NLP: Science Or Magic?
Even Life Coaches do dumbass things from time to time. Or it may be more accurate to say, especially Life Coaches (or this one at least) do dumbass things from time to time.
This last week I allowed myself to get drawn into a very heated argument. Initially I jumped in to defend somebody else, but it didn’t take long for everybody to turn on me and it get nasty.
I was accused of being ugly (fair enough), unethical (I don’t think so), dishonest (I suppose technically we all lie, but not in this case), a terrible speller (most definitely), an idiot (I was for getting involved), an ass hat (not sure on that one) somebody that scams my clients and a low life (you can judge on those last two).
Before I go on, I really don’t want anybody mentioning the site in the comments for three reasons.
Firstly, I am not looking for support and don’t want anybody posting there on my behalf. Seriously, don’t.
Secondly, I don’t want to send them the traffic.
Thirdly, if you do think I’m an ass hat then you’re going to have to take a ticket and get inline over there.
One of the other comments I had aimed at me was to do with NLP. The person went on to say that NLP has been proven to be mumbo jumbo.
They are not the exact words, but I’m not going back to check because it’s close enough for the purpose of this post.
The only thing that kind of comment demonstrates, is a fundamental lack of understanding of what NLP is and what it isn’t. And a deep desire to hop aboard any scam bandwagon that just happens to be going past.
NLP (neurolinguistic programming) is a huge umbrella term that covers dozens of different techniques and approaches, some of which are scientifically proven and many of which are not.
In other words, some work independent of the clients belief system and some rely largely, or even entirely, on the clients belief system.
The latter really suggests that that process is no more than a placebo, even if that placebo can be highly effective with some people. And in the final analysis it’s the results for the client that matter the most, right?
What I thought I’d do today is run through a few of the NLP processes and give you my take on whether they’re science or magic. And the word magic is purely a euphemism for the fact that we don’t know how, or even if, they really work at a neural level.
1. Anchoring – Science
You can see me demo anchoring here if you like and it has been scientifically proven to work many times. In fact the whole Pavlov’s Dog experiment was a process of anchoring, or as neuroscientists call it, a conditioned reflex.
Anchoring occurs when you do two unrelated things simultaneously enough times to cause the independent neurons to physically wire themselves together (if you want more on that, check out the brilliant The Brain That Changes Itself by Norman Doidge – al)
Neuroscientists use an expression for this and it’s “Neurons that fire together, wire together”
The problem with anchoring is that I have seen NLP instructors claim to anchor a state with one gentle touch of a subjects shoulder. Quite bluntly that’s bollocks, what they’re doing is using suggestion the same way as a hypnotherapist or stage magician may do so.
Anchoring works, but unless it’s a very traumatic event, it will probably take you many attempts to set an anchor intentionally. And an ‘anchor’ set using suggestion with a willing guinea pig on stage will probably have gone before the person leaves the room.
2. Eye Accessing Cues – Magic
I think even magic is pushing it with this one, because it’s largely nonsense. There is a belief that you can tell whether somebody is lying by watching the way their eyes move.
This can work under certain circumstances, but it is horribly unreliable and you have to do a lot of benchmarking.
I don’t want want you kneeing your husband in the gonads based on the fact his eyes moved in the wrong direction when you challenged him on coming in late one night. Here is a more in-depth look at eye accessing cues.
3. Reframing – Science
I have talked ad infinitum about reframing or reappraisal as it is also called, because it’s so powerful and I use it on a daily basis.
5 years ago I couldn’t have told you why it works, but if you get my favorite self development book of all time ‘Your Brain At Work’, (al) David Rock does a brilliant job of explaining what is actually happening in your brain when you use reframing.
If you are new here and don’t know what I’m talking about I urge you to check out this post on reframing
4 Six Step Reframe – Magic
This is a John Grinder developed strategy not to be confused with reframing, that’s used to help people change habits. In fact I used to use it sometimes in my early days, but don’t any more because I’ve found methods I prefer.
Basically it involves putting the client in a trance and communicating with their unconscious so that the positive intent behind the negative behavior can be established.
When the positive intent has been established e.g. smoking to relieve stress, then the practitioner can call on the creative part of the unconscious to look for alternate ways of relieving stress.
Then there is a process of evaluation to decide which idea (presuming there is more than one) is best and whether there is any internal dissonance. If not, then the new behavior is implemented.
I have seen this work, and I have also seen it fail, and that’s what leads me to believe it’s suggestion at work and/or hypnosis.
In some respects it doesn’t matter if the result is the desired one, but I highly doubt this technique would work with somebody that is skeptical to begin with.
5. Fast Phobia Cure – Magic
Now this is brilliant magic because even though I have never seen any research done it on it (if you have please let me know) I have seen it work literally dozens of times and I have used it with clients and helped them remove, or seriously reduce phobias they have had for years.
My first exposure to it was over a decade ago when a psychotherapist used it on my sister to cure a phobia of snakes that was so severe she couldn’t even say the word!
There’s an explanation in this post of the fast phobia cure.
6. Language Patterns – Science
NLP was built on linguistics and the first book The Structure Of Magic was purely about something called the Meta Model..
We know that the use of language can shift peoples thinking because without that knowledge there’d be no such thing as Cognitive Behavioral Therapy.
Every spin doctor and speech writer worth his or her salt knows about the power of language. Especially the flip side of the Meta Model, which is called the Milton Model.
Whereas the Meta Model looks for specificity and really drills down to the deep structure of language which is useful in a therapeutic environment, the Milton Model does the opposite.
That’s why good politicians can make a speech that never really says anything, but everybody agrees with. It’s also what cold readers (clairvoyants) and horoscope writers use to help make them appear plausible.
7. The Swish Pattern – Magic
A bit like the Fast Phobia cure, I have seen this work lots of times, but I have absolutely no idea why. It’s another technique for removing bad behaviors and I use an adapted version of it with clients to good effect every so often.
Here’s a demo of the Swish Pattern if you’d like to know more.
So there you have it. There is definitely some smoke and mirrors with NLP, but there’s also some mind-blowingly powerful stuff that is well worth getting your head round, which is what a lot of therapists are doing as many now train in NLP.
So what do you think, science or magic, or a bit of both?
Photo: “Magicians Hands #1” Courtesy of Robert Neff
I applaud your critical appraisal Tim.
But I do see a similarity between your approach and what goes on in the religion debates online. One part of which agrees that there are many false gods in NLP, yet NLP is powerful. The other side says just go one god further and become atheist (or a-nlpist).
There is still no evidence for the VAK issue. Too much doubt is on it from a variety of reliable sources. The same is true with all stuff originating in NLP.
At some point there should be some sort of attribution of power. Where does it come from? From the above list you show, all the NLP stuff is magic (placebo/confirmation bias/deception). All the stuff in the list that is science originated outside of NLP.
NLP isn’t a coherent framework, just a grab-bag. So its pretty much a position built on quicksand. Too many review papers now class NLP as pseudoscience, quackery, dodgy, misleading and discredited.
Whatever REALLY works (according to good research) in anybody’s repertoir can be attributed to well researched method AND theory. Plausible explanation and real evidence will tend to come from things that are not classed as pseudoscience.
So for what its worth, I see progress in life in general. I also see more people critical of the pseudoscience of NLP, and more people attributing success to legitimately researched science.
Neuro is great stuff and its building all the time. But Neurolinguistic programming really has earned itself a proper bypass though.
Can we not ever explain the mysteries of the mind? Do Bandler and Grinder simply move in mysterious ways? I think most professionals are tired of such non-answers.
I’d give the remaining god (NLP) the boot. A solid foundation will be found on a position where you can attribute successful behaviour to plausible, well researched concepts.
“Too many review papers now class NLP as pseudoscience, quackery, dodgy, misleading and discredited”
Really? Throw a few links to academic papers at me will you?
Is that why more psychotherapists and counselors are training in NLP than ever before and why so many Fortune 500 companies like American Express and Mercedes Benz use NLP consultants? Is it also why both major political parties employ NLP as well as athletes and people performing at the highest level?
There is no thing called NLP. Therefore, to say it has been discredited is ridiculous and undermines your entire argument imho.
You’ll love my latest post by the way! Or maybe not ;-)
Hi again Tim
The discrediting papers and reviews I refer to are posted here:
https://sites.google.com/site/reflectionsonnlpres/
Their main concern is that pseudo-science is becoming more institutionalized, and more needs to be done to expose it. NLP is given as a key example.
You say NLP is not a thing. This is my point. NLP is not well defined. Adherents seem to want to be increasingly vague about it, especially when questioned (hence the moving in mysterious ways allegory). That is a problem.
Ok, I know you like to provoke, and I like the same approach.
“IF” you were going to bypass NLP, what would you go to? Of course you have already shown some above. But what is your main backup? Human info processing theories? Social psych? Neurolinguistics? CBT?
Or would you be keen on developing your own framework, Tim style? Judging by your blog, I would place you in the HIP area (human info processing theory).
What’s your view?
I though the Norcross stuff would be in there. I read some of that ages ago and it was incredibly poorly researched.
The problem is Scott I have had this conversation so many times over the last 6 or 7 years and it never gets anywhere.
I don’t agree that NLP adherents adopt the approach that it isn’t defined either. I know I do, but I don’t know many that are trained in it that agree with me.
I am just using stuff that I know works for the most part with clients and would rather leave the philosophical debate to others.
Hi Tim
A year ago I would have responded pretty much the same as you. But then I heard what Bandler had to say about testing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNlqFBxAbes
He gives a long list of neuroscience reasons for NLP’s claimed power (about 14 seconds into the video). Then he dismisses statistical testing (which is the bedrock of neuroscience), and claims absolute certainty for his methods. The only other people I know who claim such certainties are the religious. So basically (to me at least) he has gone from god of congruence to king of crap. I also asked an expert linguist friend about Grinder’s linguistics claims, and it turns out they are similarly crooked.
As an aside; I remember the joy of life and mental freedom at turning atheist after 22 years of Catholicism and all its associated priestly babble. So I’ve also given neuro-linguistic programming the boot. I no longer wear the proverbial neuro-linguistic programmer T-shirt. Consigned to mythology; the mass-graveyard of dead gods. The research seems to support that common sense conclusion. Or did you have a more specific criticism of Norcross et al?
So at least with my NLP bypass well installed, I now go straight to reality/evidence based concepts rather than pseudoscience. I prefer accurate and realistic attribution.
Judging by your article, you appear to be somewhere near the edge of that change. Of course its up to you which way you want to go.
Still, I get the feeling your future is broader and brighter.
Cheers
Scott the godless
You sound very evangelical about it Scott. Lots of seeing the light type of stuff.
I prefer to live in the gray areas. Use what is useful and disregard the rest.
Heard Bandler and his credentials questioned lots of times, but never heard anybody suggest Grinders background was anything other than squeaky clean. He WAS a Linguistics professor and did work with Gregory Bateson and the three leading therapists in Erickson, Satir and Perls of the time. Do you think he duped them?
Anyway, let’s call it a day because we aint gonna agree and I don’t want to spend time on a pointless debate.
Oh one final thing. Go and read the Norcross paper, it’s a couple of years since I did (and I think I read the first one, not the 20008 version) it had numerous easy to research factual errors.
An interesting article – though I do have to disagree with your view on eye accessing cues.
You’re right that you cannot rely on left/right movements (well you can to a degree with good calibration), but the vertial movements are very reliable at working out what kind of access is being made (V, A, or K).
The biggest problem most people have with eye accessing is assuming that there is a single access occuring when there are multiple.
Got any links to the research Chris.
Nlp has given me plenty of tools to use. I’m a fan of the fast phobia cure, and variations of it. I would say reframing alone is worth the price of admission! I agree that the eye accessing cues are bunk. There are still people out there trying to sell it.
If someone is looking for books, I recommend the early stuff by Bandler and Grinder. I think a good read through Derren Brown’s review of NLP is worthwhile as well. That is in his book Trick of the Mind.
Good post, Tim!
Best Regards,
Lonnie
Tricks of the Mind is one of my favorite all time books!
That makes two of us!
A great blog Tim thanks. Actually there are good scientific reasons why the fast phobia cure (also known as The Rewind technique as it is also highly effective for PTSD) work and there is some evidence that it is more effective than other treatments http://www.hgi.org.uk/archive/rewindevidence.htm
Best wishes
Mark
Good article, thanks Mark. Still not sure we are at the point of saying it definitely works, but it’s good to see research being done on it.
I believe that it really depends upon the person being treated. It all seems to be geared towards the power of thought, and finding a way to use language in a manner that reaches the “patient”, if you will. I don’t believe in hypnosis and yet the thought that it possibly could be real, rendering me a clucking chicken in front of a room full of people, is actually terrifying. Maybe I don’t believe in it because I don’t want to, and also because I would never trust someone enough to manipulate my sub/unconscious mind in any manner, thus, hypnosis probably wouldn’t work because I don’t want it to. Others I know, swear by it. I think a lot of the different therapies, including CBT and EMDT, work. They make sense to me, personally, as I can wrap my brain around them. A few years ago, they did not, because I was not wanting to discipline myself enough to be honest with myself and find something that works so I could get better and learn to manage my triggers.
Tori, check out this post, it may put some of your fears to rest about hypnosis.
https://adaringadventure.com/nlp/what-is-hypnosis/
I am a firm believer in NLP and have used it in my life to get through somr very difficult times. Not everything works on everyone and that is why there are many different medications, therapies and treatments. i choose to allow people who dont keep an open mind about the differences in treatments to talk because they truly have no idea the amazing results of NLP and may never know….sadly.
Exactly Marcelina and that’s why we have to be careful. And it saddens me that some people ridicule NLP without ever understanding what it is.
Such is life I guess, and thanks for dropping by.
Just wanted to say thanks for recommending “Your Brain at Work” David Rock.
An amazing and possibly life changing book as I have thought and applied some of the stuff he talks about in the book every day since I finished it. I need to read it again though as there is quite a lot of ideas to take in and cement on a first reading.
Slightly off-topic aside: It was also the first book I read on the IBooks app – Thought a phone would be too small to read books on, but it’s not, it’s great and now I’m addicted to reading books this way as I always have book on me at all times.
You’re welcome Annabel! IO actually read the hard copy and then bought the audio version and have listened to that a couple of times. It’s genius.
According to this article in Scientific American http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-is-pseudoscience , the neuroscience surrounding consciousness is nonfalsifiable and therefore cannot be scientifically proven or disproved.
I guess NLP is part of the neuroscience surrounding consciousness, right?
Thanks for the link Chris, and sorry you spent so long in moderation I didn’t spot it. I’m going to check it out that. Cheers!
Nice job sorting the wheat from the chaff!
To me, science/magic is a little black and white. I’d say most approaches to psychotherapy/coaching/personal development fall into the category of ‘art’.
And as we know, art can be good, bad, charmingly naive or downright awful.
You’re right it is, although some of it is proven science.
I think you’re right overall though, what we do is a bit of a black art because what works with one client may blow up in your face with another. We’re complicated souls ;-)
Yes, even artists rely on science – pigments, acoustics, MacBook pros etc. ;-)
Knowing the importance of anchoring …
The week my mother was in the hospital and heading toward her passing was the week before Christmas, 2005. Knowing that anchoring works, I made a very conscience and specific effort to AVOID any music during that week.
That’s important, because music is a huge part of my life.
I didn’t want any particular piece of music to give me flashbacks to the sadness I was feeling at the time; I knew the sadness would eventually pass and I didn’t need to revisit it every time, say, I heard “Jingle Bells”.
It worked. I can listen to music without fear.
Holy crap, wow again!
That is some brilliant forethought Don because youa re absolutely right, you almost certainly would have anchored those emotions to the music you were listening to.
Well played!
I’m trained in NLP and I’m also originally a Social Worker, trained and experienced in psychosocial intervention. I agree – NLP is a mixed bag. As are most other forms of psychological intervention. Also, practitioners vary widely in their knowledge and skill sets – even when they originate from the same field. I’ve worked with great social workers and really shit ones, just as I’ve seen great NLP practitioners and really shit ones, great life coaches and really shit ones.
Mental health is highly political and there are many “theories” about the way that the mind works that we accept as “the truth” at face-value, just because they are taught at a university. Lots of the theories taught within traditional psychology at university level are metaphors at best, rather than “scientifically-proven” processes (think Freud’s theories of the conscious and unconscious, and id, ego, super-ego and libidinal drives/ Kubler-Ross’ 5 stages of grieving). But there’s still a lot that we don’t understand about how the mind/body works and working with it is both an art and a science.
Unfortunately, NLP is a field that seems to attract “magicians,” charlatans and charismatics, and I’ve seen a lot of people using NLP techniques as though they’re following a recipe book or casting a spell. Their attitude is manipulative and condescending: “hold still while I fix you with this clever thing I know how to do…” No compassion, no humanity, no listening. Lots of showmanship, hype and aggression in their approach. Not to mention stupidly high prices.
NLP also seems to attract people who love the idea of shortcuts and quick fixes, and believe in the illusion of “happy all the time,” with little appreciation for the grown-up challenges of real life, the broader social and political pressures at work, power dynamics in society, and the simple fact that emotional pain, “negative emotional” and loss, illness, failure and death are all part of what it is to be human. After our daughter died last year, I had a few NLP practitioners I’m connected to say the stupidest things in an attempt to quickly fix/ reframe our loss and get us into a “more positive state.” Ugh!
Having said that, I’ve seen the same patterns of condescension and lack of depth in the world of Social Work and psychology. As an example, I recently attended a mandatory “suicide intervention” training for social workers – this is a standardized, supposedly research-based course that every social worker in this country has to certify in.
We came away with full-colour pamphlets that folded up to wallet-size, outlining a 7-step process to “saving someone’s life.” The focus was the 7 steps, as though this was a magic spell that could be cast on our clients. There was no focus on compassion/ listening/ exploring your own beliefs about suicide as a practitioner and understanding how that might impact on your intervention/ no discussion of power dynamics in society and how that impacts on the choices people feel are available to them and their vulnerability to suicide/ no discussion of different cultural views on suicide/ no discussion of the biological or chemical issues that can cause a depression that leads to suicidal thoughts.
If I was suicidal after having tried everything I know and finally gotten to a point where suicide feels like the only option, and someone pulled that pamphlet, “I-m-gonna-save-your-life-beacuse-I-know-what’s-best-for-you” attitude and 7-steps process on me, I’d feel homicidal instead! And can you imagine what it’s like for people who have repeated bouts of suicide ideation… they’d get a variety of professionals all running the same BS 7-step process on them, instead of listening to them an helping them to address the problems they’re struggling with!
A lot of NLP is totally logical and is in fact used in “scientifically-accepted” forms of therapy that are taught in respected universities, whether they call it NLP or not – like CBT, narrative therapy, art therapy and music therapy (examples are reframing/ belief work/ language patterns/ values work/ metaphor). I do think there’s also a lot of placebo-effect and hypnosis involved in making processes like the phobia cure/ swish/ anchoring work. But I’m ok with that. Hypnosis is a part of NLP.
I’ve used the phobia/ trauma cure successfully with skeptics and non-skeptics, even while I myself was skeptical about it. Richard Bolstad has a very thorough article about the process http://www.transformations.net.nz/trancescript/trauma-process-handouts.html. My sense is that a process like the phobia/ trauma cure, when delivered in the way described by Richard Bolstad, may well be working just because it’s providing the client with metaphors for the way the mind and body responds to trauma and guiding the client through changing their metaphors for trauma response into healthier/ more supportive ones. The “mind/ memory-as-a-movie” metaphor is a useful tool. Some people might get their results because of hypnotic suggestion too, but I’m not trained in the use of hypnosis, so I can’t claim that’s the reason for the results I’ve gotten.
Richard Bolstad has an article about some of the research that has been done into the effectiveness of various NLP techniques: http://www.transformations.net.nz/trancescript/research-on-nlp.html He, himself says that most of the sample groups are too small to consider “scientifically reliable,” but it’s worth a read if you want to explore deeper. Bolstad also directly discusses the question of whether NLP is “magic” over here: http://www.transformations.net.nz/trancescript/the-truth-beyond-magic.html
It would be nice and easy to navigate the world of mental health support/ personal change if it was black and white and we could know that “all NLP practitioners are bollocks”/ “all registered psychologists are the bomb,”/ “all self-employed mental health practitioners or “life coaches” are smarmy charlatans”/ “all government-employed mental health practitioners are high in integrity and competence…” but it’s a messy, mixed bag. So instead we have to all question the professionals we work with, watch for their underlying values and beliefs that inform their work, and notice how they make us feel. The easiest way to know whether someone is screwing you over is to notice whether you feel stronger/ empowered through your interactions with them, or weaker/ needy/ disempowered/ patronized by your interactions with them. And since there’s always a free way to get mental health support/ personal development, you should NEVER go into debt to get support with your mental health and personal development.
Polarizing and offering extreme opinions about NLP/ life coaching/ therapy can be helpful to the extent that it challenges us to broaden our worldviews, ask questions and figure out what we think. But reality is diverse, so “tarring-everyone-with-the-same-brush” attitudes and opinions are never going to be a reflection of reality, and are therefore worth questioning.
Wow! No disrespect to the other commentators here Cath, but if I had a comment of the year award I think you’d just have bagged it.
You should have sent me that as a guest post, it’s awesome!
I’m with Tim – wow Cath, looking forward to a post from you on this…I’ve also experienced some so called NLP pros who have behaved in exactly the way you describe and it’s a real turn off but, like you say, that doesn’t mean I tar everyone with the same brush. There is good and not so good and downright manipulative practices – I just don’t go back for a second look when that’s the case.
ATB Tamsin
Incredible comment, thank you.
Hey great article except for the intro. Very informative, but wish I could pass it on to friends without having to warn them to skip the first few paragraphs about you calling yourself a “dumbass.”
Fair point Elizabeth. I was aware that it was almost like telling an in-joke for anybody that had never been here before. But the vast majority have and know what was going on to a certain extent.
It’s rare I do something like that, but as I say, point taken.
When I first became a coach I often felt compelled to know and understand why things worked. Now, after almost 10 years I’m just happy things work, happy that people feel better, happy that I got to use this “magic” in some small way.
Kudos Tim for responding to the drama with this post.
That’s probably the best approach in many ways, but m,y mind doesn’t work like that it’s always whining at me “But how does that work, and what if it really doesn’t?” ;-)
I still use Swish and FFC though, so I can shut it up sometimes.
Much needed post. For some reason a lot of people ignore that NLP + CBT are both really similar in many ways. Yet, CBT is touted as the one of the best modern forms of psychotherapy and NLP is a “pseudoscience.” Anyone who is aware of the Meta Model and Milton Model knows this is a load of crap.
It’s true that there is a lot of BS in NLP (eye-accessing cues especially which have been scientifically disproven), but it’s also important not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. There are a lot of good principles and techniques in NLP that are massively useful. I recommend anyone interested in personal development to at least read “The Structure of Magic: A Book About Language and Therapy.” It will help you become a much clearer thinker.
I’ve personally had success with the Swish pattern too, and some of the visualization/trance stuff. That depends on a person’s hypnotic suggestibility though.
I agree about that Steven. When I started reading about CBT I was shocked at how similar it was, I mean really shocked.
TSOM was a bit of a slog for me, but I agree, well worth reading and definitely a game changer in many respects.
Spot on Steve – totally agree with your take.
Hey Tim – been away and off line past couple of weeks so just catching up now. Sounds like you’ve been through it for speaking up again and your usual honest, amusing views. Not sure what blog you’re referring too or what went on and, as you say, you don’t want people wading in now in any case. So, I’ll just say, very pleased you didn’t “throw the towel in” as you mentioned above – nothing would be worth that, and this post completely turns anything round IMHO. Thanks as always and keep up the good work – my Google Reader would be a much less inspired or amusing place without A Daring Adventure – not to mention being one of the most real (for want of a better word) life coaches I’ve come across.
ATB for now
Tamsin
I appreciate the kind words Tamsin and I have been blown away by the support. You’re right I would have regretted walking away from it all. Sometimes life throws crap at you and you either deal with it or curl up into a ball and die.
The latter option sucks imho ;-)
Tim – People may have any opinion they want of NLP, but if works, it works. Even if it is magic and it works, hey, sign me up!
Otherwise this is a helpful post outlining many key principles of NLP. Not too many people can get people riled up about NLP and debating it so passionately. Impressive!
Thanks a lot Vishnu, I seem to have a knack of winding people up ;-)
This is the sort of thing that really annoys me. There’s something that works OK and people who don’t know all that much about it create their own mythology around it to make themselves money. When the smoke and mirrors that they created come down, as they inevitably will, the original principal gets a terrible reputation.
I think every industry pretty much has that Chris. Where there’s money to be made there will always be people to exploit a situation.
I love some aspects of NLP, but I’m also very aware of its limitations.
Hi Tim,
Various facets of NLP are extremely helpful. If the client gains benefit, it’s a win win in my book. Thank you again, love your writing.
be good to yourself
David
At the end of the day, it’s what the client gains that’s always the most important thing.
Thanks for (once again) helping to sort the wheat from the chaff. Great post.
My head’s still in a spin about the whole thing. I can’t help feeling there’s a lot of intelligent people on that site who are ruining their potential to do good with all the unnecessary vitriol. I’m bowing out.
No mate, thank you for your support. I had a load of e-mails and texts and I am so grateful, because without them I may have thrown the towel in.
Sorry for the misspelling of “differently”…I should proof things better, I reckin!
It’s ok, I just banned your ISP and reporte you to the grammar police.
I may be drawing you into a potentially heated argument (certainly hope not…let’s both decide not to…) but…
where my head went (and where my judgement flag began to wave wildly)when you were explaining all these techniques for changing behavior (or at least encouraging change) was, what happened to a time when people changed their behavior by making a conscious decision to behave differentlt, understanding the rationale for the changed behavior in getting better life-results, and intentionally and consciously practiced the new behavior long enough to create synaptic pathway change in the brain (ie:new habits)?
Sorry if I’m just causing trouble, but felt compelled to share since it’s what came up for me!
Good question Char!
You cannot change an unconscious belief/fear/phobia etc at the conscious level. Actually that’s not true because CBT does that, but it can take forever.
Processes like FFC and TSP work at an unconscious level and sometimes that is needed if you are going to change behavior.
Try rationalizing that flying is safe to somebody that is terrified of flying. It doesn’t matter how many stats you throw at them because you are talking to the conscious mind and their conscious mind knows their fear is illogical, but the unconscious doesn’t care.
Deciding to change is cool, but it requires massive amounts of will-power and that requires massive amounts of energy to the pre-frontal cortex and people usually end up giving in before they achieve the results they desire.
This was really cool to read Tim. First of all, if you were an ass hat I wouldn’t have given you the Versatile Blogger Award today.
Second of all, if you were any of those things we would just support it since we’re the ones reading and practicing your advice.
Really clever way you did your article. Once again your honesty prevails.
We do a number of DISC and Value assessments for clients so I can understand where skepticism comes in. So our assessment developers have been running tests and studies to verify the results for that same reason.
Excellent job once again,
Bryce
Thanks a lot Bryce I really appreciate your support and glad I met you man!
I like what you’ve done here separating out the “magic” from the “science”. I have no problem with magic, and I thing science is wonderful, but I get very annoyed when people try to dress magic up in the clothes of science.
My (admittedly uninformed, cynical, and probably unfair) view of NLP has been that it’s a grab-bag of various psychological tricks and techniques, some with more merit than others, that was turned into a “system” so somebody can copyright and sell it.
I know quite a few people who have done various NLP training courses, and all of them have spoken about it positively. However they often said have said that the “real” money is in selling NLP training courses. Presumably so you can train more NLP practioners who can then sell NLP training courses.
Of course (ha!), it’s important to differentiate between the commercial practices of NLP’s founders, and what you actually learn from it. But perhaps some of its bad rep comes from the way it’s been packaged, sold, and litigated over.
That’s kinda true, but it never did get trademarked even though Bandler tried. To begin with it was way more hippyish with lots of collaborations and nobody making a fat lot of anything, but having lots of fun.
It definitely is a grab bag though and it’s also definitely got a lot of scammers in it on the training side. I know a website that could expose those people ;-)
I had been wondering what some of the NLP techniques were, because I keep hearing the term bandied about all over the place. I first heard about it when reading Tony Robbins (though I think he has his own variation), but it always sounded to me like it was something that could work.
Thanks for sharing!
You’re welcome Grady. When Robbins wrote Awaken The Giant Within, there were all sorts of legal battles going on between Bandler and Grinder with the former trying to copyright NLP.
I ‘presume’ TR changed many of the names to risk avoiding being sued should the copyright have been enforced (it wasn’t). Although I guess that he may have been trying to repackage the information as his own.
Ass Hat? is that like the opposite of a merkin?
You’re going to have to educate me on what a merkin is?
BTW, thanks for the Skype message and sorry I didn’t respond but I was just starting a group meditation call!
Hm. I think your life may just be that little bit better not knowing what a merkin is. To be honest, sometimes I wish I didn’t (I found out at a trivial pursuit evening,and this is the first time I’ve had the occasion to use the word)..
If you’re curious enough to google it now, you’ll enjoy the giggle, perhaps more so than the visual imagery that will imprint itself indelibly onto your mind.
Jeez, I don’t know what to do now! Is it as bad as a Jabberwocky?
*Sniggering* at the thought of a jabberwocky with a merkin. If I found out it was a merkin, the jabberwocky would lose all its credibility, as far as I’m concerned. :)
LMAo, finally got round to Googling it and you’re right that would be kinda funny! If only Monty Python had thought of that.
It’s only as bad as a Jabberwocky if its gyring and gimbling in the wabe.
Jeez, did you Google that or was it stuck in your memory?
For some reason I can recite that whole poem and thats from Junior school as well, it was the only poem that stuck in my memory, i think because of the use of made up words like mimsy were the borogroves and moom wraths outgrabe.
That’s even weirder, because when researchers do memory tests, people always struggle to remember made up words than real ones.
You’re unique mate ;-)
I was wondering if you could recommend any books on NLP so I can learn more about some of the techniques you mention
Probably the best book to get an overall look Andrew would by NLP: The New Technology of Achievement by Charles Faulkner and (I think) Steve Andreas.
That covers 95% of the stuff without going into insane detail.
As a physician, I was hugely sceptical of NLP…but I now espouse the view you’ve taken, in that there appears to be a hard kernel of truth.
The final thing that convinced me? Hearing Charles Faulkner being interviewed. Hugely impressive scientific mind who’s not afraid to call a lot of NLP for the bunkum that it is.
And I arrived here from the aforementioned site (you didn’t come off as badly as you’ve suggested, many who criticised came off far worse…although your fate served as a warning to other potential voices of reason, myself included…which may be a (small) consolation).
A great post: a very nice way to turn a negative experience into helpful information!
Allan, thanks a lot for dropping by and I fully appreciate what you’re saying. I told a few people that offered to support me to back off, it would have served nobody, least of all them.
Cheers!