Yet more NLP BS

[Iknoweverything]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[remirol]

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Iknoweverything]

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



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

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

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

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

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

 

[remirol]

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

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

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

What specific technique from NLP do you claim this is?

 

[Iknoweverything]

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

Thats fine Remirol think as you wish its a freeworld!

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

 

[remirol]

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

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

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

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

 

[Iknoweverything]

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

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

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

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

 

[remirol]

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

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

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

 

[Iknoweverything]

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

 

[Toke]

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

Something more substantial would help.

 

[remirol]

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

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

 

[JFrankA]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Iknoweverything]

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

Thanks

 

[JFrankA]

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

Thanks

And I expected more from you.

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Iknoweverything]

And I expected more from you.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Good luck

 

[Eddie Dane]

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

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

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

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

 

[Axiom_Blade]

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

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

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

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

 

[Lothario]

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

Good luck

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Eddie Dane]

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

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

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

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

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

Does customs in California use NLP?

 

[Lothario]

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

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

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

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

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

Does customs in California use NLP?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thoughts, opinions?