PDA

View Full Version : Neuro-Linguistic Programming



programmer_guy
18th September 2010, 08:49 AM
http://www.pick-up-artist-forum.com/downloads/NLP%20by%20XFMAN.pdf



An embedded command is a Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) technique for "planting" a thought (state, process, or experience) within the mind of another person beneath the person’s conscious awareness. This is done through presuppositions, which are assumptions implied within verbal structures.



And here are two videos that demonstrate this:

Derren Brown Controls Shopping Mall Visitors
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOEKdaXIEHc&feature=related

Derren Brown - Subliminal Advertising
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyQjr1YL0zg

Dulloldfart
18th September 2010, 09:32 AM
I find NLP manipulative and not especially valid. Derren Brown doesn't support it, as I quoted from his book on ESMB.

Paul

AnonKat
18th September 2010, 09:55 AM
I find NLP manipulative and not especially valid. Derren Brown doesn't support it, as I quoted from his book on ESMB.

Paul

Touch that wall......Thank you. :D, This TR in particular aims at rewiring the brain so it follows commands more easily with less resistance.

AnonKat
18th September 2010, 10:07 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuro-linguistic_programming


Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) is a controversial approach to psychotherapy and organizational change based on "a model of interpersonal communication chiefly concerned with the relationship between successful patterns of behaviour and the subjective experiences (esp. patterns of thought) underlying them" and "a system of alternative therapy based on this which seeks to educate people in self-awareness and effective communication, and to change their patterns of mental and emotional behaviour".[1]

The co-founders, Richard Bandler and linguist John Grinder, claimed it would be instrumental in "finding ways to help people have better, fuller and richer lives".[2] They coined the title to denote their belief in a connection between neurological processes ('neuro'), language ('linguistic') and behavioral patterns that have been learned through experience ('programming') and that can be organized to achieve specific goals in life.[3][4][5]

NLP was originally promoted by its co-founders in the 1970s as an effective and rapid form of psychological therapy,[6][7][8] capable of addressing the full range of problems which psychologists are likely to encounter, such as phobias, depression, habit disorder, psychosomatic illnesses, and learning disorders.[9] It also espoused the potential for self-determination through overcoming learned limitations[10] and emphasized well-being and healthy functioning. Later, it was promoted as a "science of excellence", derived from the study or "modeling"[11] of how successful or outstanding people in different fields obtain their results. It was claimed that these skills can be learned by anyone to improve their effectiveness both personally and professionally[12]

Despite its popularity,[13] NLP has been largely ignored by conventional social science because of issues of professional credibility[13] and insufficient empirical evidence to substantiate its models and claimed effectiveness.[14] It appears to have little impact on academic psychology, and limited impact on mainstream psychotherapy and counselling.[14] However, it had some influence among private psychotherapists, including hypnotherapists, to the extent that some claim to be trained in NLP and apply it to their practice. NLP had greater influence in management training, life coaching,[15] and the self-help industry.[16]

programmer_guy
18th September 2010, 11:00 PM
I find NLP manipulative and not especially valid. Derren Brown doesn't support it, as I quoted from his book on ESMB.

Paul

Although Derren Brown distances himself from official NLP details, many people on the internet claim that he does use it in more general ways.
They use some of his stuff as examples. If you disagree with this that is okay with me.

(BTW, I am not promoting NLP. I am just making some observations for discussion.)

Dulloldfart
18th September 2010, 11:51 PM
Although Derren Brown distances himself from official NLP details, many people on the internet claim that he does use it in more general ways.
They use some of his stuff as examples. If you disagree with this that is okay with me.

(BTW, I am not promoting NLP. I am just making some observations for discussion.)

I think NLP proponents sort of take ownership of things people do that are similar. For example, sometimes people say that I'm using NLP in my Rub & yawn stuff. I say I'm not, but they don't necessarily believe me. :)

Paul

AnonKat
18th September 2010, 11:52 PM
I think NLP proponents sort of take ownership of things people do that are similar. For example, sometimes people say that I'm using NLP in my Rub & yawn stuff. I say I'm not, but they don't necessarily believe me. :)

Paul

It actually reminded me of a Yogha

Dulloldfart
18th September 2010, 11:55 PM
It actually reminded me of a Yogha

Fruit yogha or plain?

Paul

AnonKat
18th September 2010, 11:59 PM
Fruit yogha or plain?

Paul

lol Rub and Yawn. Yawning is supose to be the ultimate way of breathing in

Yoga

programmer_guy
19th September 2010, 04:47 AM
NLP concept of Mirroring
http://www.gazotube.com/beXd_e39Uqc.html

The importance of the rapport - The process of mirroring, by Derren Brown
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1a-gBGcgRh0&feature=related

And this is another example of why some of what Derren Brown has done is called NLP.

degraded being
19th September 2010, 05:27 AM
NLP concept of Mirroring
http://www.gazotube.com/beXd_e39Uqc.html

The importance of the rapport - The process of mirroring, by Derren Brown
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1a-gBGcgRh0&feature=related

And this is another example of why some of what Derren Brown has done is called NLP.

Derren Brown also did this kind of thing as hoaxes.

programmer_guy
19th September 2010, 05:29 AM
Women will also "mirror" a man that they think is interested in them and they feel attracted to the man.
(It's not as much "the other way around".)

But this is probably a topic for another thread.

programmer_guy
19th September 2010, 05:37 AM
Derren Brown also did this kind of thing as hoaxes.

Please provide a link. I want to read it.

degraded being
19th September 2010, 05:47 AM
Please provide a link. I want to read it.

Just google "derren brown hoax", lots there.
Why he hoaxes is uncertain. He seems to play both sides.
He (apparently) hoaxes to teach people how easy it is to be taken in.
At the same time he seems to claim he*can* do unbelievable things by understanding principles of NLP, suggestion, etc. But they, sometimes are also hoaxes. It is a layered sort of thing.
Ultimately I think he is actually a showman. He uses a serious, questioning sort of persona because it is very credible. It looks like he is exposing things but he is at the same time tricking people by using that persona to look very credible amongst *intelligent* people.

programmer_guy
19th September 2010, 05:51 AM
Just google "derren brown hoax", lots there.
Why he hoaxes is uncertain. He seems to play both sides.
He (apparently) hoaxes to teach people how easy it is to be taken in.
At the same time he seems to claim he*can* do unbelievable things by understanding principles of NLP, suggestion, etc. But they, sometimes are also hoaxes. It is a layered sort of thing.
Ultimately I think he is actually a showman. He uses a serious, questioning sort of persona because it is very credible. It looks like he is exposing things but he is at the same time tricking people by using that persona to look very credible amongst *intelligent* people.

Thanks for the "feed back". I will look into it.

Regards

programmer_guy
19th September 2010, 06:00 AM
Just google "derren brown hoax", lots there.
Why he hoaxes is uncertain. He seems to play both sides.
He (apparently) hoaxes to teach people how easy it is to be taken in.
At the same time he seems to claim he*can* do unbelievable things by understanding principles of NLP, suggestion, etc. But they, sometimes are also hoaxes. It is a layered sort of thing.
Ultimately I think he is actually a showman. He uses a serious, questioning sort of persona because it is very credible. It looks like he is exposing things but he is at the same time tricking people by using that persona to look very credible amongst *intelligent* people.

Are these the hoaxes that you are thinking about?
http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/tv-shows/science-scams/

degraded being
19th September 2010, 08:02 AM
Are these the hoaxes that you are thinking about?
http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/tv-shows/science-scams/


They are the ones where he plays the hoax-buster.
There are some where the hoax has not been admitted.

Steven Morris
The Guardian, Wednesday 8 October 2003 02.17 BST
Article history

The publicity material described him as either brave or foolhardy. But Derren Brown, the illusionist who claimed he was playing Russian roulette on television using a live bullet, was revealed yesterday to be neither.

Brown's controversial stunt backfired when police on Jersey, where it was filmed, said he had used blank ammunition.

The illusionist, dubbed Britain's answer to David Blaine, had boasted he was risking his life. In fact it was an elaborate hoax.

A spokesman for Brown last night issued a less than robust defence of the stunt, saying only that if the illusionist had used a blank bullet, as the police alleged, and if it had fired as the gun were pointed at his head, then "he would have died anyway".

Three million people watched the show on Channel 4 on Sunday, despite fierce criticism from police and anti-gun campaigners.

The idea was that a volunteer would load a bullet into one of a gun's six chambers. Channel 4's publicity material clearly stated it would be a "live bullet". Brown would then use his powers to divine which chamber the bullet was in.

Viewers duly saw him fire empty chambers at his head and appear to fire a live bullet at a sandbag, which seemed to have been punctured.

When it emerged that the stunt had taken place on Jersey the police switchboard was bombarded by complaints and the matter was raised in the island's parliament yesterday.

The police say they felt they had to put the record straight. Lenny Harper, deputy chief officer for the States of Jersey police, said the force had given permission for a production and props company to bring 50 rounds of blank ammunition and equipment used to replicate the impact of a bullet on to the island. The programme makers told the police they would be filming at a farmhouse at Grouville on the south-east tip of the island.

Mr Harper said: "There was no live ammunition involved and at no time was anyone at risk."

The programme makers had made much of the fact that they were having to film overseas because of the UK's strict gun laws. But Jersey's laws are just as strict. Mr Harper said: "There is absolutely no way the States of Jersey police would allow anybody to put themselves at risk and shoot themselves dead. This was just an illusion - the question of whether it was in dubious taste is another matter."

larger | smaller
Media
Television industry · Channel 4
UK news
Printable version Send to a friend Share Clip C

Derren Brown: Hero a Fake?
To cut to the chase, the answer is no.

Hero at 30,000 Feet is the latest TV special by mental illusionist Derren Brown. In the show, Derren took Matt, a fed-up Leeds man lacking in confidence, and
transformed him through a series of set-ups into a courageous, outgoing, risk-taker--the hero of the title. Matt had applied for the programme believing it was a new quiz show, but was unaware that Derren was behind the strange, life-changing series of events he was experiencing.

The events included a fake armed robbery, a night-time encounter with a crocodile and being put in a straitjacket and tied to a railway line as a train approached. The finale was a plane journey where--and this could never happen in real life, due to regulations--a pilot fell ill on a plane, and it was up to Matt to volunteer to land it. Through "hypnosis," Matt was taken from the real plane into a flight simulator, where he successfully overcame his fear of flying and landed the plane. Up to this point, Matt had been the archetypal passive bystander. Earlier, for example, we had watched him sit by saying nothing as smoke started billowing out from under a door, all because he did not want to be the first to take action. But now, Matt the Unconfident was Matt the Hero, Matt the Brave.

For me, it was a strangely intense and emotional experience, perhaps because I identified with Matt's fears and anxieties about taking risks and stepping out in life.

For others, Derren Brown's Hero at 30,000 Feet was just a hoax.

The belief that Hero--and the entire Derren Brown phenomenon--is fake rests on two flawed ideas. The first is that what Derren does is truly "extraordinary." In one sense it is; in another sense, Derren uses psychology that is in fact quite ordinary. We are simply unaware of it. Derren Brown forces us to think about the incredible powers of the human mind that we take for granted every day.

Second, there's the idea that the theatricality of Derren's stunts invalidates them. Actually, Derren has consistently prefaced his shows with the disclaimer that what he does is "a combination of magic, suggestion, psychology, misdirection and showmanship." Derren is a mentalist, a magician.

So, what was it about the show that made people cry "Hoax!"? One was the suggestion that in Derren Brown's Hero at 30,000 Feet, Matt was an actor. I'm not sure of the basis for this, other than that people just can't believe it was all real. Again, it all seems extraordinary, but in fact, Derren is relying on established principles used by hypnotists and mentalists. In general, it is easier than most people think to convince the mind it is in a different reality, and it is possible to convince a suggestible person that anything is true, given the right conditions. Yes, Matt could be an actor, but why would he need to be? There is nothing Derren does in the program that couldn't have been done with a real person.

It's necessary to appreciate that with any reality or documentary show, a lot more goes into production and post-production, including editing, than most viewers realize. Certainly there are huge parts of what Derren accomplished and how he engineered it that are never seen on the screen. Some armchair critics see this as evidence of deception and fakery, but this is just TV production.

Derren explains a lot of it in this article, in which he answers fans' questions about Hero.

Aside from questions of fakery and such, I must say I thoroughly enjoyed the show. The thing I have always appreciated about Derren Brown is that he adds some new dimension to what he does every time he presents a new show or stunt. In The System, for example, he pressed mental illusionism into the service of critical thinking and skepticism. Now, in Hero at 30,000 Feet, Derren applies his psychological techniques to personal development and mental well-being. Derren Brown is an astounding showman, but he strikes me as a man with a mission, too.
Posted by David L Rattigan at 19:50
Labels: Derren Brown, mentalism, TV

ME> (Degraded Being)
I think the mirroring stunt is just a stunt.
Same old same old.........READING SOMEONE'S MIND.

Just a new way of presenting it to a current audience.
Mirroring may show something about people liking or feeling comfortable with each other. That is NLP and maybe agreed on by psychologists. We have heard it before and most of us probably find it quite plausible. Brown establishes that with us first to get our agreement and then adds on the extra bit, that you can read someone else's mind. How amazing! We have always wanted to be able to do that and now we can believe it without appearing flaky because it is an extension of current theory (as far as we know, in psychology, behaviour etc.).

I have seen other vids which are just trickery. There are several which use that NLP stuff about placing words into spoken sentences to make people do things. One was about people getting huge payouts at the dog races by suggestion to the payout clerk that you have a winning ticket when you don't. The clerk is so mesmerised she repeatedly hands out piles of dosh to non-winning tickets. Others too.

If that embedded command thing was true then people would jump up and do all sorts of silly things by connecting spoken words and editing out others whenever people spoke to them.

shanic89
19th September 2010, 09:42 AM
Another reason to like Deren Brown here (http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/2010/06/scientology-avoids-paying-tax-united-kingdom/).

at3ist
20th September 2010, 10:53 PM
NLP is based on Modeling. Which is basically, "do as people who are doing good do"

The creators started following the best Psychologist and people who were having results in every area, from Sales to Magick, And asking them question of how they do that?, being aware of patterns and reasons for the person being that good.

Thats why everything someone does good, others can say is NLP, but in reality is just having some skills. Like the old "obama is using NLP" Well he is, or maybe he is just good at talking, If you watch a Hitler speech you can find NLP all over it.

NLP is heavy influenced by hypnosis, Basically all there is to know about NLP you can find it in hypnosis, the NLP models are more flexible, but still are just Hypnosis. The creators modeled Milton Erickson well enough to reproduce his success.

And most NLP Is just a Model that works, but not necessary truth. Is just good assumptions.

As an example of just things that works read this

http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/nlpfax04.htm

programmer_guy
21st September 2010, 05:44 AM
NLP is based on Modeling. Which is basically, "do as people who are doing good do"

The creators started following the best Psychologist and people who were having results in every area, from Sales to Magick, And asking them question of how they do that?, being aware of patterns and reasons for the person being that good.

Thats why everything someone does good, others can say is NLP, but in reality is just having some skills. Like the old "obama is using NLP" Well he is, or maybe he is just good at talking, If you watch a Hitler speech you can find NLP all over it.

NLP is heavy influenced by hypnosis, Basically all there is to know about NLP you can find it in hypnosis, the NLP models are more flexible, but still are just Hypnosis. The creators modeled Milton Erickson well enough to reproduce his success.

And most NLP Is just a Model that works, but not necessary truth. Is just good assumptions.

As an example of just things that works read this

http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/nlpfax04.htm

Thanks for the info. I appreciate the feedback.

Would you explain why the info in the link you provided doesn't mention hypnosis?

thetanic
21st September 2010, 11:20 AM
I find NLP manipulative and not especially valid. Derren Brown doesn't support it, as I quoted from his book on ESMB.

Many NLP processes are very similar to Scn ones, though, especially the earlier creative processes from the 50s, and many of them work quite well.

secretiveoldfag
21st September 2010, 04:56 PM
4G3NTanon assumes that NLP is part of the Scientology mind-fcuk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4ALoW_yppI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EdvGzMNej8&feature=related

fortymarriedandbalding
21st September 2010, 05:33 PM
4G3NTanon assumes that NLP is part of the Scientology mind-fcuk



Very nice summary covering lots of points. Best I have seen.

Only things I will add are that the euphoria he mentions has two causes – NLP desensitisation (also used in many forms of psychotherapy that came before NLP), and the fact that the body's physiology can not tell the difference between real, imminent threats and imagined ones. That is why our heart races and we release adrenaline when we watch a horror movie. When a scientologyist is recounting these so called experiences over and over, the body produces a variety of chemicals which give us a high.

AnonKat
21st September 2010, 06:12 PM
Very nice summary covering lots of points. Best I have seen.

Only things I will add are that the euphoria he mentions has two causes – NLP desensitisation (also used in many forms of psychotherapy that came before NLP), and the fact that the body's physiology can not tell the difference between real, imminent threats and imagined ones. That is why our heart races and we release adrenaline when we watch a horror movie. When a scientologyist is recounting these so called experiences over and over, the body produces a variety of chemicals which give us a high.

That is because of the unconsious mind, it can not see the difference between fact or fiction. to the unconscious pink elephants can exist as the unconscoiuos mind mostly thinks in Images. And the brain were the mind is situated runs the body by electric currents and release of hormones(chemical messengers).

Sounds almost like Hubbard but it is standard psychology

at3ist
21st September 2010, 08:35 PM
Thanks for the info. I appreciate the feedback.

Would you explain why the info in the link you provided doesn't mention hypnosis?

NLP as I told, is a big subject, so in this link they are talking about the right frames of mind to approach NLP and you can see how it all apply to therapy if you want to call it that way (in NLP is called Learning, Cuz we don't believe theres anything wrong to begin with, so is just teaching new stuff, to people who has learned by different reasons to do things that produces "bad" outcomes in other words they are not getting what they want)

But you can tell, that all that information can be applied to therapy and basically was all the mentalities that people like Milton Ericson, Virginia Satir, Fritz Perls, and all the people who actually "cured" his patients consistently had.

You can tell also that is not necessary truth but is useful for the therapist and even the patient to believe for example "There is no such thing as failure, only feedback", and when you talk about beliefs you're talking about the mind and about hypnosis.

For the hypnosis part of NLP, You can always look for it.

But this will give you real answers, The creator himself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s941m7CKft4

Listen to the part in which he says "and If I can get her some new tools.... and teach her to learn some new things"
In this and all other parts in which he talks you can spot the presuppositions and how he approach the cases.

and this.........I can predict some of you guys will be into NLP by this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMipI3zjMOc&feature=related

programmer_guy
22nd September 2010, 04:59 AM
Wow! Thanks for all of the comments and interesting info. :thumbsup:

When I started this thread I never suspected that I would get all the very intelligent feedback on this subject.

programmer_guy
22nd September 2010, 05:56 AM
Here is one person's rebuttal to NLP (it's long)
http://skepdic.com/neurolin.html

programmer_guy
22nd September 2010, 06:20 AM
Concerning Richard Bandler

Titillating Trial Involves Lots of Dirt--and Mr. Clean
Guru Focus of Lurid Murder Case

http://articles.latimes.com/1988-01-12/news/mn-35140_1_murder-case

This is a weird story... even though he was acquited.
I wonder what really happened. I may never know.
But maybe this was personal and has nothing to do with NLP. :confused2:

at3ist
22nd September 2010, 04:45 PM
Yeah, the life of bandler and the fuck up shit he has done, What I can tell about it, is that he is not a saint, far from it, He even discuss those cases and a lot of others in his interviews. Like drug use and a lot of other things.

So yeah nothing to do with NLP, But I'm sure that it has a lot to do with the creation of it, Cuz of the determination, and the badass attitude.

What I can say about NLP itself is that it has a lot of hype. And you have to see for yourself, rather than believing, cuz they use NLP to sell and teach NLP, and they want your money, NLP is not free, there are 10.000 dls seminars where you sit to listen stories and laugh. But that in itself is not bad. We live in a capitalist society and they know about marketing.

And about the article is just nonsense, you can tell cuz I already tell you that most of NLP are useful lies, if you try to make it literal, serious and scientific you get articles like that one. Trying to prove things that can not be proved by conventional methods.

anonymous1312
22nd September 2010, 06:14 PM
NLP has been over hyped in recent years with some pretty fantastical claims made about it. The techniques and concepts of basic NLP are fairly sound but there are limits to what they can achieve making it fairly pedestrian.

Regarding Derren Brown, he claims to use a mix of magic, suggestion, misdirection, psychology and showmanship to achieve his results and I believe him. The cunning thing is that some of the NLP claims are part of the misdirection and showmanship; sometimes when he tells you how he achieved a trick what he says isn't necessarily true.

On hoaxes. Magicians have always created dangerous illusions that for them were perfectly safe, like catching a bullet in the teeth; magicians don't make a habit of risking their life any more and almost certainly less than stunt men. Being a mentalist / magician is all about performing hoaxes for entertainment; part of being a showman and a magician is to create a sense of wonder and frankly if the truth is told about how a lot of the tricks are performed the sense of wonder is lost.

That said I like to point out to scientologists that the achievements of Derren Brown are way better than anything any would be OT has achieved. Derren Brown is very much at cause and possesses apparently super human perception etc. etc. and he is definitely NOT a scientologist!

fortymarriedandbalding
23rd September 2010, 08:17 AM
That is because of the unconsious mind, it can not see the difference between fact or fiction. to the unconscious pink elephants can exist as the unconscoiuos mind mostly thinks in Images. And the brain were the mind is situated runs the body by electric currents and release of hormones(chemical messengers).

Sounds almost like Hubbard but it is standard psychology

These reactions come from the reptilian brain, for want of a better term, not the unconscious mind. The reptilian brain is unthinking and does not care what colour the elephants are, only that there are images of danger being picked up by the eyes.

(I am not refering to the evolutionary model of the reptilian brain that has been debunked years ago, rather the neurophycology model)

programmer_guy
23rd September 2010, 08:23 AM
These reactions come from the reptilian brain, for want of a better term, not the unconscious mind. The reptilian brain is unthinking and does not care what colour the elephants are, only that there are images of danger being picked up by the eyes.

(I am not refering to the evolutionary model of the reptilian brain that has been debunked years ago, rather the neurophycology model)

The "reptilian" part of the brain IS our so called unconscious mind.
IMO, you are both correct... just from different descriptions.

fortymarriedandbalding
23rd September 2010, 08:43 AM
Yeah, the life of bandler and the fuck up shit he has done, What I can tell about it, is that he is not a saint, far from it, He even discuss those cases and a lot of others in his interviews. Like drug use and a lot of other things.

So yeah nothing to do with NLP, But I'm sure that it has a lot to do with the creation of it, Cuz of the determination, and the badass attitude.

What I can say about NLP itself is that it has a lot of hype. And you have to see for yourself, rather than believing, cuz they use NLP to sell and teach NLP, and they want your money, NLP is not free, there are 10.000 dls seminars where you sit to listen stories and laugh. But that in itself is not bad. We live in a capitalist society and they know about marketing.

And about the article is just nonsense, you can tell cuz I already tell you that most of NLP are useful lies, if you try to make it literal, serious and scientific you get articles like that one. Trying to prove things that can not be proved by conventional methods.

NLP is a useful tool if kept in perspective. Unfortunately some of the seminars you talk of rely on creating a frenzy type of enthusiasm that is not sustainable. Some can be quite cult like.




That said I like to point out to scientologists that the achievements of Derren Brown are way better than anything any would be OT has achieved. Derren Brown is very much at cause and possesses apparently super human perception etc. etc. and he is definitely NOT a scientologist!

I know someone like Derren Brown who, without any training, instinctively uses NLP and hypnosis in an incredibly effective form. This person has since done some courses because when someone told him what he was doing, he wanted to learn more. The courses did nothing but give him terms to what he was doing.

This person was able to notice and take in many cues from peoples face, body, voice etc and process them almost instantaneously. If you showed him one of those “find the differences” puzzles with two pictures, he only needed to see both pictures for one second, then you could take one picture away and he would point out all twenty differences. And he does not have a photographic memory, but noticed and filed the differences away in his brain inside the second.

Strange thing was, give him a page out of a book and it would take him 5 minutes to read it and he would still make many mistakes. He did not pass the courses in NLP because he could not read well enough to complete exams and learn all the explanations.

Nothing superhuman about him, he is just wired differently. On the outer edge of the distribution graph on certain normal human abilities.

fortymarriedandbalding
23rd September 2010, 08:51 AM
The "reptilian" part of the brain IS our so called unconscious mind.
IMO, you are both correct... just from different descriptions.

That depends on definition of unconscious mind. Unconscious mind often refers to a part of the mind that is powerful and able to do great things if you can gain control of it or access it. It talks to you below your level of awareness.

Under that definition, it is quite different to the reptilian brain. The reptilian brain does not think, does not speak to you, it simply reacts.

programmer_guy
23rd September 2010, 08:56 AM
That depends on definition of unconscious mind. Unconscious mind often refers to a part of the mind that is powerful and able to do great things if you can gain control of it or access it. It talks to you below your level of awareness.

Under that definition, it is quite different to the reptilian brain. The reptilian brain does not think, does nto speak to your, it simply reacts.

IMO, it's the same thing.

Maybe more scientific brain research over the coming years will give us the answers to those questions.

Stat
23rd September 2010, 09:19 AM
My humble opinion: - fortunately, most if not all of us, even if liable to verbal/visual, etc., suggestions (sure we are, to some extent), unless extremely distressed and/or in a great turmoil (including children and some old people - read more vulnerable) or chemically influenced, can easily stay ourselves and form our own opinions and decisions despite of any covert attempts of mind manipulation. Pardon me if I am too wordy. Hope it makes sense to you. It does to me. Thank God. lol

Arthur Dent
23rd September 2010, 02:56 PM
My humble opinion: - fortunately, most if not all of us, even if liable to verbal/visual, etc., suggestions (sure we are, to some extent), unless extremely distressed and/or in a great turmoil (including children and some old people - read more vulnerable) or chemically influenced, can easily stay ourselves and form our own opinions and decisions despite of any covert attempts of mind manipulation. Pardon me if I am too wordy. Hope it makes sense to you. It does to me. Thank God. lol

I agree. Otherwise we'd all be complete zombies. However, I do think that we are trained in scn to be rather expert at NLP whether you call it that or not. I remember being regged in a phone booth* at night and being persuaded to call an elderly relative and ask for money!! This was in 1974, when I was, granted, still at an impressionable young age. umm...but really?? Seems to me I was nearly as impressionable in 2007 while being made to scrounge for yet another intensive!

And how many people have I helped reg?? For intensives, or to contribute to something or to join staff or to train. I believe these NLP-type techniques became second nature. :omg: Or were they
there to begin with? :omg: :omg: The thought scares me but recognizing it allows me to NOT practice it further to the best of my ability.

*(oh why??? because the center were I was didn't pay their phone bill and were cut off!!!:duh:)

fortymarriedandbalding
24th September 2010, 07:51 AM
My humble opinion: - fortunately, most if not all of us, even if liable to verbal/visual, etc., suggestions (sure we are, to some extent), unless extremely distressed and/or in a great turmoil (including children and some old people - read more vulnerable) or chemically influenced, can easily stay ourselves and form our own opinions and decisions despite of any covert attempts of mind manipulation. Pardon me if I am too wordy. Hope it makes sense to you. It does to me. Thank God. lol

You are right. But when used as a therapy, people who are undergoing NLP are willingly subjecting themselves to the therapy.

NLP can be quite effective for salespersons and people who are unsure whether to purchase something and it may be enough to tip the scales for people. Sometimes this is only enough for the person to be happy with the purchase for 10 minutes or so, but unfortunately many people are not prepared to return something straight after purchasing it, so they may be stuck with something they did not really want. Adverts use NLP type tricks all the time.

An interesting read is “59 Seconds: Think a little, change a lot” by Prof. Richard Wiseman . It shows how easily people can be nudged in to behaving a certain way or feelng a certain way. This is not NLP, but NLP is really a collection of psychological techniques bundled together, so much of what is in this book is also utilized by NLP practitioners or marketers.

With scientology, it relies on people wanting to believe and submitting themselves to processes designed to fool them into thinking they are working.


I agree. Otherwise we'd all be complete zombies. However, I do think that we are trained in scn to be rather expert at NLP whether you call it that or not. I remember being regged in a phone booth* at night and being persuaded to call an elderly relative and ask for money!! This was in 1974, when I was, granted, still at an impressionable young age. umm...but really?? Seems to me I was nearly as impressionable in 2007 while being made to scrounge for yet another intensive!

And how many people have I helped reg?? For intensives, or to contribute to something or to join staff or to train. I believe these NLP-type techniques became second nature. :omg: Or were they
there to begin with? :omg: :omg: The thought scares me but recognizing it allows me to NOT practice it further to the best of my ability.

*(oh why??? because the center were I was didn't pay their phone bill and were cut off!!!:duh:)


I believe that scientologists are far from expert in NLP or Hypnosis or anything to do with helping the human mind. Hubbard was an expert on getting people to submit willingly to certain processes that took advantage of how the mind worked to create the illusion of helping. That these processes used hypnosis and psychiatric techniques now used in NLP does not make those who used them expert. They were following like robots, not dancing with their clients like a good psychologist or psychiatrist will do.

Scientologists played along in their auditing sessions, not even recognising that they, and the person they were auditing were subjects to NLP and hypnosis. They thought that wins were more to do with the mumbo-jumbo hubbard trotted out about reactive mind, body thetans etc, rather than hypnosis and nlp being used to give the impression of something being done, leading to placebo effect etc.

If scientologists were expert at NLP they would be more competent in relating to the public and handling protesters.

It is important that people who do not know anything about NLP do not go around saying Hubbard stole from NLP based on this thread. NLP came after much of scientology. NLP is a collection of phychological techniques drawn from many, many different sources. Many of these predate scientology. The ones hubbard used were used in by several well known psych prior to hubbard using them.

Stat
24th September 2010, 09:54 AM
Something to think about and do some research on for sure.

I also think of a placebo effect. And a true "human touch".

And some other things I need to learn/evaluate more about.

Thank you, guys.

Respect you and your opinions.

programmer_guy
25th September 2010, 09:51 AM
Something to think about and do some research on for sure.

I also think of a placebo effect. And a true "human touch".

And some other things I need to learn/evaluate more about.

Thank you, guys.

Respect you and your opinions.

Some people are more susceptable than others.
Some people can learn to go into a trance state more quickly and easily than others.
It's somewhat like learning to ride a bicycle.

VaD
25th September 2010, 08:21 PM
NLP is based on Modeling. Which is basically, "do as people who are doing good do"

The creators started following the best Psychologist and people who were having results in every area, from Sales to Magick, And asking them question of how they do that?, being aware of patterns and reasons for the person being that good.

Thats why everything someone does good, others can say is NLP, but in reality is just having some skills. Like the old "obama is using NLP" Well he is, or maybe he is just good at talking, If you watch a Hitler speech you can find NLP all over it.

NLP is heavy influenced by hypnosis, Basically all there is to know about NLP you can find it in hypnosis, the NLP models are more flexible, but still are just Hypnosis. The creators modeled Milton Erickson well enough to reproduce his success.

And most NLP Is just a Model that works, but not necessary truth. Is just good assumptions.

As an example of just things that works read this

http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/nlpfax04.htm

I'd like to thank the OP and everyone who contributed to this thread, with opinions, links etc.
My special thanks to at3ist with his post and link above.

I ran into NLP back in 1995, and found some interesting things to learn. But I got (from someone in Scn) that it was "from Psychs", and thus I forbade myself to look into it or learn anything about it.
In fact, my self-created prohibition to learn anything about it was valid up until today.
I mean now! AFTER I've learned about OT3, Xenu and the fact that Scn tech with its theory are nothing but scam.

Today my curiousity (AGAIN!) overcame my fears of reading and hearing something that would make me insane... (I guess here I agreed being insane after learning what I wanted to learn).
Yet, this gave me another great perspective. Not that I'm all over NLP now but my vision has certainly expanded.
Maybe because I removed another barrier from learning about things and humans.

I guess that Scientologist's mindset makes one still. I mean still about going forward in his learning. It keeps one shut off from fruits of observations that are not per LRH. It keeps one sticking to a certain paradigm.. to a certain principles... One of which is "do not get subverted into something else! Or - you'll die in agony!"

Do I make sense?

VaD
25th September 2010, 08:38 PM
http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/nlpfax04.htm

Interesting also that I used some NLP principles without knowing anything about NLP... just naturally and without any "second thoughts".

NLP, which had been my Enemy, just like any Psychs were, turns out to be my good friend which can explain to me some phenomena I have experienced and reinforce and help to handle some phenomena that I had trouble with.

I used to think that NLP was ONLY to manipulate people. Now I see that NLP as another way of seeing a man in his relationship with environment.

Any good knowledge can be used for the good or for the bad.. It depends on who owns the knowledge. (Atomic bomb was not created for killing people. Those who made it didn't mean it being used for warfare)

NLP is a good knowledge. And those who put this knowledge together are NOT responsible for the followeres who did, have done and have been doing something ugly with/out of it.

VaD
25th September 2010, 09:20 PM
Just a thought.
Let's say that basically a person what s/he is. No image, no special scent, no flavor, no nothing special about him.
He wants a successful model for his image, scent, flavor, abilities...
He thinks that by himself he is nothing.

He chooses a state of Clear as a successfull model. He goes for it.
Now, everything else is "for birds".
The ONLY right thing becomes is to follow Hubbard's path (which WILL make him into someone with image, flavor, scent...).

Well, that's modeling. It's not done to one externally. It's done by a being itself. He just chose the path - the path AWAY from being himself, towards "better self" (which, in itself, is an illusion. The Self-illusion).

P.S. Sorry, the connection of above post with NLP is that a person tends to be *somebody* with others. To be oneself (among others) is often unacceptable, unpleasant, stupid, unintelligent, unethical, and generally - not good. Thus, it's better for a person to BE SOMEBODY (who is acceptable, pleasant, smart, intelligent, ethical, nice, sweet...). So, a person models his presense in the community how he wants to be seen, felt as good, pleasant, acceptable....
NLP to me uncovered the essense of necessity of such modeling pretenses.

secretiveoldfag
25th September 2010, 09:43 PM
So did LRH inhibit contact with psychs (=Evil etc etc) to stop his followers finding out what the tech was doing to them? Considering the tech is based on forms of hyphnosis, NLP, visual stuff, etc etc this was not stupid.

In 1945 he had no objection to psychiatry, was pleading for treatment so a lot changed in the next five years.

at3ist
26th September 2010, 05:21 AM
NLP is a good tool to learn, read books about it, at the worst you will learn about yourself and others.

Most of this things are about creating models for others and yourself, what I mean by that is that you make someone believe something, then the person follow it, then it does what you tell the person, it will do. (read placebo (read hypnosis), and also know that placebo is not a bad thing, If channeled with good intentions and if the thing you're supposed to do, don't prolong itself for a lifetime).

Also Analyze your life based on what I just wrote, what models are you living on?, what do you think those models will get you?.

Somebody once toll you, it will be good to read, and you're reading right now.

What about the language you speak, How does it make you view of the world?.

So in other words we live in models you like it or not, some of them copied, some of them you make.

RolandRB
26th September 2010, 10:57 AM
Touch that wall......Thank you. :D, This TR in particular aims at rewiring the brain so it follows commands more easily with less resistance.

But more so is the "keep it from going away". If you obey that command and think you are keeping a wall from going away then you are a small step away from signing a big value check over to the cult.

programmer_guy
27th September 2010, 02:36 AM
But more so is the "keep it from going away". If you obey that command and think you are keeping a wall from going away then you are a small step away from signing a big value check over to the cult.

Roland, IMO you should change your avatar.

I know very well what you mean by it BUT 'net surfing passers-by might not understand.

at3ist
28th September 2010, 01:26 AM
And is probably the other way around, he is the one fucking with people.

VaD
29th September 2010, 11:03 PM
I'd like to post some excerpts from the following link:
http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/nlpfax04.htm


3. You cannot not communicate
Commentary: People often imagine that they can avoid personal responsibility by simply saying nothing. This pre-supposition points out that we are constantly communicating, by what we do say, by what we don't say, and by a host of non-verbal signals.
On this basis it may be obvious that there is more to be gained by accepting responsibility for one's actions, than by trying to stay aloof.



4. The meaning of your communication is the response that you get
Commentary: The pre-supposition here is that people will respond to what they think you mean, which may be an accurate or inaccurate interpretation of your intended meaning.
(Please note, a "communication" is the 'whole' message - not only what you said but also all of the accompanying non-verbal signals.).
The value of this pre-supposition is that it points out that if we want people to respond appropriately to what we say then we need to talk to them rather than at them. That is, we need to be constantly aware of other peoples' responses to what we're saying, and adjust our communication accordingly, rather than just assuming that they will have understood what we meant them to understand.


6. Every behaviour has a positive intention
Commentary: This is possibly the most controversial of the NLP presuppositions, since it is so open to misinterpretation.

What we actually mean is that every behaviour has a positive intention, as far as the person exhibiting the behaviour is concerned.
This does not mean that the behaviour is the best possible choice (from an objective point of view). Nor does it mean that the behaviour will have positive benefits for anyone else.
A classic example of what we might call the inverted positive intention is the behaviour of the bullying manager who gains re-assurance from hitting on the people under him/her.

The solution to this kind of inappropriate behaviour is to find a way of satisfying the intention by more acceptable means. A way, for example, of giving the manager re-assurance in such a way that he no longer needs to bully his employees to get it.


7. Every behaviour is appropriate in some context
Commentary: Another way of putting this is: if we adopt a certain behaviour it's because once upon a time it worked. The trouble is that we often go on sing a certain behaviour even though it is manifestly no longer appropriate.
Having said that, if we accept this presupposition then we also realise that the most effective solution is to find a new, more appropriate behaviour rather than holding a lengthy, pointless post mortem over the old behaviour (which is more likely to re-enforce that old behaviour rather than driving it out).


8. A map is not the territory it depicts; words are not the things they describe; symbols are not the things they represent
Commentary: This may well be the single most important pre-supposition in the whole of NLP (originally developed by Alfred Korzybski, the founder of General Semantics).
In very simple terms it means that we are always slightly separated from 'reality'. We draw maps, but the map is not actually the place it depicts and we need to be responsive to what is actually happening around us rather than complaining that things aren't as they "ought to be".
Similarly, we need to understand that words are only a kind of shorthand for the things they describe. To get an inkling of what this means in practice, just look at the words on a banknote. What exactly does "promise to pay the bearer" really mean?
What would an actual pound or dollar look like, as distinct from a coin or bank note which represents or symbolises some financial value?


10. There is no such thing as failure, only feedback
Commentary: When something doesn't go as we planned we tend to see that as failure. Depending on the seriousness of the situation we might then get angry, irritated, sad, depressed, worried, guilty or whatever.
None of which serves any useful purpose.

But what happens if we see the situation as feedback rather than failure. A real life demonstration of how not to do something?
Instead of being wrong we've learned something. Instead of feeling bad we are free to form a new plan of action and try again.

Cosy, rosy-tinted 'positive thinking'? Not exactly.
Edison identified about a 1,000 materials which are not suitable as filaments for a light bulb before he found one which worked and worked well.
A number of best-selling books (i.e. million sellers plus film) were turned down by more than two dozen publishers before they were accepted for publication.
And always remember the poor talent scout at Decca records who rejected the Beatles as having no future in music!

I like those statements. There are more there.
I'll comment from my linguistic point of view how NLP dovetails with my daily life of a teacher later.

VaD
30th September 2010, 12:14 AM
My comment:

People deal with each other thru words and non-verbal messages.
If one wants to get his idea across, he does it with 1) words, 2) gestures 3) feelngs.
Generally, it's neuro-linguistics. People use it all the time.

"Programming" word is quite unpleasant for many... but don't parents "program" their own children to behave the way they want them to behave?
Programming is not something extraneous to us, humans. We do it (by the powers we possess). - Senior to junior, wife to husband, mother to child, robber to a victim, scientology (authorities) to scientologists...

at3ist
30th September 2010, 05:33 PM
Internalizing the presuppositions is one of the greatest things you can do in your life. It will serve you in your carer, your relationships and any endeavor you do, I see them as a good attitude toward things.

oneonewasaracecar
2nd October 2010, 12:45 PM
Many NLP processes are very similar to Scn ones, though, especially the earlier creative processes from the 50s, and many of them work quite well.
Neither Scientology nor NLP has subjected themself to peer review. Both NLP and Scientology have trademark protection and secrecy.

Derren Brown (and other skeptics) criticize it for this reason. I have heard Derren Brown say (of NLP) their MIGHT be something there, but nobody knows because it is a closed system.

My guess is that NLP is a money making cult which has just borrowed off of Milton Erikkson (like every most others with 'new' ideas in hypnosis). Hubbard pilfered from Erikkson, including the confusion technique. His lectures are riddled with it.

at3ist
2nd October 2010, 07:31 PM
Theres no secrecy in NLP, just advanced courses, But everybody knows what subjects are covered in them.

Theres a lot of hype, thats the thing. in NLP there are people claiming a lot of stuff that can not be proved, and the NLP system in itself is based on metaphors (aka lies) so go figure.

So you might hear people selling "The LAST technique developed in the field that is so covert and so GOOD, it will double your income in a week" and you go to the seminar and you realize it was just hype. NLP to sell NLP.

NLP is well known and there nothing secret in it (that I know of lol), that you can learn it by books, and theres nothing like in scientology where the books are just adds to the real secret thing. No, in NLP books you find the drills and the exercises to become good at it, If you want mastery you can go to the courses of people who are already mastering it.

VaD
3rd October 2010, 04:50 PM
Hats, Policies, KRs, Word Clearing methods, Auditing Methods and Styles... they are all models. They are all "How to..."

If a person (even an Ex Scientologist) keeps "strengthening his "postulates" and uses "old hats", he keeps getting nowhere where he wanted to arrive.
Yet, if one concentrates on methods/how to's models, and keeps griddling out those that don't fit him, then finally he gets somewhere... having found those that do get him where he wants.

(good to remember: "People would get way more out of their life if they weren't troubled with great ambitions")

$cn postulates are fixed by Hubbard. Postulates of what you can reach thru Scn are fixed and they are not yours. They are Hubbard's fantasy in action.

$cn tech's (read: methods, models...) are fixed.

Successfull models are the ones each person works out for himself - according to *HIS OWN* goals (dreams, postulates...).

Thus, Scn tech (how to's) is only valid for those who found Hubbard's models successful for themselves.

I didn't. :eyeroll:
I have other models that work way better for me. :coolwink:

Ever wondered why there are so many "How to..." books?

VaD
3rd October 2010, 05:14 PM
A ----> B

That's what person wants.
Let's say that he's a *shy* person.
So he postulated to be *courageous*person. - It's his postulate.

How does he go about it? What are the methods?

Scn says: "The Bridge is THE answer. Just do your steps and you'll get to *B* (BTW, no matter what a person had at his *A*, the *only* answer is "the Bridge!")

Now, NLP says that methods/models are numerous and to your own flavors. It's not a single party line thing. You can take it or leave it. You can choose your objective, postulate with reality, and go for it. You are the one responsible.

Value of postulate

In Scn you get those ideas of being Clear and OT. You get descriptions (definitions) of them that are beyond your dreams.
You transform into a being whose *postulates* now are *no less than being a God-like*.
(Remember point *A*? - A person just wanted to be courageous)

Postulates are OVERestimated, and people believing in things think too much of themselves and their abilities to reach *B*.
They just have no methods and models to reach any *B* they want (especially, with LRH's implanted *B*s).

Otherwise, better abilities can be reached. :yes:

VaD
3rd October 2010, 05:36 PM
We value our dreams and our postulates and our goals very much.
We cherish them.
In fact, we are willing to give everything for them (like Scientologists do).

Something unpleasant to say: we cherish them Too Much!
Seems, we'd rather sit back and postulate than go and do something about achieving something that gets us closer to it.

Worse than that is that the more we sit back the more our dreams grow...

****

Guess what.

Our simple Postulates/Goals/Dreams (those that haven't become infected by others Postulates/Goals/Dreams) are achievable.

And the point is not in thinking of oneself less or cutting down your "initial dreams", but about finding and applying better Methods/Models/Approaches to getting to *B*

***

There is something I discovered about dealing with life further.

It's not our "postulates" we have to be concerned about (especially, when those "postulates" are nothing but indoctrinated idea of "better state").
We have to find our own methods and models that we want to realize and feel ourselves acomplished *B*.

programmer_guy
4th October 2010, 01:15 AM
Sex and Death Among the Ice Cubes:
Subliminal Messages in Advertising
http://www.classroomtools.com/sublimad.htm



Like most people, advertisers sometimes like to discuss their work. Reading the descriptions some have given of how particular ads and campaigns were created (caveat: before using this article with your students, review it for age-appropriate language and ideas - a good idea in general, but especially for links in this section of the site), we see that every component of an ad is carefully constructed and placed, sometimes deceptively so. So before automatically rejecting a subliminal explanation for the presence of something, try to find a better one to explain its appearance.

I've titled this section Sex and Death Among the Ice Cubes because it is based in large part on my reading of the work of Wilson Bryan Key. While I do not believe that attempts at subliminal manipulation are as common as Key asserts, I find the contents of a small number of ads impossible to explain reasonably in any other way.

at3ist
4th October 2010, 07:15 PM
@ Vadim Dolgov

Are you talking about Thelema?

VaD
4th October 2010, 08:08 PM
@ Vadim Dolgov

Are you talking about Thelema?

I'm not anymore into mystical solutions. Never read Crowley's stuff (except links from ESMB).

I'm more into "positive psychology".

There is an interesting comment from Jeff's blog that falls in line with what I'm for and after. I believe it was written by someone familiar with NLP:

http://leavingscientology.wordpress.com/2010/09/25/the-boogeymen/#comment-5433

Let me quote it here:

Scientology starts with fear. It starts on the boogeyman that you are not as good as other people (ie you are held back by your ruin) and keeps a hold of you with the boogeyman of psychs and media.
It starts with the hook – “We will find your RUIN!
Then we will fix it. Then you will be better than anyone else, Superman!
Fame, fortune, love will all be yours if you can just fix what is wrong with you.”
Then it hooks with a promise of turning average Joe into Super Joe.
Ever noticed how arrogant Scientologists in general are?
They have been fed with the promise, no, the absolute certainty that they are right, they are better, they KNOW. But arrogance is merely the external manifestation of internal fear, fear of failure, fear of not being the best, fear of being found out that they are not indeed superman.
What if the hook was: lets find your GIFT.
Lets not worry about your stutter, or unhappy marriage or dead end job.
Hell 80% of the population probably have similar issues, its pretty much part of the life experience.
Lets find out what truly makes you shine instead, what makes you not just “the stutterer with the lousy marriage and crappy job”, but the man who can make the most amazing ships in bottles; or sings beautifully; or calms abused children with gentle stories told off the cuff.
Some people’s gifts that are less tangible but no less wonderful, the woman who just makes you feel calm and happy, simply by being with her.
So here you are, wondering what makes you unique and special among the billions of us. What makes you superman.
Is it really by finding and fixing or trying to fix a ruin. What actually is a ruin anyway? Its a comparison between you and other people.
But we are not all alike.
We do not all interact with the world in the same way. So who determines the standard of the ideal human? And why would we want to be that standard?
Who sold that standard to us?
Perhaps even on a deeper spiritual level, we chose to experience life through the lenses of the so-called ruin in order to learn and grow. Perhaps its not what we can’t do that makes us; but rather what we can inherently do and be.
Once we understand the fact that we can’t be prima ballerinas when we grew to 5’8 at 12 years of age and blessed with a build like a shotputter, then its time to understand that our gifts will take us onto a different path. Its what gives us those shiny, sparkly moments of joy that helps us cope with the humdrum job or marriage. It may even give shine enough light on areas of our lives that aren’t happy, to allow us to move away from it; but then again, it might not.
No one was promised a perfect life or an easy journey.
We can certainly not pay anyone else for it to happen either.
Its life lottery. Some of us win the jackpot, some of us just get a fleeting thrill when it seems our numbers are going to come up.
Being unhappy, disgruntled, broke, heart broken, depressed is part of the journey of life, just as is joy and peace and contentment. But its all ephemeral, always changing as we interact with the world.
To Scientologists still enthralled with the tech, I ask, would you be reading this if Scientology honestly wanted you to “find your gift” and worked with you to bring it to the fore.
Would you find more joy in life, or maybe just come to an acceptance of your life, if you focussed more on your strengths rather than putting full focus on and try to hammer out your perceived weaknesses?
Bearing in mind some “weaknesses”can never be rectified, so are you on a one way ticket to nowhere, forever focussing on what you aren’t; and rarely focussing one what you are?
If it is giving you great personal pleasure and joy to spend hours of your life auditing out body thetans, then that is wonderful.
I mean that sincerely. Take joy wherever you can.
But if its preventing you from exploring your joy, or finding your gift that brings you joy, then try to remember an earlier time when your life wasn’t limited by manufactured fear, the Boogeyman.

at3ist
4th October 2010, 09:55 PM
Positive psychology, thats great, tal ben-shahar is a great resource for that subject, check him.

In my bad understanding of Crowley,That "finding your gift" sounds like "Do What Thou Wilt". lol

Like, find what your true *B* is, and get it. Crowley, being a motherfucker aggregates "and fuck anything that gets in your way" and he also had a "bridge" but aimed at finding that "Gift" (again I don't know much about it) apparently that gift is love.

But yes, I agree with you, theres no mystical solution. and there is also no problems (but this one is kind of mystical in a way).

Ogsonofgroo
4th October 2010, 10:11 PM
I've always sort of taken NLP as a bit of a given, like brainwashing and conditioning, that the more you repeat something the deeper it gets imbedded.
This research gives sheds some new light on why NLP, cult programming, and the methods of mind-fuckery that Hubbard 'created' from the cobbled debris of many others, works the way it does. It also explains how we can heal our own brains, deal with obsession, fears, physical damage of neoro pathways (due to cancers and strokes etc.), all the fun things.
Enjoy, discuss, if a slight derail I apologise, but this is cutting edge and interesting stuff.
http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/natureofthings/2008/brainchangesitself/

VaD
4th October 2010, 10:17 PM
at3ist, great exchange!

We might ask each other, "What school do you belong to?" before we start sharing our inner beliefs.
In the end, Who cares? - It's been between you and you. Between me and me.

NLP, having been used for the good or for the bad, has not been responsible. Knowledge, data are not responsible for what people do with it.

We just got been made to think that it's "psychs technology against humans". - To me, it's BS.
To me, NLP is just another way to go about Life.

And! We have to learn NLP ways to effect people as a new technology - since it affects us in our everyday life.

at3ist
4th October 2010, 11:11 PM
NLP is just software to me, I recommend it to people just as that, Good software to deal with things.

Software as any other stuff you are lead to believe. At the end you are the one responsible to run the software to help yourself. Cuz there are cases like in everything else, that will run the software to fuck themselves and others. The same with softwares that are fuck up in itselfs as SCN, and some people will run them for good.

In other words NLP or any other subject IMO should not be put as a end product that everybody has to learn in order to save mankind or something, They have no utility within themselves.

An in the end you're not just software. and in my experience and from other teachings, software is the last thing we are.

Lone_Stranger
4th January 2011, 12:39 PM
Neither Scientology nor NLP has subjected themself to peer review. Both NLP and Scientology have trademark protection and secrecy.

Once again, an attack on the FoNLP by someone who clearly knows nothing about it.

(Sorry, I realise this person is a senior member, but unfortunately that doesn't mean s/he can't make mistakes.)

1. NLP is a specific modelling technique, nothing else.

2. Critics who make sweeping generalizations about whatever it is they think of as "NLP" are "ten a penny". The question here is: Which SPECIFIC techniques are the same in Scientology and the FoNLP.

(The FONLP is the "field of NLP". It includes the modelling technique, a host of related concepts and techniques and concepts, and training in NLP and/or any of the related techniques and concepts.)


Derren Brown (and other skeptics) criticize it for this reason. I have heard Derren Brown say (of NLP) their MIGHT be something there, but nobody knows because it is a closed system.

Interesting - but twaddle. There is NO copyright on "NLP" or "Neuro-Linguistic Programming". And virtually all of the authentic techniques have appeared in books you can purchase on Amazon.

Why Derren Brown says what Derren Brown says, or is alleged to have said, is only known to Derren Brown. Since he was neither a co-creator or developer of the field I don't really see what relevance this has to determining what the FoNLP is really about.


My guess is that NLP is a money making cult which has just borrowed off of Milton Erikkson (like every most others with 'new' ideas in hypnosis). Hubbard pilfered from Erikkson, including the confusion technique. His lectures are riddled with it.

Oh dear!

Milton Erickson's name is NOT spelt with two "k's". And "NLP" is NOT a cult.
Andy Bradbury's site has some relevant comments about the latter point, too:

http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/nlpfax23.htm

As to "borrowing", the co-creators - Bandler, Grinder and Pucelik - made it clear that they were building on other people's work right from the first book on the subject - 'The Structure of Magic I', published in 1975 (the acknowledgement is at the start of the bibliography).

In fact they "borrowed" from Erickson, Virginia Satir, Fritz Perls, Noam Chomsky, George Miller, the field of cybernetics, etc., etc., etc.

In fact one of the reasons why the authentic FoNLP is such good value for money is because it is based on techniques that were already in use by people who were recognised by their contemporaries as being outstanding exponents of the skills B, G and P modelled them for.

Oops, I nearly forgot. There are two sides to the "peer review" question. And guess who has covered the subject:

See http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/nlpfax22.htm

for research relating to the FoNLP, especially in relation to education

See http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/nlpfax21.htm

for an example of two people using linguistic techniques found in the FoNLP in an attempt to trash the FoNLP

See: http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/nlpfax28.htm

for details of a number of supposedly "scientific" studies of the FoNLP

And see http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/norcross.html

for a sidebar in that article which has some fairly uncompromising comments on the real value of "peer reviewing" by the editor of an internationally-recognised peer reviewed medical journal.

:whistling:

SweetnessandLight
4th January 2011, 02:19 PM
NLP is a useful tool if kept in perspective. Unfortunately some of the seminars you talk of rely on creating a frenzy type of enthusiasm that is not sustainable. Some can be quite cult like.



I know someone like Derren Brown who, without any training, instinctively uses NLP and hypnosis in an incredibly effective form. This person has since done some courses because when someone told him what he was doing, he wanted to learn more. The courses did nothing but give him terms to what he was doing.

This person was able to notice and take in many cues from peoples face, body, voice etc and process them almost instantaneously. If you showed him one of those “find the differences” puzzles with two pictures, he only needed to see both pictures for one second, then you could take one picture away and he would point out all twenty differences. And he does not have a photographic memory, but noticed and filed the differences away in his brain inside the second.

Strange thing was, give him a page out of a book and it would take him 5 minutes to read it and he would still make many mistakes. He did not pass the courses in NLP because he could not read well enough to complete exams and learn all the explanations.

Nothing superhuman about him, he is just wired differently. On the outer edge of the distribution graph on certain normal human abilities.

This person might have been slightly dyslexic...several dyslexics I have known are GREAT at pattern recognition, and at reading people's faces and moods, body language, reading a crowd, etc. I would agree that they are hard-wired to be better at this than most.

programmer_guy
9th January 2011, 06:04 AM
Derren Brown tells it like it is:

Derren Brown Interview (1/6)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xswt8B8-UTM&feature=related

Derren Brown Interview (2/6)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQyfsCNFyRY&feature=channel