?

[Senex]

This will be an interesting case study: does placebo effect cease when the subject becomes aware that it's a placebo?
Absolutely. Iknoweverything will soon be stumbling on his NLP monologues. His swagger will soon be replaced by meekness. Don't build your business persona on a house of cards is the moral to this thread.
If you're really talented using embedded commands you can manipulate your way to a big mac and a middle-aged divorcée. Throw in some punctuation ambiguity and you might even get a company paid Fiat Punto
Hey, hey, hey -- I don't care about big macs or puntos -- but don't be disparaging my favorite demographic.
Yes and I have a degree in psychology, thank you for your eye opening reply

You also stated you know nothing about mentalism, I do.

That makes your replies even more amusing

I missed this earlier. You know something about mentalism yet believe in NLP? You have a degree in psychology and believe in swish? It's much more likely that you watched a few mentalists and bought into their misdirection NLP explanations. You can't actually perform mentalism yourself can you? You just haven't chosen to use your Jedi NLP tricks for amusement. You are such a sucker for mentalist misdirection.

What do you know about mentalism? What effects were you thinking of when you said you know about mentalism?

[Iknoweverything]

LOL!!!!!

[Gord_in_Toronto]

LOL!!!!!

:id:

and

:dl:

[remirol]

LOL!!!!!

So... anything of substance left? Or would you like to go back to the ad hominem trolling and evading the simple question: could you specify which parts of NLP you do not think are BS?

[Lothario]

LOL!!!!!

Is this just a regular "LOL" or is there some NLP persuasion trickery hidden within? I must admit it made me smile so i guess it worked. NLP is powerful, indeed.

[JFrankA]

LOL!!!!!

....?

Okay, what's the joke?

Or are you trying to show superiority?

....it's not working.....

[MikeSun5]

LOL!!!!!

Living Outright Lies?

[Lothario]

Hmm... i suppose Iknoweverything's not going to reply anymore.

I have another question. I saw some courses on "Conversational Hypnosis" being sold together with NLP so i looked it up on wikipedia. It brought me to an entry on "covert hypnosis": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_hypnosis
Once again the name Milton Erickson shows up. He was the source of NLP's language patterns (the same ones being used to "manipulate" people) and from what i understand a great influence in the world of hypnotherapy.
Is Milton's work "woo" or do his concepts of embedded commands and punctuation ambiguity as ways to speak directly to the subconcious have any value when used on a willing patient? Also, what's your take on hypnotherapy?

[MikeSun5]

Hmm... i suppose Iknoweverything's not going to reply anymore.

I have another question. I saw some courses on "Conversational Hypnosis" being sold together with NLP so i looked it up on wikipedia. It brought me to an entry on "covert hypnosis": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_hypnosis
Once again the name Milton Erickson shows up. He was the source of NLP's language patterns (the same ones being used to "manipulate" people) and from what i understand a great influence in the world of hypnotherapy.
Is Milton's work "woo" or do his concepts of embedded commands and punctuation ambiguity as ways to speak directly to the subconcious have any value when used on a willing patient? Also, what's your take on hypnotherapy?

:rolleyes: Don't encourage him. That wiki link made me laugh, though. I hadn't seen that one.

[Iknoweverything]

:rolleyes: Don't encourage him. That wiki link made me laugh, though. I hadn't seen that one.

hah yes you have encouraged me. Much of the aggressive replies I got were not worth responding to. Especially from Senex, poor lad.

Everyone seems confident that they have "debunked" all of NLP so rather than argue any more I am happy to agree with you.

We now seem to be moving onto convert hypnosis. Rather than trying to debunk something can we attack this differently. I would like some help answering these questions instead.

How do people judge if they like someone more than someone else ?

IS there a skill of Persuasion, if there is how is this done ?

Enough with the aggressive negativity, I know i played a part in that to.

[JFrankA]

hah yes you have encouraged me. Much of the aggressive replies I got were not worth responding to. Especially from Senex, poor lad.

Everyone seems confident that they have "debunked" all of NLP so rather than argue any more I am happy to agree with you.

We now seem to be moving onto convert hypnosis. Rather than trying to debunk something can we attack this differently. I would like some help answering these questions instead.

How do people judge if they like someone more than someone else ?

IS there a skill of Persuasion, if there is how is this done ?

Enough with the aggressive negativity, I know i played a part in that to.

*sigh*

Again, hypnosis only works if the subject wants it to. That goes for ANY hypnosis: covert, blatant, or instant.

The only thing I find that works "hypnosis wise" is confusion. Now this my own anecdotal evidence and observations so take it for what it's worth.

In my humble opinion, and please feel free to correct me if you find evidence to the contrary, if you confuse someone enough, they won't be thinking critically. Most people thing critically a lot, but it's not hard to get someone to drop that train of thought. Confusion is the best way. If you get someone confused enough, they are concentrating on what they are confused about you can get in a suggestion in.

Now some people call this "talking to the subconscious" but I call it "confusing someone momentarily". Con men do it all the time and this is exactly what "covert hypnosis" is based upon. When someone says that one must "break the pattern of what someone is used to", to me it's nothing more than a complicated (confusing) way of saying "confuse them". Now I do believe that there are ways of confusing people or making people drop their "critical thinking". But even with that, the basis remains the same: It won't work if the person really doesn't want it to.

Let me give you an example of what I mean. Let's say I decide to do a con on someone. I find a person, usually one who seems preoccupied, not sure of what to do, that sort of thing. I surprise him, tell him a story really quickly and a solution that he will benefit from. Now he's suddenly thrust into a situation that is totally unexpected and (if he heard it right and he thinks he did) will get something out of it. Couple with that the sense of urgency and *WHAM*. I have scammed him.

No NLP, no hypnosis, no convert hypnosis. What I had done was to play with is the person's desires, confuse him into making a snap decision. Sometimes one doesn't have to put a time element into it. Sometimes an awful lot of confidence and bluffing (what I call blustering) work just as well, if not better.

And see, Iknoweverything, that's what you are doing. Whether you are aware of it or not. Apparently you are, because you've already said that NLP is a placebo. If it's true that you are so successful with NLP, it's obvious you are aware that what you are doing is sheer confidence and blustering. Advertisements do it all the time. However, does it work 100%? Never. What's the big thing that all this can never, ever, ever, overcome? The person's true desire.

Now one may fool a person for a while, but, again, IMHO, their true desire will always come out. Always.

[Iknoweverything]

*sigh*

Again, hypnosis only works if the subject wants it to. That goes for ANY hypnosis: covert, blatant, or instant.

The only thing I find that works "hypnosis wise" is confusion. Now this my own anecdotal evidence and observations so take it for what it's worth.

In my humble opinion, and please feel free to correct me if you find evidence to the contrary, if you confuse someone enough, they won't be thinking critically. Most people thing critically a lot, but it's not hard to get someone to drop that train of thought. Confusion is the best way. If you get someone confused enough, they are concentrating on what they are confused about you can get in a suggestion in.

Now some people call this "talking to the subconscious" but I call it "confusing someone momentarily". Con men do it all the time and this is exactly what "covert hypnosis" is based upon. When someone says that one must "break the pattern of what someone is used to", to me it's nothing more than a complicated (confusing) way of saying "confuse them". Now I do believe that there are ways of confusing people or making people drop their "critical thinking". But even with that, the basis remains the same: It won't work if the person really doesn't want it to.

Let me give you an example of what I mean. Let's say I decide to do a con on someone. I find a person, usually one who seems preoccupied, not sure of what to do, that sort of thing. I surprise him, tell him a story really quickly and a solution that he will benefit from. Now he's suddenly thrust into a situation that is totally unexpected and (if he heard it right and he thinks he did) will get something out of it. Couple with that the sense of urgency and *WHAM*. I have scammed him.

No NLP, no hypnosis, no convert hypnosis. What I had done was to play with is the person's desires, confuse him into making a snap decision. Sometimes one doesn't have to put a time element into it. Sometimes an awful lot of confidence and bluffing (what I call blustering) work just as well, if not better.

And see, Iknoweverything, that's what you are doing. Whether you are aware of it or not. Apparently you are, because you've already said that NLP is a placebo. If it's true that you are so successful with NLP, it's obvious you are aware that what you are doing is sheer confidence and blustering. Advertisements do it all the time. However, does it work 100%? Never. What's the big thing that all this can never, ever, ever, overcome? The person's true desire.

Now one may fool a person for a while, but, again, IMHO, their true desire will always come out. Always.

Cant see the point in the *sigh* apart from showing instant arrogance as usual.

I was looking for specific answers to my questions, not a lecture on what I already know.

[JFrankA]

Cant see the point in the *sigh* apart from showing instant arrogance as usual.

I was looking for specific answers to my questions, not a lecture on what I already know.

The *sigh* was not out of arrogance. It was out of sadness because of the number of times I repeat this. That's not arrogance and I'm sorry you saw it like that.

Also, it wasn't a lecture. I know I mentioned you at the end, but it was to point something out, not to reprimand you. Again, I'm sorry you saw it like that.

But you have just shown my point: you *chose* to see it that way. It was something you were looking for. I understand why you would, though.


And I did answer your question, the "IS there a skill of Persuasion, if there is how is this done ?" question. Maybe I was too wordy and I'll boil it down.

1. You cannot change a person's basic desires. No persuasion in the universe can change that.

2. It's possible that during a course of a conversation you may actually find another desire the subject has that she/he hasn't stated. A personal "hidden desire", if you will.

3. It's possible to bypass a person's "critical thinking" in order to persuade them to what you are thinking, but this is always temporary.

4. People have very active imaginations, desires and have critical thinking. The critical thinking, though, can be strong or weak depending on the person and the circumstances that person is presently in.

Methods:

1. It's possible to tap into that "hidden desire" or bypassing critical thinking temporarily by confusing a person.

2. It's possible to tap into that "hidden desire" or bypassing critical thinking temporarily by acting authoritative and using what I call "bluster". (Don't be offended, I use this every time I step onstage to perform hypnosis on people).

3. It's possible to tap into that "hidden desire" or bypassing critical thinking temporarily purely by accident.

(Please note that the "you" here is a general you and not specific to anyone reading this).

That's it. That's what any hypnosis is based upon, that's what NLP is based upon, that's what people who con others try to do, that's what advertisements try to do and they all use different means to this end. It doesn't always work and the same technique won't work for the same person all the time, etc.

It all comes to one basic thing: what the person desires. Period.

[Iknoweverything]

It all comes to one basic thing: what the person desires. Period.

That's great Jfranka i concur with what you say.

You mention People's imagination.

Like I have said, until people have a visual picture they are unable to build a desire for an outcome. This is what persuasion is, questions that you ask people can allow them to create pictures in there mind of desires they did not previously have. Specific questions from NLP/Ericson can give people the opportunity to consider desires they previously did not have an idea of. I whole hearty agree that you cannot get someone to agree to something they dont want to. BUT I do say again that if someone is in a state of limbo the right questions can help them see the desire. What I am saying is that its just another sales/communication technique. I cant see the different between this and any other form of communication.

It still leaves the question " is it more effective that a normal sales technique"

For me it has worked, for me I have had great success using nlp methods. Could I of achieved what I have without them ? I really have no idea. You probably will say yes.

If you looking to NLP to manipulate people against there will it cannot work. If your using NLP to make yourself a better person and have a structured communication tool then I "IN MY EXPERIENCE" have to say its good.

The question still remains. How do we judge someone and how do we decide if we like them better than another person. I am interested for other explanations rather than the NLP ones.

So how ?














My other question about how we judge others has still not been answered.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

<snip>

How do people judge if they like someone more than someone else ?

Arbitrarily. Based on past experiences, prejudices and folk tales. Examples -- never trust a used car salesman, all Canadians are liars and people with narrow eyes are not to be trusted.

IS there a skill of Persuasion, if there is how is this done ?There is no such single skill. There are techniques that sometimes work to convince people of something in non-rational ways but there does not appear to be a coherent theory and if there was NLP, is not it.

Example -- "Would you like fries with that?"


<snip>

[Iknoweverything]

Arbitrarily. Based on past experiences, prejudices and folk tales. Examples -- never trust a used car salesman, all Canadians are liars and people with narrow eyes are not to be trusted.

There is no such single skill. There are techniques that sometimes work to convince people of something in non-rational ways but there does not appear to be a coherent theory and if there was NLP, is not it.

Example -- "Would you like fries with that?"

Nice bit of comedy there Gord.

[JFrankA]

That's great Jfranka i concur with what you say.

You mention People's imagination.

Like I have said, until people have a visual picture they are unable to build a desire for an outcome.

Sorry, I disagree. People have desires all the time. However, sometimes they don't know what that desire is. Sometimes, they don't realize that they have a choice. It's not a question of goals. It's a question of what they want. And sometimes people act on what they want without quite knowing what it is. Haven't you ever done anything and said to yourself later, "why did I do that?"

There is no set formula. People do things. The things they do is of their choice, whether they know what that desire is or not, it is their choice.


This is what persuasion is, questions that you ask people can allow them to create pictures in there mind of desires they did not previously have. Specific questions from NLP/Ericson can give people the opportunity to consider desires they previously did not have an idea of.


Nope. Sorry, that's the NLP/Ericson definition. Persuasion is this:


1 a: the act or process or an instance of persuading b: a persuading argument c: the ability to persuade : persuasiveness
2: the condition of being persuaded
3 a: an opinion held with complete assurance b: a system of religious beliefs ; also : a group adhering to a particular system of beliefs
4: kind, sort


and the definition of Persuade is this:

1 : to move by argument, entreaty, or expostulation to a belief, position, or course of action
2 : to plead with : urge


This is completely different than what your definition is. One doesn't need to create pictures in a mind in order to "create desires". That is a salesman talking, no offense meant. A homeless guy can simply say to me "Give me a dollar, please" and I will give it to him. Where's the visual? How did he create a desire that I previously didn't have?


I whole hearty agree that you cannot get someone to agree to something they dont want to. BUT I do say again that if someone is in a state of limbo the right questions can help them see the desire.


"The desire". Who's desire? I'm sorry but that last statement still sounds like you feel like you can convince other people that YOUR desires are the ones they really have.


What I am saying is that its just another sales/communication technique. I cant see the different between this and any other form of communication.


Haven't you heard of simply telling the truth? No bells, no whistles, no tricks, no techniques. Just blunt out with it.

Misdirection, false or left out information, strong innuendo, leading questions, double meanings, mirroring, pacing, etc, are all meant to confuse a person to some degree. I've done sales a lot in my life and I was very good at it. I was taught all that stuff in order to make me a better sales person.

What worked best for me? Simply being honest. Letting the person make their own decision. Pure, simple, no tricks, no NLP, nothing. Just "here it is, and this is what it will do and this is what it won't do."

No amount of coercion, which is what sales techniques are really trying to do, will never change a person's mind for long. All these persuasion tricks that are being done are overblown ways of confusing a person long enough to drop their guard.


It still leaves the question " is it more effective that a normal sales technique"

For me it has worked, for me I have had great success using nlp methods.
Could I of achieved what I have without them ? I really have no idea. You probably will say yes.


Yes, because there are tons of sales people who've never put the letters NLP together and do well in sales. And sales isn't the only form of persuasion. There's discussions, like this one, teaching, hell, even asking your girlfriend where you two should go to dinner. All of that is some degree of persuasion and 90% of it there is no NLP going on.


If you looking to NLP to manipulate people against there will it cannot work.


I'm sorry, I don't believe you believe that fully on that. It's just my impression. No matter, though.


If your using NLP to make yourself a better person and have a structured communication tool then I "IN MY EXPERIENCE" have to say its good.


Here's the other thing: you've said yourself that NLP is a placebo. If it works "in your experience" for you then how can it if you know it's hooey?

To put it another way, if you know a sugar pill isn't curing your cold, why do you keep taking it and claiming it cured your cold?

The only logical answer is that you still believe it works....right?

Look, give yourself some credit, not the NLP. If you really are a successful salesman then its YOU who has done the work, not the NLP. By giving credit to the NLP you are taking away the success that you achieved from yourself.

No offense but it's the same thing I say to people who accomplish something and thank god or prayer or whatever for it. I tell them that they are taking their own accomplishment, their own hard work, their own credit away from themselves and giving it to something that doesn't exist.

Why would you do that?



The question still remains. How do we judge someone and how do we decide if we like them better than another person. I am interested for other explanations rather than the NLP ones.

So how ?

My other question about how we judge others has still not been answered.


You laughed at Gord's answer. It was the right one. I would add to his answer, for what it's worth, that most people take get a first impression of a person withing seventeen seconds of seeing them

In fact, I agree with Gord's answer completely, come to think of it.

Anyway, there are going to be some people who like you and don't know why and some people who like you and know why and some people who don't like you and don't know why and some people who don't like you and know why. That's the way life works. You are not going to get everyone to like you. It's a weird mishmash of why. There is no set "pattern" to make everyone like you.

However, from the claims of NLP followers and people who sell NLP instruction, they infer that with it, every one will like you.

[Lothario]

Haven't you heard of simply telling the truth? No bells, no whistles, no tricks, no techniques. Just blunt out with it.

Misdirection, false or left out information, strong innuendo, leading questions, double meanings, mirroring, pacing, etc, are all meant to confuse a person to some degree. I've done sales a lot in my life and I was very good at it. I was taught all that stuff in order to make me a better sales person.

What worked best for me? Simply being honest. Letting the person make their own decision. Pure, simple, no tricks, no NLP, nothing. Just "here it is, and this is what it will do and this is what it won't do."

No amount of coercion, which is what sales techniques are really trying to do, will never change a person's mind for long. All these persuasion tricks that are being done are overblown ways of confusing a person long enough to drop their guard.


Yeah, i agree with this.

The book that Senex recommended, Cialdini's Influence, is a pretty good resource on persuasion techniques. The funny thing is, these techniques have been used on me throughout my whole life and i never fell for them. Not once have i bought something that i didn't want to buy.
For instance, just the other day, two Jehova's witnesses were knocking at my door. I opened and said i was really busy so i didn't have the time to listen to them. Before i went inside, they asked me for my name and wrote it down. This is what Cialdini calls commitment and consistency. By giving them my name, it's like i've made a commitment to them. Of course the next time they show up, i'm going to dismiss them again or even worse, i'm not even going to open the door so that technique really didn't do them much good.

There are many theories about what we are looking for in a sexual partner. Some say we are looking for someone that resembles our mother/father, some say we are looking for people with symmetrical faces. Of course, in the end, nobody really knows. The same can be said about what makes other people like us. Even the most charismatic leaders in history weren't liked by everyone.

One thing that concerns me, and no one has provided an answer for it yet, is why are NLPers allowed to sell methods that are downright coercive? Even if it doesn't work, the fact that i am teaching men how to hypnotize women into bed or how to trick costumers into buying something they don't want is at the very least unethical. Not to mention that it probably fits into the definition of fraud.

[Iknoweverything]

Thanks for the reply Jfranka that was a great post.

[remirol]

One thing that concerns me, and no one has provided an answer for it yet, is why are NLPers allowed to sell methods that are downright coercive? Even if it doesn't work, the fact that i am teaching men how to hypnotize women into bed or how to trick costumers into buying something they don't want is at the very least unethical.

It says that the _purchasers_ are unethical, but if I sell you a magic whistle that I tell you will make people obey a single command, am I actually selling you anything coercive or useful? No. The only unethical thing I'm doing is selling you something that doesn't work as advertised; I'm taking your money and giving you nothing.

Not to mention that it probably fits into the definition of fraud.

NLP proponents and advocates spend a great deal of time being vague and equivocal, so as to provide plenty of "outs" that blame the purchaser when what they're selling fails to perform as advertised. In the above scenario, it's easy to find the fraud, and thus easy to prosecute; it's simple to blow a whistle, thus easy to test. In the NLP scenario, it's a lot harder to establsh fraud because the NLPers set everything up as super-complicated -- and as such, it's much easier for them to say "well, you just didn't use it right" when it fails (as it will).

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Nice bit of comedy there Gord.

"Many a true word is said in jest."

Your response is even more humerous than my post.

You asked for answers and you got them. The fact that you cannot reply tells much about NLP and its True Believers.

:bunpan

[Gord_in_Toronto]

<snip>

You laughed at Gord's answer. It was the right one. I would add to his answer, for what it's worth, that most people take get a first impression of a person withing seventeen seconds of seeing them

In fact, I agree with Gord's answer completely, come to think of it.

<snip>



Thanks. I was just trying to add a note of rationality to the discussion. ;)

[Lothario]

It says that the _purchasers_ are unethical, but if I sell you a magic whistle that I tell you will make people obey a single command, am I actually selling you anything coercive or useful? No. The only unethical thing I'm doing is selling you something that doesn't work as advertised; I'm taking your money and giving you nothing.


That guy who sold the Natural Cures They Don't Want You To Know book did some time in jail precisely because he was taking people's money and giving them nothing in return.
Let's say i sell you a rape drug that doesn't work. Ultimately there's no harm in doing so, because any girl who sleeps with you will do so because she wanted to and not because you spiked her drink. But don't you think that selling a rape drug is unethical, regardless of whether it works or not?


NLP proponents and advocates spend a great deal of time being vague and equivocal, so as to provide plenty of "outs" that blame the purchaser when what they're selling fails to perform as advertised. In the above scenario, it's easy to find the fraud, and thus easy to prosecute; it's simple to blow a whistle, thus easy to test. In the NLP scenario, it's a lot harder to establsh fraud because the NLPers set everything up as super-complicated -- and as such, it's much easier for them to say "well, you just didn't use it right" when it fails (as it will).

Yes, you have a point here. But i think it's possible. Take a couple of unbiased scientists, train them in NLP and run the tests. Then they won't have the common excuse "they didn't know enough about NLP".

[remirol]

That guy who sold the Natural Cures They Don't Want You To Know book did some time in jail precisely because he was taking people's money and giving them nothing in return.

And he did time in jail because he was selling something _testable_ that didn't do anything, and foolishly made specific claims.

Let's say i sell you a rape drug that doesn't work. Ultimately there's no harm in doing so, because any girl who sleeps with you will do so because she wanted to and not because you spiked her drink. But don't you think that selling a rape drug is unethical, regardless of whether it works or not?If it doesn't work, it's unethical because I'm committing fraud.
If it _does_ work, it's unethical because, well, you get the picture.

But it's unethical for different reasons, and the distinction is important.

Yes, you have a point here. But i think it's possible. Take a couple of unbiased scientists, train them in NLP and run the tests. Then they won't have the common excuse "they didn't know enough about NLP".First: scientists are often fooled by con jobs more easily than other people.

Second: The excuse won't be that they didn't know enough, it's that they didn't use the techniques properly. NLP has carefully framed itself so that no objective test can be made of its merits; all results are judged subjectively. The creators will of course not participate in any test that might even come close to providing an objective assessment; look at how much evasion one of its proponents conducted in this thread when simply asked to specify which specific technique worked. (And, in fact, that same proponent even started in with the ad hominem "oh, you must not have done it right and you didn't have any success, that's why you don't like it").

It's very hard to get people for fraud who don't make specific claims about their product, or who make claims backed with a gazillion disclaimers. Look at Enzyte for an example; despite the fact that they have a straightforward, testable product, their actual _claims_ of what the product will do are sufficiently vague and weasel-worded that the recent legal action was not about fraud in the product itself... but about dishonest business practices (reusing credit card numbers, refusing to cancel, etc.)

[Toke]

I can´t help thinking of one evening in port where some female duty offices mentioned a british homepage with drug rapes where the victims are clearly snooring.
She asked if is could be considered rape as she* was clearly unaware of what was happening. I answered that it would be a really short discussition.

*The victim

It sound like what these guys are trying to sell.

[Lothario]

If it doesn't work, it's unethical because I'm committing fraud.
If it _does_ work, it's unethical because, well, you get the picture.

But it's unethical for different reasons, and the distinction is important.


It's also unethical because from the moment you sell a fraudy product that encourages men to put women on some sort of hypnotic trance in order to get them to bed, you are making way for an "anything goes" type of approach, and that was my point. If the hypnotic mumbo-jumbo doesn't work, it's only a short step to actual physical abuse.

I understand what you're saying about the possibility of scientific testing. NLPers will always refuse to accept it, but it will help dissipate the lack of information regarding NLP that i've seen around. Take a look at the comments on Derren Brown's videos in youtube. People believe that he's using NLP and that it's possible to manipulate a person just like that. Like i said, i also had some pretty interesting discussion with people who believe they had created sex slaves with these Speed Seduction language patterns (i could copy some posts from other forums here but i don't think the authors would be too happy about it).
I'm starting to think that the vast majority of people believe in this crap. Personally i must thank this forum for helping me clear whatever doubt i had.

[Lothario]

Also, there are two sections of that article i posted that i just don't understand.
This:

"Ethical concerns of manipulation have also been voiced: “so long as the influenced party's outcome is achieved at the same time as the influencer, this is "influencing with integrity." However, "Achieving your own outcome at the expense of or even without regard for the other party constitutes manipulation. What makes this particular 'informed manipulation' so frightening is that people with these skills acquire such personal power that they are able to affect people deeply, and their capacity to misguide others is thereby increased to the point of evil." (Seitz and Cohen 1992). Concerns have also been raised over NLP's use in “speed seduction” methods proposed by NLP proponents such as Ross Jeffries in that may encourage manipulation and coercion."

And this:

"Although the basic tenets of NLP have been proved by science to be incorrect and ineffective, concepts that NLP borrows from other areas, such as hypnosis, social psychology etc, are used to coerce cult members to do things that they would normally not do. Certain cults use borrowed techniques within NLP, in combination with the occult and pseudoscience to claim modern day miracles and induce dependence and compliance on the part of the cult’s victims. Borrowed hypnotic techniques within NLP are used by both mild cults and very aggressive cults to induce dependence on the cult, and to further provide conditioning to induce compliance within the cult (Langone, 1993).

The techniques used tend towards the drilling of guided imagery techniques that are designed to create suggestible circumstances for the mind so that the suggestions of the trainer/leader are instilled into the mind of the devotee or recruit. The Australian Report, on Scientology has banned the use of these techniques within cults and religions in Australia due to their ability to create unhealthy dissociative states and delusion within the subjects. Well trained psychologists even have to refer to the mind control aspects of NLP to help the victim recover from the NLP using cult. Fortunately, the ill effects of these techniques is restricted only to those individuals using them extensively on their own, or during workshops, seminars, and other recruitment venues."

[remirol]

It's also unethical because from the moment you sell a fraudy product that encourages men to put women on some sort of hypnotic trance in order to get them to bed, you are making way for an "anything goes" type of approach, and that was my point. If the hypnotic mumbo-jumbo doesn't work, it's only a short step to actual physical abuse.

I cannot agree. The type of person who is purchasing the hypothetical product above is _already_ that short step away from actual physical abuse; they wouldn't even be considering your product if they weren't already subscribed to the "anything goes" approach.

Put another way, your product isn't turning purchasers into bad people; they were bad people to begin with. If it wasn't your product, they'd find something else. (This is similar to people who proscribe the banning of alcohol as the 'cure' for alcoholism; it doesn't work. Some people have addictive personalities and will just find something else to wreck their life with.)

I understand what you're saying about the possibility of scientific testing. NLPers will always refuse to accept it, but it will help dissipate the lack of information regarding NLP that i've seen around.

You're handwaving over a lot of effort required here to actually design the tests properly -- and even then, when the methods are deniable by the NLPers, how productive will it be?

Part of the reason nobody's felt the need to do a study is because NLP hasn't really gained much ground except among single male losers on the Internet (the intended target market all along).

Take a look at the comments on Derren Brown's videos in youtube. People believe that he's using NLP and that it's possible to manipulate a person just like that.

Youtube comments should never be taken as _any_ indication of what the average person believes, simply because of the self-selecting (and bottom-scraping) nature of Youtube comments in the first place.


I'm starting to think that the vast majority of people believe in this crap.

Based on what, Youtube comments? Seriously, those things will give you a horrendously skewed and non-representative view of the world. I would consider your source for that information a lot more carefully.

[remirol]

Also, there are two sections of that article i posted that i just don't understand.
This:

"Ethical concerns of manipulation have also been voiced: “so long as the influenced party's outcome is achieved at the same time as the influencer, this is "influencing with integrity." However, "Achieving your own outcome at the expense of or even without regard for the other party constitutes manipulation. What makes this particular 'informed manipulation' so frightening is that people with these skills acquire such personal power that they are able to affect people deeply, and their capacity to misguide others is thereby increased to the point of evil." (Seitz and Cohen 1992). Concerns have also been raised over NLP's use in “speed seduction” methods proposed by NLP proponents such as Ross Jeffries in that may encourage manipulation and coercion."

Above paragraph incorrectly presumes that NLP works and also subscribes to the "gateway-drug" fallacy; ie. "pot is bad, we should ban pot because people will move on to heroin". Absolutely false, of course; this is a short version of what I outlined in my prior post.

"Although the basic tenets of NLP have been proved by science to be incorrect and ineffective, concepts that NLP borrows from other areas, such as hypnosis, social psychology etc, are used to coerce cult members to do things that they would normally not do. Certain cults use borrowed techniques within NLP, in combination with the occult and pseudoscience to claim modern day miracles and induce dependence and compliance on the part of the cult’s victims. Borrowed hypnotic techniques within NLP are used by both mild cults and very aggressive cults to induce dependence on the cult, and to further provide conditioning to induce compliance within the cult (Langone, 1993).

This is discussing cults as the primary problem, not NLP; cults spend a great deal of effort brainwashing their victims with many different techniques and are _much_ more dangerous than NLP, in my opinion. Also, this paragraph and the snipped one both deny the premise, in that they lead off saying 'NLP is ineffective' and then spend a great deal of time referencing NLP techniques as if they _were_, making the entire thing logically inconsistent and the conclusions discardable.

[JFrankA]

Remirol has it right.

Cult brainwashing techniques are far more dangerous, and I'm talking about the extreme ones, do far more than just "speech patterning" and "brain interrupt". They go further including techniques such as sleep and nutrition deprivation, verbal abuse, peer pressure, removal of privacy, etc. Very very different and much more physical and intensive than NLP or hypnosis could ever be.

Now mix hypnosis and/or NLP techniques with real brainwashing techniques such as sleep and nutrition deprivation, physical punishiments, verbal abuse, peer pressure, removal of privacy, and the rest and you could create a sex slave. But this is very illegal, very unethical and damages the subject terribly.

But there is no way, not any way at all that simple NLP and hypnosis can create a sex slave unless the subject really wants to. The subject has, at any time, the physical and mental ability to "break" it.

Now what Derren Brown does is a trick. He's a magician. I didn't see the youtube clip in question, but I know that Derren Brown says at the beginning of each show or performance that what he does is a trick. He gets into more detail than that, but everything he describes is what a magician does.

[Lothario]

I figured it out. It's a misquote from the book by Langone. What he says is:

"Cults are often keen to use the new age notions within NLP, in combination with the occult and pseudoscience to claim modern day miracles and induce dependence and compliance on the part of the cult’s victims. The NLP terms applied within cults are not so much persuasive on their own, but they support the beliefs promoted by the cult, and set up ambiguities necessary to excuse the cult organizers for their actions, further incriminating (and committing) the participants within the cult."

[remirol]

I figured it out. It's a misquote from the book by Langone. ...

That makes a lot more sense, yeah.

[Lothario]

That was fast Remirol :)

The reference to hypnotic techniques used by NLP seems to be correct, but i agree with JFrankA: it's hypnosis combined with way more powerful techniques

[JFrankA]

That was fast Remirol :)

The reference to hypnotic techniques used by NLP seems to be correct, but i agree with JFrankA: it's hypnosis combined with way more powerful techniques

Here's a pretty good video (and actually funny video considering the topic) explaining the process...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnNSe5XYp6E

[Moochie]

Above paragraph incorrectly presumes that NLP works and also subscribes to the "gateway-drug" fallacy; ie. "pot is bad, we should ban pot because people will move on to heroin". Absolutely false, of course; this is a short version of what I outlined in my prior post.

In my own experience, early experimentation with pot led to a lifelong liking for vodka.

Just thought I'd share. :D


M.

[JFrankA]

Actually, here's another video that explains how our decisions can be skewed.

Notice, however, he doesn't explain how the decisions are controlled by someone else, but how we make descions based on the information provided to a person. A very big difference indeed.

http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_ariely_asks_are_we_in_control_of_our_own_decis ions.html

[Lothario]

Actually, here's another video that explains how our decisions can be skewed.

Notice, however, he doesn't explain how the decisions are controlled by someone else, but how we make descions based on the information provided to a person. A very big difference indeed.

http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_ariely_asks_are_we_in_control_of_our_own_decis ions.html

Good video. I hadn't watched that particular one but was familiar with the website.

One last question. You've compared hypnosis to going out to the movies, when your imagination is active and you are focuing on what is going on. I've read some of RJ's speech patterns and most of them include vivid descriptions of what it's like to fall in love, etc etc etc.
Is it possible that by giving someone a detailed description full or rich language they will enter some sort of mild hypnotic state, willingly?

[JFrankA]

Good video. I hadn't watched that particular one but was familiar with the website.

One last question. You've compared hypnosis to going out to the movies, when your imagination is active and you are focuing on what is going on. I've read some of RJ's speech patterns and most of them include vivid descriptions of what it's like to fall in love, etc etc etc.
Is it possible that by giving someone a detailed description full or rich language they will enter some sort of mild hypnotic state, willingly?

The "willingly" is the key.

All hypnosis really is, is this: desire of the subject, focus of the subject, imagination of the subject, and the language ability of the hypnotist to make suggestions.

Notice that most of the contents of hypnosis is from the subject. Not the hypnotist.

This is why hypnosis works when I perform my shows: these people want a show, they are focused on what I am saying, they are imagining the fun they are going to have and are able to imagine what I ask them to. Since they are feeling that way, they are open to what I throw at them. And remember, even with that in place, I still have to whittle the participants down to the ones who are the most focused, most willing and most imaginative. As an example, when do a show for a party, I usually do two shows with the same audience. The first show I whittle the volunteers down to a few stage participants. The second show, though, I always end up with more participants on stage. Why? Several reasons. More drinking occurs, for one. :-) But one of the reasons is that the people who participated in the first show always tell the others who weren't on stage how good they feel and how much fun they had.

Also remember that hypnosis is basically something we do everyday. We read a book, we listen to a lecture, we watch a movie, we get involved in our school work, we even read a posting on a forum. So definitely it is possible to enter a "trance", for lack of a better word, with vivid language. However, it's not unusual and does not stop the will of the subject.

See, you're doing it right now. You would be doing it even if you are reading a post from someone who is flaming you. The point is, YOU are choosing to focus on it. YOU choose to react to it the way YOU want to to the language that you are reading. So at any time, you can choose to keep reading this post, or decide if I'm full of **** and close it before finishing it, or even respond with "You're full of ****!!!" The language transfers a thought, but in the end you choose to respond however you respond to that language.

The bottom line is that the whole hypnosis thing is not an unusual "state of mind". And language, especially well crafted language, will recreate that state but...only if the recipient is willing to.

The only except, IMHO is if you confuse the recipient. Confusion is the only thing that bypasses the "critical thinking" that we are always doing. But as I said before, you have to be quick. After a person is either ignores the confusion or figures it out, their will comes back in spades. :)

.....I hope I clearly answered your question. Sorry, I tend to get kind of wordy.....

[Lothario]

.....I hope I clearly answered your question. Sorry, I tend to get kind of wordy.....

Thanks for the great post.

I understand what you mean. For instance, when i read a book or watch a movie, yes i do become focused and tend to ignore what's going on around me. But i don't feel the same the character of the movie is feeling. I'm just focused because i find the movie interesting. I don't even know if you could say i'm in an "altered state".
Can a description of a state (let's say happiness or arousal) provoke that state on the person you are talking to if you use hypnotic language (pauses, tonality, etc), even it if depends on the other person's will?

EDIT: You already answered that, sorry. So basically if the subject wants it to there is a chance it could work?

[Senex]

Yes and I have a degree in psychology, thank you for your eye opening reply

You also stated you know nothing about mentalism, I do.

That makes your replies even more amusing

I missed this earlier. You know something about mentalism yet believe in NLP? You have a degree in psychology and believe in swish? It's much more likely that you watched a few mentalists and bought into their misdirection NLP explanations. You can't actually perform mentalism yourself can you? You just haven't chosen to use your Jedi NLP tricks for amusement. You are such a sucker for mentalist misdirection.

What do you know about mentalism? What effects were you thinking of when you said you know about mentalism?

hah yes you have encouraged me. Much of the aggressive replies I got were not worth responding to. Especially from Senex, poor lad.

I'm a poor lad? That puts you in poverty my friend.

Put the poor lad in his place. Please share what you know about mentalism and how NLP plays a part. I dare you. I double dare you.

Not replying means I win! ;)

[Rogue1stclass]

All I wanna say is that is that read like 4 pages wondering what NLP is before I finally googled it.

Neuro-linguistic program, which is an attempt to tap into the brain's instinctual programing to get people to like you, or something.

If it actually worked, using it to pick up chicks at a bar would be like using a shotgun to kill roaches, so it's a good thing that at best it's just hamhanded and simplistic pseudoscience.

Any results you may receive using such an approach are strickly coincidental.

[Senex]

In my own experience, early experimentation with pot led to a lifelong liking for vodka.

Just thought I'd share. :D
M.
That's been my experience as well. ;)

All I wanna say is that is that read like 4 pages wondering what NLP is before I finally googled it.

Neuro-linguistic program, which is an attempt to tap into the brain's instinctual programing to get people to like you, or something.

If it actually worked, using it to pick up chicks at a bar would be like using a shotgun to kill roaches, so it's a good thing that at best it's just hamhanded and simplistic pseudoscience.

Any results you may receive using such an approach are strickly coincidental.

Thanks for googling NLP and putting the thread back on topic.The OP is about NLP not cults. I think your metaphor about killing roaches is wrong for many reasons. Let's just say NLP doesn't work.

[Lothario]

Any results you may receive using such an approach are strickly coincidental.

Most likely. But i think it's curious how i've seen doctors and other people who should be men of science believing and using NLP.

That's been my experience as well. ;).

I've never tried pot and have no desire of doing so but if you guys want to share a bottle of vodka, i'm in. Or scotch. Ok, i'll drink just about anything that has alcohol in it :).



Let's just say NLP doesn't work.

Since nobody's presented any viable arguments in favor of NLP so far, i think you can say that. Honestly i hope we are right, because like remirol said, if it did work, it would raise some interesting legal and social questions about the use of NLP

[JFrankA]

Since nobody's presented any viable arguments in favor of NLP so far, i think you can say that. Honestly i hope we are right, because like remirol said, if it did work, it would raise some interesting legal and social questions about the use of NLP

If it did work, we would have much more than just forcing a person to go to bed with you. Advertisers, policticians, etc would use it so that they would get you to think the way they want you to.

Come to think of it, a lot of them relly do try it.

...doesn't work all that well do it? :)

Otherwise everyone would have one kind of butter, paper towels, agree completely on the same issues...etc.. not because the product was good, but because the commerical was good. Don't know about you but, for example, I used to ask mom to buy only Peter Pan Peanut Butter even though I HATE their old commericals and logo because I like the taste of it better than other brands.

[Rogue1stclass]

Most likely. But i think it's curious how i've seen doctors and other people who should be men of science believing and using NLP.

Men of science also bought into Eugenics. It still doesn't mean that you can weed out bad traits in humans via selective breeding. Genetics are too complex for that. Bad traits will still cross over and intensify, and some new ones will end up being created.

NLP is like that. Sure, there may be instinctual triggers in the human mind, but to think that they would work as a kind of secret override switch for conscious thought is vastly oversimplifying an extremely complex issue.

My point is, regardless of their profession, men of science can be just as gullible as the rest of us. Perhaps more so if there is just enough real science as to make it sound credible.

[Lothario]

Yeah, but what put me off in this case is the sheer amount of testimonial evidence i found around. Yes, it's possible that their sucess using NLP or hypnosis or whatever was merely a coincidence. But shouldn't they KNOW it was just a coincidence?
How do these guys mantain sucessful businesses that just don't work for decades? It's strange... If you try acupuncture, you may not know if it did any good to you or not. But with a product like this, there shouldn't be much doubt. Either you pick up chicks/ improve in sales or it just doesn't work. How can you be mislead to believe you created a sex slave using NLP?
I can PM you some posts i ran across just so you can see how much these people believe in it.

[remirol]

Yeah, but what put me off in this case is the sheer amount of testimonial evidence i found around.

Testimonial evidence is all-too-often partly or completely fabricated. Take IKE's "brag" post earlier; how much of it's true? How much of it is verifiable? Would the answers to the previous two questions change even if he had posted under his real name? Under a real-seeming name ("Frederick Chalmers")? *

In the end, that's all testimonials are -- an anonymous name attached to a completely unverifiable positive statement. (After all, nobody will publish testimonials that are unflattering, right?)

* Answers to the above:
1. No way to tell. 2. None of it. 3. No. 4. No.

[Lothario]

Testimonial evidence is all-too-often partly or completely fabricated. Take IKE's "brag" post earlier; how much of it's true? How much of it is verifiable? Would the answers to the previous two questions change even if he had posted under his real name? Under a real-seeming name ("Frederick Chalmers")? *

In the end, that's all testimonials are -- an anonymous name attached to a completely unverifiable positive statement. (After all, nobody will publish testimonials that are unflattering, right?)

* Answers to the above:
1. No way to tell. 2. None of it. 3. No. 4. No.

I mean testimonies of people i have actually talked to and who are not (i have no reason to believe so anyway) affiliated with any NLP guru.
Like i said, i can PM some posts if you want to see for yourself.

Obviously, the John Does at their websites count for absolutely nothing.

[remirol]

I mean testimonies of people i have actually talked to and who are not (i have no reason to believe so anyway) affiliated with any NLP guru.

How are these people different from the person in my above post posting under his real name? In other words, why do you have any reason to trust anything they say about NLP? How much of their story can you verify?

[Lothario]

Good point. Those who live near me, i could get in my car and follow them around to see if they are really don juans or great salesmen, but then again i could never really tell whether or not it was because of NLP. Not to mention i would never bother to do so lol.
I don't see what they would benefit from bragging about something that they didn't do to some stranger on a web forum (although that was what IKE did).

[remirol]

I don't see what they would benefit from bragging about something that they didn't do to some stranger on a web forum (although that was what IKE did).

Men have been bragging about (and vastly overstating) their 'conquests' since recorded history started being, well, recorded. I don't know that it's productive to ask "why" anymore as much as it is productive to recognize the phenomenon exists. :)

[Lothario]

Yeah, once again you make a good point.
BTW, i noticed some time ago that there's a topic on debunking NLP on the JREF's Facebook page. Do you know if Randi (or any other skeptic) ever wrote something on the subject?

[remirol]

No se, senor.

[JFrankA]

My point is, regardless of their profession, men of science can be just as gullible as the rest of us. Perhaps more so if there is just enough real science as to make it sound credible.

And that's why a site like this is run by a magician. :)

BTW, i noticed some time ago that there's a topic on debunking NLP on the JREF's Facebook page. Do you know if Randi (or any other skeptic) ever wrote something on the subject?

Derren Brown (another magician, a skeptic and an atheist) does touch on this in his book "Tricks of the Mind". In fact, he describes an NLP class he actually attended in the book. (I'll spoil it for you - he compares it going to a revivalist mass). He does state that he uses the eye thing when he is performing, but he's not conviced in works outside that venue. His take on it, and I tend to agree with him, is that it might help you when you make a suggestion to a subject, if the situtation is right (e.g. the subject is willing and/or confused), but for any claims beyond that it's blown completely out of the water.

Personally, I suspect that a lot of woo starts with something like a study that comes out that says "if you do W when X and Y are happening, it might improve the status of Z a little." And suddenly people just exagerate, extrapolate and create things that are completely wrong but sound good.

I believe NLP (and hypnosis) is one of those kinds of woo.

[Lothario]

I have that book and i read the part where he talks about NLP.
The problem with DB, like i said in the Conjuror's Corner, is that he's always vague about NLP. I posted some bits from an interview where he says that everytime he gets asked about NLP, he replies that it's part of what he does. He never says exactly WHAT does he use that is NLP.

[JFrankA]

I have that book and i read the part where he talks about NLP.
The problem with DB, like i said in the Conjuror's Corner, is that he's always vague about NLP. I posted some bits from an interview where he says that everytime he gets asked about NLP, he replies that it's part of what he does. He never says exactly WHAT does he use that is NLP.

Oh. Okay, sorry, I was going by memory. I thought he was more clear....or maybe I misunderstand what you are asking. :)

At any rate, when I get home, I'll re-read the chapter. :)

[Lothario]

Oh. Okay, sorry, I was going by memory. I thought he was more clear....or maybe I misunderstand what you are asking. :)

At any rate, when I get home, I'll re-read the chapter. :)

http://www.jamyianswiss.com/fm/works/derren-brown.html - This is the interview

"DERREN: Well, it depends on whose course you take. In the same way I've taken NLP courses and learned some NLP.
JAMY: Well, there are differing opinions on NLP. There's not a shred of scientific support for it, outside of its own self-sustaining industry, plus a lot of mentalists.
DERREN: Well, I not a big a fan of it, but I've done it and think in some contexts there's some use--that's a whole other conversation--but it's a dirty word as far as I'm concerned. If somebody came up to me and said, "Look, I really liked your show, and I'm going to go to an NLP course," which I've had happen, I would say to them, "Well, if you want to do that, do that, but here's what you'll get out of it. It's not what I do. It's part of what I do," which is I think true, I think that's fair enough to say."

[MikeSun5]

Everyone seems confident that they have "debunked" all of NLP so rather than argue any more I am happy to agree with you.

Not everyone, just you. See post #124. Your entire reason for joining this thread was to tell us that "not all NLP is BS!" Unfortunately, you ended up agreeing with us. See above quote, and post #124.

And I'd love to indulge and answer these questions...

How do people judge if they like someone more than someone else ?

IS there a skill of Persuasion, if there is how is this done ?

...but neither of the answers involve NLP, so they're not really relevant to the OP.

Do you know if Randi (or any other skeptic) ever wrote something on the subject?

A long time ago, when I started heavily researching NLP, I actually once emailed Randi about his opinions. Ironically (considering the name of this thread), Randi's response was simply, "NLP is ************."

[Eddie Dane]

Actually, here's another video that explains how our decisions can be skewed.

Notice, however, he doesn't explain how the decisions are controlled by someone else, but how we make descions based on the information provided to a person. A very big difference indeed.

http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_ariely_asks_are_we_in_control_of_our_own_decis ions.html

I finally got around to watching this. Excellent!

Thanks.

[Moochie]

There are a couple of experiences I've had that maybe pertain to this discussion.

The first occurred in the pre-dawn of my existence as a critical thinker, almost forty years ago.

I was working the graveyard shift in a service station when a customer diddled me out of $20 by some form of distraction/misdirection routine. I was vaguely aware that something was going on at the time, but realized too late that the guy had swindled me. I learned later that it was a well-known con job -- well-known by those who'd had it done to them, I suppose, because I had no knowledge of it and no one had ever mentioned it. Suffice to say that the routine involved the exchange of a bunch of smaller bills for a large bill, or something like that. I can't actually remember the specifics, only that it happened and that at the time a small beacon went off in my mind.

It has never happened to me again.

The second instance occurred a few years ago. I was about to withdraw some cash from an ATM, and just as I was about to punch in my PIN, my wife spoke to me -- asked me something, I don't recall. What I do recall is that I couldn't complete my ATM transaction because I had "suddenly" forgotten my PIN. It seems my wife's speaking to me just as I was retrieving the PIN from my memory somehow interrupted the retrieval process -- "scrambled" my brain, so to speak -- so that I couldn't complete the transaction until some time later, when presumably my brain became "unscrambled" and my PIN once again became accessible.

I don't think these experiences are unique, from what countless others have told me.

Does anyone care to comment, whether in regard to NLP or not?


M.

[Lothario]

There are a couple of experiences I've had that maybe pertain to this discussion.

The first occurred in the pre-dawn of my existence as a critical thinker, almost forty years ago.

I was working the graveyard shift in a service station when a customer diddled me out of $20 by some form of distraction/misdirection routine. I was vaguely aware that something was going on at the time, but realized too late that the guy had swindled me. I learned later that it was a well-known con job -- well-known by those who'd had it done to them, I suppose, because I had no knowledge of it and no one had ever mentioned it. Suffice to say that the routine involved the exchange of a bunch of smaller bills for a large bill, or something like that. I can't actually remember the specifics, only that it happened and that at the time a small beacon went off in my mind.

It has never happened to me again.

The second instance occurred a few years ago. I was about to withdraw some cash from an ATM, and just as I was about to punch in my PIN, my wife spoke to me -- asked me something, I don't recall. What I do recall is that I couldn't complete my ATM transaction because I had "suddenly" forgotten my PIN. It seems my wife's speaking to me just as I was retrieving the PIN from my memory somehow interrupted the retrieval process -- "scrambled" my brain, so to speak -- so that I couldn't complete the transaction until some time later, when presumably my brain became "unscrambled" and my PIN once again became accessible.

I don't think these experiences are unique, from what countless others have told me.

Does anyone care to comment, whether in regard to NLP or not?


M.

I think this could be the trick that was used on you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8lsSPshxJ4

As for the ATM part, i think it could be what is called a pattern interrupt. If i remember this stuff correctly, if you interrupt someone's thought pattern, they go into some sort of confused state. Something like that. JFrankA can probably explain it better than i can.

[MikeSun5]

As for the ATM part, i think it could be what is called a pattern interrupt. If i remember this stuff correctly, if you interrupt someone's thought pattern, they go into some sort of confused state. Something like that. JFrankA can probably explain it better than i can.

That's exactly right. The NLPers think that by saying or doing something unexpected during a routine encounter breaks the "pattern" (the pattern being your normal behavior). I've heard of therapists trying to use pattern interrupts to deal with breaking habits and addictions, but mostly they're hailed by people claiming to do covert hypnosis and other nonsense.

The "covert hypnotist" may do something like this: You just met your "victim" and are going through the normal routine. Introductions, where you work, etc. The victim asks, "Where are you from originally?" And the hypnotist claps his hands and says, "No, officer. I've never owned a snake." The victim is now confused, in a mild hypnotic trance, and highly suggestable. :boggled:

Moochie's post was exactly what an NLP believer would cling to when defending it. Unfortunately, those type of brain farts don't happen to everyone, and most certainly don't happen all the time - otherwise poor Moochie would be freaking out. There are a lot of distractions out there to interrupt all the patterns we go through every day.

I've noticed Derren Brown likes to throw bones to the NLP crowd during some of his routines. I saw some pattern interrupts in 'The Heist,' and he really likes using the "handshake interrupt."

[Lothario]

That's exactly right. The NLPers think that by saying or doing something unexpected during a routine encounter breaks the "pattern" (the pattern being your normal behavior). I've heard of therapists trying to use pattern interrupts to deal with breaking habits and addictions, but mostly they're hailed by people claiming to do covert hypnosis and other nonsense.

The "covert hypnotist" may do something like this: You just met your "victim" and are going through the normal routine. Introductions, where you work, etc. The victim asks, "Where are you from originally?" And the hypnotist claps his hands and says, "No, officer. I've never owned a snake." The victim is now confused, in a mild hypnotic trance, and highly suggestable. :boggled:

Moochie's post was exactly what an NLP believer would cling to when defending it. Unfortunately, those type of brain farts don't happen to everyone, and most certainly don't happen all the time - otherwise poor Moochie would be freaking out. There are a lot of distractions out there to interrupt all the patterns we go through every day.

I've noticed Derren Brown likes to throw bones to the NLP crowd during some of his routines. I saw some pattern interrupts in 'The Heist,' and he really likes using the "handshake interrupt."

I'm not sure it's a term that NLPers invented, i think it's something they picked up from hypnosis.
I've noticed Derren Brown doing this "handshake induction" or the "pattern interrupt" during a couple of routines. Like on the "Russian Scam". Truth is i can't explain the routine with or without pattern interrupt. It would be great if someone could... FEEL THE NEED to... EXPLAIN WHAT DERREN DOES (notice the embedded commands :)).

P.S. Ross Jeffries has updated his website. He is now selling his new Mindframe product which reveals you the secrets of... hypnotic copywriting

[JFrankA]

I'm not sure it's a term that NLPers invented, i think it's something they picked up from hypnosis.
I've noticed Derren Brown doing this "handshake induction" or the "pattern interrupt" during a couple of routines. Like on the "Russian Scam". Truth is i can't explain the routine with or without pattern interrupt. It would be great if someone could... FEEL THE NEED to... EXPLAIN WHAT DERREN DOES (notice the embedded commands :)).

Can't.....resist.....must.....give.....away......m agician......secrets........... :D

Remember this: Derren Brown is a magician. He tells you at the beginning of every show he does that he uses misdirection, sleight of hand, psychological tricks, etc. The one thing he doesn't mention doing is something magicians call "Duel Reality". Duel Reality is simply the act of doing a trick that makes the audience see one effect, but the spectators see another. No woo to this. Just simple misdirection and sleights of hand.

For example, I can do a trick in which the spectator in which they choose a card then I pass my hand three times over the cards. At the end, to the spectator, she has thinks she forgot what card she chose, but to the audience, I've predicted the card she was going to choose. It's done with sleight of hand, misdirection and a patter that causes some confusion to the spectators. No hypnosis, no NLP.

Derren is far better than anyone else at these kinds of tricks and a lot of what he does has that duel reality and confusing patter going. A lot of his patter is meant to sound like what he does could be true, but if you are willing to "scratch under the surface", you'll see it's just patter. And once more, if you ask him straight out he'll just tell you it's a trick.

Remember that Derren Brown is just a magician. Using him as a way to confirm NLP or hypnosis works is like using Star Trek to confirm that aliens exist. :)

[JFrankA]

About pattern interrupt, it boil it down to this: Confusion. Period. The human brain is always looking for patterns. That's why people see Jesus' face in wood, cheese sandwiches or whatever. That's why people hear satanic messages when they play ordinary conversation backwards. We are always looking for patterns. Sometimes we overdo it.

So when you do something out of the ordinary, off the pattern so to speak, people get confused.

It's no secret. It happens all the time. Just really that simple.

[Lothario]

About pattern interrupt, it boil it down to this: Confusion. Period. The human brain is always looking for patterns. That's why people see Jesus' face in wood, cheese sandwiches or whatever. That's why people hear satanic messages when they play ordinary conversation backwards. We are always looking for patterns. Sometimes we overdo it.

So when you do something out of the ordinary, off the pattern so to speak, people get confused.

It's no secret. It happens all the time. Just really that simple.

Yes, but exactly what can you achieve with a pattern interrupt? You say something strange in the middle of a conversation, the other person is thinking "who the hell is this weirdo?" then what? What can you get a person to do?

[Senex]

My woo detecter is going off. Trust me, Darren Brown does not use NLP. Not ever. NLP is woo and Darren Brown is a brick and mortar performer. Therefore Brown doesn't use NLP. I can explain 90% of what he does with my modest yet functional library of mentalism at arms reach from my bed. Brown does standard mentalism. He just is gifted at misdirection.

Let's take pattern interuption. I don't understand it because it is woo. Darren Brown might a take a camera crew and perform for a hundred or so people for every one person that gets televised just to get the right "pattern interuption" eye movement from some deer in the headlight audience member, in order to get NLP'ers to ooh and aah at his ability.


The issue I have with Darren Brown is the issue I had with my generation's mentalist, The Amazing Kreskin. Now, I'm an adult and I have made a study of suggestion. I am excellent at detecting certain types of BS. However, I wasn't so sharp when I was 13. Kreskin misled me. I occasionally perform magic and mentalism and perhaps Kreskin was inspirational -- but he did make me believe things that weren't true when I was young and gullible. I'm still uncertain about how I should feel about him.

I am certain Darren Brown misleads young people today just as Kreskin misled me. Let's look at one of Brown's effects that I am unce3rtain of how he performs. He did this effect on TV where he got employees at a horse racing venue to pay him on losing tickets. His shtick was he banged his fist twice and stated "you will pay on this winning ticket" or something similar. Total baloney. The only way I can see how he did this was he bet every horse on a previous race and asked the clerk off-camera to pay him later. The bottom line is however he performed this trick was off-camera. I know darn we he can't make people give him money by just asking. He wouldn't be in the entertainment business if he could. He woulld be in the fat and lazy criminal enterprise. I wondr how many children think they can say some bulloney assertively and bang their hand on a table twice and think they will trick someone.

Bang Bang Cindy Crawford, you are going to fool around with me!

I'm a child at heart.

[remirol]

Yes, but exactly what can you achieve with a pattern interrupt? You say something strange in the middle of a conversation, the other person is thinking "who the hell is this weirdo?" then what? What can you get a person to do?

Besides think you're a weirdo? Not much.

I mean, OK, then the person's confused, right? Fine. They're confused. But unless they were in the middle of actually doing something that they're now going to try to complete while confused (this is why the above-mentioned money-swindle works, because the person is _required_ to handle the money), you aren't going to be able to get very much at all to happen. Ideally you'd get them to commit to something that they'll later feel bad about uncommitting to and thus would do the thing they didn't want to do in the first place. But that sort of action is completely unreliable, as most people have no qualms about saying "wait, I agreed to eat babies? OK, I'm not doing this" later -- because it's not something they wanted to do in the first place.

Magicians can use this to distract a person. But this again isn't so much about getting a person to do something as it is allowing _yourself_ to do something undetected.

[JFrankA]

Besides think you're a weirdo? Not much.

I mean, OK, then the person's confused, right? Fine. They're confused. But unless they were in the middle of actually doing something that they're now going to try to complete while confused (this is why the above-mentioned money-swindle works, because the person is _required_ to handle the money), you aren't going to be able to get very much at all to happen. Ideally you'd get them to commit to something that they'll later feel bad about uncommitting to and thus would do the thing they didn't want to do in the first place. But that sort of action is completely unreliable, as most people have no qualms about saying "wait, I agreed to eat babies? OK, I'm not doing this" later -- because it's not something they wanted to do in the first place.

Magicians can use this to distract a person. But this again isn't so much about getting a person to do something as it is allowing _yourself_ to do something undetected.

Took the words right out of my ..err...fingers. :)


I am certain Darren Brown misleads young people today just as Kreskin misled me. Let's look at one of Brown's effects that I am unce3rtain of how he performs. He did this effect on TV where he got employees at a horse racing venue to pay him on losing tickets. His shtick was he banged his fist twice and stated "you will pay on this winning ticket" or something similar. Total baloney. The only way I can see how he did this was he bet every horse on a previous race and asked the clerk off-camera to pay him later. The bottom line is however he performed this trick was off-camera. I know darn we he can't make people give him money by just asking. He wouldn't be in the entertainment business if he could. He woulld be in the fat and lazy criminal enterprise. I wondr how many children think they can say some bulloney assertively and bang their hand on a table twice and think they will trick someone.


He actually did a 30 minute special on that one particular trick. (Part one is here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX94fV4TWbc) and if you don't want to watch it, his method is below:

You are right. He does bet on every horse.

He also performs then exposes how he can flip a coin and get it land on heads 10 times in a row without a camera edit.

As to whether he misleads people, I tend to disagree. IMHO, Derren brown is different than Kreskin because once the spotlight is off, he makes no bones about the fact that he's just a magician. He doesn't sell NLP products, all his books are magician's books (revealing secrets to his tricks) and he's a skeptic as well. If someone is fooled by Derren, it's because they didn't dig deep enough.

As another example of what I mean, before every show, I tell my audience that I have no powers, that hypnosis is no more powerful than watching a movie, that any tricks I do are tricks, and I still get people asking me to help them lose weight, get girls, speak to the dead.

People are going to believe what they want to believe, no matter how much you throw the truth at them, unfortunately.

[Lothario]

I think i just figured out how Derren does his tricks. ;P

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1rlThKe1qo

[Lothario]

By the way, i don't know if anybody noticed it, but the moment i use embedded commands, everyone starts spilling out Derren's secrets. Amazing! It works! :)

[Moochie]

I think this could be the trick that was used on you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8lsSPshxJ4

<snipped>

Yes, very much like what happened to me. Thanks for that.


M.

[Moochie]

Yes, but exactly what can you achieve with a pattern interrupt? You say something strange in the middle of a conversation, the other person is thinking "who the hell is this weirdo?" then what? What can you get a person to do?

I don't know that it can be used for anything. I do know that something approaching that idea exists, because it happened that time at the ATM. The very clear memory of it has stayed with me for all the intervening years. Why? Because it was so unusual to me. I have generally good recall of facts and figures, and have memorized my 16-digit credit card number, plus the 3-digit security number on the back. This makes it easy to shop on the internet because I don't need to go and get the card every time I make a purchase.


M.

[MikeSun5]

Senex nailed it with that last post. Derren Brown uses NLP just like David Blaine uses voodoo and Criss Angel uses shamanism. Or whatever. It's all simple misdirection.
They're all tricks. Even Derren's explanations for his tricks are misdirection. When he's in front of the camera or on stage, you really shouldn't believe a word he says. Just enjoy. ;)

By the way, i don't know if anybody noticed it, but the moment i use embedded commands, everyone starts spilling out Derren's secrets. Amazing! It works! :)

Wow, that IS amazing... I take back everything I've ever said about NLP!

[Moochie]

For those who remember, and without further comment from me, the great Dr. Jonathan Miller on the Dick Cavett (http://cavett.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/miller-talks-again/?th&emc=th) show in 1981, discussing Mesmerism/hypnosis.

Enjoy.


M.

[Lothario]

For those who remember, and without further comment from me, the great Dr. Jonathan Miller on the Dick Cavett (http://cavett.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/miller-talks-again/?th&emc=th) show in 1981, discussing Mesmerism/hypnosis.

Enjoy.


M.

I think that's not the right link, Moochie.

I watched this funny episode of Penn and Teller's ********! on Hypnosis some time ago. Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWLhb1kmrFU) is Part I.

[Moochie]

I think that's not the right link, Moochie.

I watched this funny episode of Penn and Teller's ********! on Hypnosis some time ago. Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWLhb1kmrFU) is Part I.

The video is a short way down the page.

Thanks for your link, too. :)


M.

[Lothario]

The video is a short way down the page.

Thanks for your link, too. :)


M.

Oh right. Good video.

Thanks M.

Another good article on NLP: http://knol.google.com/k/joe-greenfield/neurolinguistic-programming/2j6nlcky7q5vo/2#

Notice the attacks from some NLP zealots at the bottom.

Take care

[Moochie]

Oh right. Good video.

Thanks M.

Another good article on NLP: http://knol.google.com/k/joe-greenfield/neurolinguistic-programming/2j6nlcky7q5vo/2#

Notice the attacks from some NLP zealots at the bottom.

Take care


Thanks again -- that was a good (if longish) read, and highly recommended to anyone still persuaded that there is anything to this quackery.


M.

[Lothario]

It's a small world. I am still doing research on NLP and today i found a thread about NLP in a magic/mentalism forum (i think it's quite popular amongst the conjuror crowd):

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=90877&forum=15&start=0 (http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=90877&forum=15&start=0)

Funny thing is one of the users, JoaoPedro, is actually the first person i heard raving about NLP. I was aware that he was a mentalist at the time and he did buy into the NLP explanation to Derren's tricks. Actually, i think he's the reason why i know Derren's work at all.

Does anybody know anything about this forced 3 of Diamonds think? Is it something like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2JhJMc_s3o&feature=channel_page)?

I'm sorry to keep bugging you guys, i just want to cover all the grounds here.

[JFrankA]

It's a small world. I am still doing research on NLP and today i found a thread about NLP in a magic/mentalism forum (i think it's quite popular amongst the conjuror crowd):

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=90877&forum=15&start=0 (http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=90877&forum=15&start=0)

Funny thing is one of the users, JoaoPedro, is actually the first person i heard raving about NLP. I was aware that he was a mentalist at the time and he did buy into the NLP explanation to Derren's tricks. Actually, i think he's the reason why i know Derren's work at all.

Does anybody know anything about this forced 3 of Diamonds think? Is it something like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2JhJMc_s3o&feature=channel_page)?

I'm sorry to keep bugging you guys, i just want to cover all the grounds here.

I don't know exactly how he did those tricks, I have a idea, though.

First off, don't use a magician as a bellwether for anything like NLP or hypnosis, no matter what she/he says during the performance. The explanation itself is a misdirection: a trick to get you to look for something that she/he wants you to look for.

Second. Remember that participant wants this to work. Her desire is there, and so is ours after all, we need to be tricked to figure out how we were tricked. Because of that, half the battle is done. She (and we) are open to the suggestions and misdirections he presents. Suggestion works to a point when there is true desire and confusion going on.

Teller explains it much better than I can:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5x14AwElOk

[Iknoweverything]

I don't know exactly how he did those tricks, I have a idea, though.

Second. Remember that participant wants this to work. Her desire is there, and so is ours after all, we need to be tricked to figure out how we were tricked. Because of that, half the battle is done. She (and we) are open to the suggestions and misdirections he presents. Suggestion works to a point when there is true desire and confusion going on.


I know exactly how they are all done and there is no NLP or hypnosis with any of the tricks in that video.

The fact that you do not know jfranka may suggest that your opinions are based on a limited amount of information. The bigger picture is always there even though you think you know everything.

Sexex you asked what do I really know about mentalism ? I have read hundreds of books and if you need the list let me know.
I am not really sure why I replied to you as its obvious from your posts that you seem to be mentally unbalanced. Some NLP may be good for you to take a look at yourself and see where you could improve how you feel.

I do know that suggestion is used in some mentalism. if suggestion/influence did not work then neither would the trick

Anyone who has read many Luke Jermay books will know that.

Flame on

[Iknoweverything]

ok What if I could get you a little script together, something that would take under a minute to perform for you.

You ask a person a series of questions then you ask another final question. The final question would be something like "what colour is grass" The person will 8/10 times answer wrong.

For me its more like 9/10

Let me know and i will post it. I dont really know if this is NLP as such

[remirol]

ok What if I could get you a little script together, something that would take under a minute to perform for you.

You ask a person a series of questions then you ask another final question. The final question would be something like "what colour is grass" The person will 8/10 times answer wrong.

This is trivial crud and is just an example of confusing people. There are a number of similar "tricks", most of which we all learned in 3rd grade -- there's one floating around the internet asking the viewer to read the name of the color of each word as fast as they can, and it's a picture of words like "green" colored blue, etc.

I dont really know if this is NLP as such

1) If it isn't NLP, I don't want to see it offered as support that NLP works. Still waiting for you to let us know what specific NLP techniques work, by the way.
2) It's not NLP. It's just an example that if you talk enough nonsense to a person and/or ask a person to repeat nonsense, that eventually they'll get confused. It isn't an example of control or influence.

[JFrankA]

I know exactly how they are all done and there is no NLP or hypnosis with any of the tricks in that video.

The fact that you do not know jfranka may suggest that your opinions are based on a limited amount of information. The bigger picture is always there even though you think you know everything.

I'm sorry if I sound like I am about to "flame" you but due the fact you have picked and chose what to respond to my posting seem to be a misdirection to me.

Just because I do not know exactly how it's done doesn't mean I don't know the tricks. I'm sure that even Derren Brown or Luke Jeremy or Banachek would know how every trick is done.

The point is that this is NOT NLP. This is merely suggestion that works because (as I said from square one) THE PERSON THAT IS TAKING THE SUGGESTION WANTS IT TO HAPPEN. The final decision always, always falls on the subject. If they are confused to a point, that will aid in having the subject decide on the more obvious decision. That, along with sleight of hand, misdirection, etc, is what a mentalist does.

This does not mean, at all that this will work in getting someone to buy something they don't want, nor getting a woman who normally wouldn't be interested in you into your bed.

It seems to me that NLP are taking something that is a momentary, quick thing and blowing it up into something special. It's the same logic of saying "Well, two aspirin cured my headache, then ten aspirin would cure my back ache and my cramps and the pain in the toe I just stubbed".


Sexex you asked what do I really know about mentalism ? I have read hundreds of books and if you need the list let me know.
I am not really sure why I replied to you as its obvious from your posts that you seem to be mentally unbalanced. Some NLP may be good for you to take a look at yourself and see where you could improve how you feel.


Who's flaming now? And what books? Why is reading "hundreds of books" relevant to this topic? Didn't you say in an earlier post that NLP is a placebo? And NOW you're suggesting it would improve how he feels?

Yeah, sugar always makes me feel better...and fatter... :rolleyes:


I do know that suggestion is used in some mentalism. if suggestion/influence did not work then neither would the trick

Anyone who has read many Luke Jermay books will know that.


This is true but what does this have to do with NLP? NLP is about getting people to do what you want even if they don't want to do it and it's permanent. I've said it before and I'll say it again - suggestion works for the mentalist because a) the audience WANTS to be fooled, b) the mentalist throws in a lot of confusing patter and misdirection, c) the suggestion lasts only as long as the performance.

That's it! Period. And it all what I've been saying from the beginning.

I'm sorry, I have to ask this: Don't you read what I write?

Flame on

Enjoy the fire. Sorry, you asked for it.



ok What if I could get you a little script together, something that would take under a minute to perform for you.

You ask a person a series of questions then you ask another final question. The final question would be something like "what colour is grass" The person will 8/10 times answer wrong.

For me its more like 9/10

Let me know and i will post it. I dont really know if this is NLP as such


*Yawn* More bragging? Is that what you are looking for? Fine:

I can get a person to guess a random card I pulled out of a deck. I get that 9/10 too. So?

That doesn't prove NLP - that suggestion, confusion and the desire on the subject's part to play along and get it right.

In your trick, that's just suggestion and confusion.

[Lothario]

I think we are going off-topic here. The question is not whether it is possible to fool or trick someone. There's no doubt about it. If i confuse or distract someone, i can snatch their wallet, switch an envelope without them seeing it, get them to sign something they don't want to, etc. Ok. That's not the point here.

The point is: 1) Is NLP any good? and specially 2) Can i use any of the techniques that fall under the umbrella of NLP, like embedded commands, describing a pleasurable experience and then linking it to myself with an "anchor", ericksonian handshakes and pattern interrupts to get someone to do or feel as i wish?

Examples: "After over a decade of experience and research, and feedback from literally thousands of students, I’ve come up with simple but proven powerful language patterns designed to by-pass a woman’s left-brain critical “check list” through which she normally screens guys." Ross Jeffries

"Just last night Kim and I were out to dinner and this guy came up to us and began to talk. It seems that he had made over a million dollars yesterday in the stock market. Well we figured if he had done that well that he should buy us dinner…and he did! We also got some very interesting investment advice that I plan on using! No I did not just trance him. When trance is used with anchoring and rapport, what you get is a 123 punch that is almost unstoppable!!!" Tom Vizzini

"When "The Dark Side" patterns are used - it not only can change an opinion, it can destroy and totally obliterate a mind. And it stays in operation until you get it fixed or until you slowly, over time, put the pieces back into place. But for some people, that will never happen and the devastation is total". Kenrick Cleveland

This is the kind of stuff they are selling. Self-improvement uh?

[remirol]

The point is: 1) Is NLP any good? and specially 2) Can i use any of the techniques that fall under the umbrella of NLP, like embedded commands, describing a pleasurable experience and then linking it to myself with an "anchor", ericksonian handshakes and pattern interrupts to get someone to do or feel as i wish?

My assessment is "no -- you can only get someone to do or feel things that they wanted to do or feel in the first place."

Examples: "After over a decade of experience and research, and feedback from literally thousands of students, I’ve come up with simple but proven powerful language patterns designed to by-pass a woman’s left-brain critical “check list” through which she normally screens guys." Ross JeffriesNote how he doesn't really actually _say_ anything here or make any claims; he just says that these "patterns" are designed to do "X". Not only that, he begins with an unsupported generalization about women that cannot hold true in all cases.

"Just last night Kim and I were out to dinner and this guy came up to us and began to talk. It seems that he had made over a million dollars yesterday in the stock market. Well we figured if he had done that well that he should buy us dinner…and he did! We also got some very interesting investment advice that I plan on using! No I did not just trance him. When trance is used with anchoring and rapport, what you get is a 123 punch that is almost unstoppable!!!" Tom VizziniEven presuming the basic truth of the anecdote (since this story could be fabricated out of whole cloth and looks very suspicious at first glance -- why are seven-figure stockbrokers walking up and talking to random people?), I could ask some guy who'd just made a million to buy me a $30 dinner jokingly, and he probably would, no NLP required. Also note that he doesn't claim that he used _anything_ on this guy; he just lets the reader assume it for themselves.

"When "The Dark Side" patterns are used - it not only can change an opinion, it can destroy and totally obliterate a mind. And it stays in operation until you get it fixed or until you slowly, over time, put the pieces back into place. But for some people, that will never happen and the devastation is total". Kenrick ClevelandThis one's simple; if it was true he could demonstrate it at will, but he hides it behind the Too Evil to Use excuse. I can't speak for the JREF, but I bet Kenrick's claim might even be eligible for the MDC -- "destroying or totally obliterating a mind" should be trivial to test.

[Lothario]

Ah... I was wondering when this (http://www.howardnations.com/persuasivejuryarguments/secretsway.html) would show up. Lawyers using NLP.

I'm trying to find more studies on the persuasion uses of NLP, but i can't find anything.

[Senex]

Sexex you asked what do I really know about mentalism ? I have read hundreds of books and if you need the list let me know.
I am not really sure why I replied to you as its obvious from your posts that you seem to be mentally unbalanced. Some NLP may be good for you to take a look at yourself and see where you could improve how you feel.

I do know that suggestion is used in some mentalism. if suggestion/influence did not work then neither would the trick

Anyone who has read many Luke Jermay books will know that.

Flame on

Don't give me a list of books -- give me a list of effects that you believe can work that relies on NLP. No explanations -- just the title of the effect. I have performed a couple of effects from Jermay's 7 Deceptions and the woo hand gestures work best with a crowd that know you are not a skeptic. I believe I know what works and why much better than you do, despite you calling me mentally unbalanced. Since you did call me mentally unbalanced I believe you have created a burden on yourself to prove my opinion of NLP in mentalism is the work of an unbalanced mind. Unbalanced is a lousy thing to call another person without reason -- especially when you one believes in NLP and how it can cure me :D

[Ashles]

ok What if I could get you a little script together, something that would take under a minute to perform for you.

You ask a person a series of questions then you ask another final question. The final question would be something like "what colour is grass" The person will 8/10 times answer wrong.

For me its more like 9/10

Let me know and i will post it. I dont really know if this is NLP as such

I'd be interested in seeing this script. If only to clarify what concept we are actually talking about.

[Pup]

I'd be interested in seeing this script. If only to clarify what concept we are actually talking about.

I hope it's not just the "white of an egg" (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071201223648AAccE6d) thing.

[JFrankA]

I hope it's not just the "white of an egg" (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071201223648AAccE6d) thing.

It's kinda like that.

It involves confusion.

It's a trick.

No NLP needed....or useful. :)

[MikeSun5]

I know exactly how they are all done...

...The bigger picture is always there even though you think you know everything....

I have read hundreds of books...

well, with a screen name like that...


The point is: 1) Is NLP any good?

No.

and specially 2) Can i use any of the techniques ... to get someone to do or feel as i wish?

Only if they are a willing participant who believes in NLP and are aware of what you're doing.
When it works, NLP therapy operates on the placebo effect. Covert hypnosis doesn't work at all.

I think the only reason relatively smart people get caught up in believing in NLP is because it has all this scientific-sounding rhetoric.
It's as bogus as phrenology - which, I remind you, was considered a legitimate science back in the day.

[JFrankA]

I think the only reason relatively smart people get caught up in believing in NLP is because it has all this scientific-sounding rhetoric.
It's as bogus as phrenology - which, I remind you, was considered a legitimate science back in the day.

I agree, but I think another reason why smart people get caught up in it is the old "more is better" thing.

For example, the thinking here is "if a con artist can get a total stranger to give away money with just talking, what he is doing can be used more so that it can be taken further". This kind of thinking, I feel, is the trap that causes a lot of people to believe in NLP and hypnosis.

[Ashles]

ok What if I could get you a little script together, something that would take under a minute to perform for you.

You ask a person a series of questions then you ask another final question. The final question would be something like "what colour is grass" The person will 8/10 times answer wrong.

For me its more like 9/10

Let me know and i will post it. I dont really know if this is NLP as such

I'm still interested in reading the script.

[Lothario]

I'm still interested in reading the script.

I'm more interested in seeing IKE or any other NLP proponent using these Jedi mind tricks on people.

[remirol]

I'm more interested in seeing IKE or any other NLP proponent using these Jedi mind tricks on people.

I'm sure they'd be delighted to whip up a nice, staged YouTube video for you :D

Realistically though, what you're suggesting starts to approach a controlled test, and that's exactly the sort of thing these NLP salestypes/promoters avoid at all costs. Heck, look at how much effort IKE spent dodging a request to name one type of NLP that he thinks "works"... :)

[Lothario]

Realistically though, what you're suggesting starts to approach a controlled test, and that's exactly the sort of thing these NLP salestypes/promoters avoid at all costs. Heck, look at how much effort IKE spent dodging a request to name one type of NLP that he thinks "works"... :)

Perhaps his constant contradictions are an attempt to use "pattern interrupt" on us? :)

[JFrankA]

I'm more interested in seeing IKE or any other NLP proponent using these Jedi mind tricks on people.

*waves hand in front of IKE*

Show us the NLP tricks we are looking for.......


(I'm sorry, I just couldn't resist.... :D)

[Lothario]

These guys are everywhere... they claim Obama is using NLP and covert hypnosis methods - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4iDwV7hCmw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4iDwV7hCmw)

"Erickson had no hesitation in presenting any suggested effect as being "hypnosis", whether or not the subject was in a hypnotic state. In fact, he was not hesitant in passing off behaviour that was dubiously hypnotic as being hypnotic." Weitzenhoffer, The Practice of Hypnotism, 2000

Apparently Erickson and other people believed in the power of hypnotic suggestion without any formal hypnotic induction. I still don't get it... what is hypnosis after all? It seems like hypnosis (and NLP) are being used for almost anything. Hypnotic copywriting, sales, seduction, etc. Can the use of hypnotic language make one's speech more persuasive? Considering that in its therapeutical form it relies heavily on placebo effect, isn't it strange that people are applying it to persuasion?

[Ashles]

ok What if I could get you a little script together, something that would take under a minute to perform for you.

You ask a person a series of questions then you ask another final question. The final question would be something like "what colour is grass" The person will 8/10 times answer wrong.

For me its more like 9/10

Let me know and i will post it. I dont really know if this is NLP as such


I'm still interested in reading the script.

[Lothario]

I'm still interested in reading the script.

Don't hold your breath :)

[MikeSun5]

I'm still interested in reading the script.

Non-NLP drivel like this is what he's talking about...

Say these numbers out loud, in succession:
3
33
333
3333
33,333
333,333

Now QUICKLY think of a color and a tool. First ones in your mind.



Most people will pick "red hammer." Old Banachek stuff, but not NLP.

Or make someone say the word "go" as the answer to 5 consecutive questions and ask them what they do at a red light. 9 out of 10 will say "go." That's not NLP either, my mom taught me that one. :)

[Lothario]

I knew this one

[Ashles]

ok What if I could get you a little script together, something that would take under a minute to perform for you.

You ask a person a series of questions then you ask another final question. The final question would be something like "what colour is grass" The person will 8/10 times answer wrong.

For me its more like 9/10

Let me know and i will post it. I dont really know if this is NLP as such


I'm still interested in reading the script.

[JFrankA]

I'm still interested in reading the script.

I'm interested as well, Ashles, but I'm afraid we are in for a long, long wait. :)

[remirol]

"I think he may be on extended sabbatical from the Forum".

[Lothario]

I'm sure he'll be glad to tell us what he's been up to once he comes back. I predict it will involve NLP, beautiful women and trips around the world.

Meanwhile, i'll try to revive this thread. This news story is being used as an ad for one of those conversational (covert) hypnosis courses: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7309947.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7309947.stm)

Watch the footage. This is the course i'm talking about, by a man named Igor Ledochowski: http://www.conversational-hypnosis.com/?gclid=CN3_mI-RoZsCFaAA4wodaEjkBw#closebar (http://www.conversational-hypnosis.com/?gclid=CN3_mI-RoZsCFaAA4wodaEjkBw#closebar)
I was referred to it, once again, by a hypnotherapist.

[Lothario]

No comments on the "hypnotist thief"?

BTW, i found this today: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cA8S8QUbydk&feature=related

This has got to be BS. There's no way he could do this by touching the guy's hand once.

[JFrankA]

Lothario, these last two things have something in common:

They are people who are trying to con others. Look, it's the same thing over and over, confuse someone enough so that they are open to a suggestion. Confusion can happen a myriad of different ways and once someone is confused, you can slip in a suggestion and the person will more likely follow it. (and notice the words I used: "more likely" - even that isn't guaranteed.)

But this is a quick and very temporary thing. What is complete bullpucky, as it was stated before in this thread but I can't find who said it, is the belief that one can actually, completely and permanently mind-control someone else through the use of words and voice inflection to the point of getting that person to do something that they clearly wouldn't want to do.

Again, this is the key: it's a thing that works a little but no more. You may be able to con someone out of a hundred dollars, but that same person you've conned is going to a) eventually realize that they have been conned and b) not trust you ever again c) won't be fooled by you.

And there is no way in hell that you can use NLP or hypnosis to get a woman who has decided that she wouldn't go to bed with you if you were the last man on Earth in bed with you.

[Lothario]

What about this guy?

http://www.anthonyjacquin.com/products.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iiWIe2DGJl4

He claims to be using the "handshake interrupt" we spoke about.

[remirol]

What about this guy?

He claims to be using the "handshake interrupt" we spoke about.

What's different about anything he's doing from all the other con artists trying to peddle their woo?

[Lothario]

What's different about anything he's doing from all the other con artists trying to peddle their woo?

Some very impressive routines. Unless they're fake, it does seem like he hypnotized the man using the fabled ericksonian handshake. But then again i don't know much about the subject. That's why i ask.

[remirol]

Some very impressive routines. Unless they're fake, it does seem like he hypnotized the man using the fabled ericksonian handshake. But then again i don't know much about the subject. That's why i ask.

Well, the point is -- anyone can make a Youtube video and it has absolutely no bearing on whether or not the subject of the video is true. What did you _really_ see, when you look at it without the lenses of what-you-want-to-see there? In other words, what were the actions that took place?

The video creator wants you to _believe_ certain things are happening. But take his claims out of it for a second -- what's actually happening? Anything different than the other woo peddlers out there?

[JFrankA]

Here's another way to put it.

Hypnosis is a card trick. Once you know some basic sleights and moves, you can produce what seems to be a miracle right before people's eyes. That's because you are fooling them.

Hypnosis is like that. It's the same moves, the same confusion techniques, the same way of playing off a spectator's desire in order to achieve the effect that the hypnotist is going for but dressing it up differently.

[Senex]

What about this guy?

http://www.anthonyjacquin.com/products.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iiWIe2DGJl4

He claims to be using the "handshake interrupt" we spoke about.


That guy is full of woo. If he really could do what he says his book teaches...

Is it possible to walk into a shop and leave with
any goods you choose without paying?


Is it possible to become 'invisible'?


Is it possible to pay people with blank paper
rather than cash?


Is it possible to make people collapse with laughter
on your command?


Can you get free drinks by convincing bar staff
you are a superstar?

The answer to all of these questions and many more is YES. The techniques in this book will show you how


... then why does he offer his services as a traditional hypnotist for parties? He could be a world class thief or teacher of creepy voyeurs who want to be invisible in the women's locker room.

You can't handshake interupt a stranger into going into a hypnotic trance.

This is true about stage hypnosis - you can watch one and recreate what they do just by mimicking them, unlike you can with a magician who does have secret stuff you don't see. The only thing a hypnotist might do you are unaware of is whispering to a subject or having a stooge or two as a subject to help uninhibit the other subjects (just like a well run wet T-shirt contest does ;))

Stage hypnotists don't pay for their appliances with blank paper or drink for free when not performing. They would if they could - but they can't and neither will you even if you buy that guy's book.

[Lothario]

I think Derren has a routine where he becomes invisible to some guy on his show.

[Senex]

I think Derren has a routine where he becomes invisible to some guy on his show.

I think Derren has many routines where he confuses what is possible and what is misdirection to some guy on this thread.

[Lothario]

I think Derren has many routines where he confuses what is possible and what is misdirection to some guy on this thread.
:rolleyes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPZH07THejo

Here it is. People commenting are saying that DB has hypnotized the guy before.

Of course, he does the usual NLP subliminal influence "you will stop seeing me" kind of thing for misdirection.

I wish i knew how he does these tricks.