Yet more NLP BS

[ZirconBlue]

People use Pareto for self help purposes?

How is that supposed to work?

You can eliminate 80% of the time wasted on a forum by ignoring 20% of the posters?

 

[Senex]

You can eliminate 80% of the time wasted on a forum by ignoring 20% of the posters?

No, that's not how it works. 20% of a set of anythig you can name gives you 80% of the benefit of that set. For instance 20% of the posts you read on this site give you 80% of your enjoyment. 20% of the customers where you work give you 80% of your business.

People use Pareto for self help purposes?

How is that supposed to work?

Those Paretonians are worse than the scientologists. I'm going to sic my geriatric golden retriever on the next one that knocks on my door looking for money.

 

[ZirconBlue]

No, that's not how it works. 20% of a set of anythig you can name gives you 80% of the benefit of that set. For instance 20% of the posts you read on this site give you 80% of your enjoyment. 20% of the customers where you work give you 80% of your business.

That's true, but we also use pareto analysis in other ways: focusing on the 20% of your problems that cause 80% of the quality defects, for example.

 

[Senex]

That's true, but we also use pareto analysis in other ways: focusing on the 20% of your problems that cause 80% of the quality defects, for example.

Don't be knocking on my door looking for money because my deaf, arthritic dog has better things to do than biting your ass.

 

[ZirconBlue]

Don't be knocking on my door looking for money because my deaf, arthritic dog has better things to do than biting your ass.

I have no idea what you're talking about, but I'm considering making that my sig.

 

[Senex]

I have no idea what you're talking about, but I'm considering making that my sig.

I think you do. You belong to that doorbell ringing, proslytizing tribe of paretonians. I know your kind. You are disciplined to make lists. You wake up in the morning and sit at the kitchen table making a list of things to do that day. After you write the list you prioritize it. Then you count the number of list entries and divide that by 5. Then you say to yourself come hell or highwater I'll get that top 20% accomplished today.

You look at life as a 20/80 percentage. You are very accomplished at division by 5. You are very smug with your division by 5 philosophy. god help anyone who has to work under you. You will have them making lists and dividing by 5 all day long. Top 20% this and bottom 20% that. If you are married you drive your wife crazy with your lists.

My dog and I want nothing to do with your kind. Always prioritizing and dividing. We thrive in the many wonders of the lower 80%. I can spend my entire day working on a project on the bottom half of my list and be in bliss. Chew on that type A driving your wife crazy man.

 

[ZirconBlue]

I think you do. You belong to that doorbell ringing, proslytizing tribe of paretonians. I know your kind. You are disciplined to make lists. You wake up in the morning and sit at the kitchen table making a list of things to do that day. After you write the list you prioritize it. Then you count the number of list entries and divide that by 5. Then you say to yourself come hell or highwater I'll get that top 20% accomplished today.

You look at life as a 20/80 percentage. You are very accomplished at division by 5. You are very smug with your division by 5 philosophy. god help anyone who has to work under you. You will have them making lists and dividing by 5 all day long. Top 20% this and bottom 20% that. If you are married you drive your wife crazy with your lists.

My dog and I want nothing to do with your kind. Always prioritizing and dividing. We thrive in the many wonders of the lower 80%. I can spend my entire day working on a project on the bottom half of my list and be in bliss. Chew on that type A driving your wife crazy man.

Nominated!

 

[Pedro De Mello]

back here by chance...

Seriously....hahahh

There is better things to do with your superior brain powers I promise!..

Wouldn't that be "There (are) better things to do with your superior brain powers (comma) I promise!" - are you referring to the brain powers that people already have and that you are promising or are you promising that there are better things to do with your brain powers?

I don't get it.

Don't take me wrong, it's just that for one who sells himself (yes, because you're definitely a male) as being a super-duper-expert in using language as a powerful tool, you and your peers are quite often (not to say ALWAYS) juvenil or plain dull on your remarks. And, when you're not, you try to be excessively academic, wisch turns out to be even funnier. I guess that's what you would try to do next - try to present yourself as a valuable human being, speaking with fancy words like "procrastination" or "anathema" and expecting somehow to regain some credibility - but now you won't because I'm telling you what is it that you will do...

You know what I mean? You don't control what other people do because you are not an intelligent person. Otherwise you wouldn't try to learn NLP or social basic skills or whatever - trying to learn that kind of woo and still praise it is regarded by me and I believe many others as a simple proof that you have poor or indeed sad social skills in the first place. One who writes the kind of sentences that you write and states his advancement in life referring to an incredible life and incredible women and incredible trips and incredible houses everywhere and meetings and so on and so on make me believe, on the spot, that I'm in the presence of a giant L loser.

And I mean a BBBIIIGGG one!

Anyway... now I know that you won't even respond. Or maybe you will... with some fancy words or some desesperate attempt at wit trying to look smart. Or you'll just be plain agressive. Anyway, I don't like you. I think you are a bad influence on children and a dangerous threat to the elderly.

Come on, man! Now serious... learn how to write, please!

 

[Joe_Black]

I taught 'pickup' for a few years, ross jefferies stuff works fine in the right context although I personally don't like the guy much. (that context being intergrating its use into your everyday language to get what you want), and girls don't need to be drunk, the is nothing illegal or immoral about it used properly, its just about directing the interaction in the way you want it to go. Sure pickup can be a bit weird but most guys learn it for 6 months or a few years at the most then get bored with it, its just about increasing social intelligence and confidence. Many men are threatened by this, what social skills they learned in 20 years a guy can learn in 9 months etc.

"Oh, I'm sure the transmitter would dearly like to think of it differently. But we are talking about the _intent_ of manipulating another human to do something you want them to. Whether you have their best interests at heart is completely different from the act you're performing -- and that is that you're giving them a command.

Put another way: suggestion implies that the 'receiver' has options. In the context of NLP, it is intended that the receiver have no options." -Quoting remirol

Just to address your comments, it is intended the recevier has options and can think for themselves, its not mind control or magic, suggestion perhaps but that is all... "try not to think of a burger............ a big juicy burger!". You probably thought of a burger but you still have the option to go get one or just ignore that thought.

"But we are talking about the _intent_ of manipulating another human to do something you want them to. "

You have been manipulating since the day you were born, if you were not you would most likely be dead, this is usually not concious though. so???? subconcious manipulation = ok. Conconcious manipulation = bad.

 

[remirol]

I taught 'pickup' for a few years, ross jefferies stuff works fine in the right context

What context, specifically, is that?

Which "stuff"? All of it? Some of it? Specifically?

Put another way: suggestion implies that the 'receiver' has options. In the context of NLP, it is intended that the receiver have no options."

Just to address your comments, it is intended the recevier has options and can think for themselves, its not mind control or magic, suggestion perhaps but that is all... "try not to think of a burger............ a big juicy burger!". You probably thought of a burger but you still have the option to go get one or just ignore that thought.

To continue your example, the goal is to force the person to get a burger, whether they wanted one in the first place or not.

"But we are talking about the _intent_ of manipulating another human to do something you want them to. "

You have been manipulating since the day you were born, if you were not you would most likely be dead, this is usually not concious though. so???? subconcious manipulation = ok. Conconcious manipulation = bad.

NLP is the conscious act of attempting to manipulate someone. Therefore, by your own definition, it is bad... or would be if it worked at all. So far, there is no evidence that NLP itself can have any effect to get someone do something they didn't already want to do in the first place.

Please read the rest of the thread for more detail; there are a number of questions that the NLP "practitioners" who've come in have opted to avoid answering. Hopefully you won't be another one of those who prefers to handwave over specifics rather than pointing to something concrete.

 

[Joe_Black]

In the context of, if your a 4 foot mega ugly guy who is homeless, the is no way it will work for you. Gotta have congurency with what you are saying. although I believe alot of it teaches guys in the long term some good insight into how to communicate effectively with them and other guys too, which is hard to learn and usually just picked up during the course of a life, then again that roman guy cicero reportedly learned from someone. I have friends that say like you the NLP element is over rated/if it works its just chance and at best just does this:
a) Shows a great ability to deeply emote, something generally attractive to most women and something that most men generally lack
b) Once practiced sufficiantly great conversational control, and dominance, again is usually a very attractive trait. (you learned states manship from it in a way)
c) in a socially intelligently allures to you having many good things about you. From what I have seen its only true in reality in about 40% of people who practice NLP (in the UK this is).


Again either way it does work, same result different path.

The goal is not to force anyone to do anything, you can't force someone with NLP or hypnosis, if they did it they wanted to do it, it does not make them stupid. I don't know about other people but my personally is not 2D i have various elements that make me, like the part that wants to avoid fast food and hit the gym, feel good and look good. And the other part that wants to eat burgers, and play games and tells the gym to get lost. I guess in a way it just trys to influence how effective depends on the person. If you want to know if NLP works at all, try this everytime you have a orgasm sqeeze your thumb and little finger on one hand together, do this, i don't know at least 5 times every time you orgasm, then try it when your at work one day, if you feel a really strange feeling then you know the is something to it, if you feel nothing what so ever you will know it does not work for you and you can forget about it, its irrelivent to your life.

i didn't say concious manipulation of someone is good or bad, I believed that was your implication (as it seems to be most peoples for some reason) so I stated it.

 

[remirol]

In the context of, if your a 4 foot mega ugly guy who is homeless, the is no way it will work for you.

So, in other words, it doesn't work as advertised. Got it.

I have friends that say like you the NLP element is over rated/if it works its just chance

Not so much chance -- if you're physically attractive, act confident, dress well, and have decent social skills, _of course_ you'll have an easier time finding people to date. Or, more important than any of that, if you hang around where there are single women and approach them. It's that simple.

Note that NLP doesn't enter into the picture here anywhere. Why do you think that is? Answer: it's a bunch of placebo BS. If you hang around clubs, can manage the basics of hygiene/appearance and approach enough women, eventually one will say yes.

Again either way it does work, same result different path.

Except you haven't demonstrated anything about how it's the NLP working, rather than any of a number of other factors. (Including plain old luck.)

The goal is not to force anyone to do anything, you can't force someone with NLP or hypnosis, if they did it they wanted to do it,

That isn't the way NLP is advertised, though, which is my gripe against it. That, and I haven't seen any evidence that it does anything at all.

If you want to know if NLP works at all, try this everytime you have a orgasm sqeeze your thumb and little finger on one hand together, do this, i don't know at least 5 times every time you orgasm, then try it when your at work one day, if you feel a really strange feeling then you know the is something to it, if you feel nothing what so ever you will know it does not work for you and you can forget about it, its irrelivent to your life.

What you are describing isn't what I see described as NLP, it's something called classical conditioning. Pavlov first observed it many years ago (the whole dogs and bell thing, remember?), and there's been a lot of writing and research about it. It's possible to make people do things via conditioning, but that isn't what NLP portrays itself as. What part of NLP, specifically, 'works'?

i didn't say concious manipulation of someone is good or bad, I believed that was your implication (as it seems to be most peoples for some reason)

Direct question: Do you believe that intentionally manipulating people to do things that you want them to that they didn't want to do is good or bad -- yes or no?

 

[Pedro De Mello]

I don't get it... is the NLP from pick-up artists the same that Brown uses? Because the one used by the PUA seems a bit more "agressive", at least in the way they present their products. On the other hand, Brown says it is something that takes years to learn and is something extremefully subtle that envolves a kind of intelligence that people who promote NLP don't seem to have. I'm not saying ALL of them but mostly the ones who use it as a tool to pick up chicks.

Once again, I don't get it... are there two kinds of NLP?

I've noticed that there are NLP promoters who say you can use it on yourself. But wouldn't that go against the excuse that scientific experimentation on the subject is flawed because the one who receives the "NLPing" is conscious of it?

I do think that, like astrology and all the rest, I'm sure that SOON there will be some kind of ramification from the ones who don't want to be seen (exclusively or AT ALL) related with that kind of practices. Maybe they'll try to make it more "scientific", like Brown did... I don't know..

By the way, remirol, what is it that you consider crime? Bear in mind, I agree with what you're saying (I know I don't need to say this...) but I don't think it is a crime at all to lie and deceive women... They do that all the time... It's one of their major social defenses, like seduction. Everyone knows that. (I'm guessing now you'll be asking me for the study that shows that. I love you, man!) Maybe I'm wrong - almost certainly, I guess.

Are you placing NLP has a hypnotic state created by a practice so immoral that it is on the same level of... roofies?

I mean - if it worked, obviously.

 

[remirol]

By the way, remirol, what is it that you consider crime? Bear in mind, I agree with what you're saying (I know I don't need to say this...) but I don't think it is a crime at all to lie and deceive women? Are you placing NLP has a hypnotic state created by a practice so immoral that it is on the same level of... roofies?

I mean - if it worked, obviously.

To lie to a woman so she'll sleep with you isn't a crime and shouldn't be (though it isn't something to be proud of, either) -- we can't regulate everything, and caveat humptor applies.

NLP as portrayed by the "pickup artists" is pushed differently, specifically as something that can override the woman's desires without her awareness so that she suddenly wants to sleep with you, where previously she would not have wanted to. This is on a different level than a simple lie, as all of us learn in childhood that people occasionally lie and not to be too trusting; if someone is speaking to you, then you are aware that they may be lying.

Put another way; if NLP both worked and was available in pill form, how much different than roofies would it really be? "Slip this into her drink and she'll want to sleep with you." -- Is this an ethical act? I say "no", and this is where I classify NLP as well, because that's what many of its practitioners portray it as -- "say the magic words and perform the magic gestures and she'll sleep with you". I see no difference in the _intent_ of the practitioner -- the only practical difference is that unlike roofies, NLP doesn't work as advertised.

 

[Pedro De Mello]

Put another way; if NLP both worked and was available in pill form, how much different than roofies would it really be? "Slip this into her drink and she'll want to sleep with you." -- Is this an ethical act? I say "no", and this is where I classify NLP as well, because that's what many of its practitioners portray it as -- "say the magic words and perform the magic gestures and she'll sleep with you". I see no difference in the _intent_ of the practitioner -- the only practical difference is that unlike roofies, NLP doesn't work as advertised.

Yes, to make someone act against their "conscious" will is extremely unethical! I'm with you on that one. But I think you are giving too much attention/credit to the Pick-Up Artists (we know it's never too much...) - for instance, some psychologists claim that they use NLP in their sessions and they say they have been sucessful in helping people ceasing smoking, drinking, getting over a divorce, depression, etc.

Those to me are quite noble achievements. However, I do also think that they are establishing fallacious cause-effect correlations - why did people stop smoking? Better yet, why were people in their office in the first place? Answer: because they WANTED to stop smoking/drinking. So, I'm not sure why they think that people are in any way affected by the NLP techniques - if a person is willing in the first place, there's no need to NLP. Even if it is done in a subtle way that they would never find out.

That's the difference, if you are WILLING in the first place, NLP is as powerful as tapping a person in the back and saying "You'll be over it, you're strong, so on and so on". Isn't NLP making people act against their usual will? Isn't that the big-whoopy aspect of it? Or are these doctors aware that they are just playing a profitable charade with a fancy name?

I wouldn't be surprised. After all, anyone nowadays gets to be a "psychologist"... right?

That's why I'm saying that the NLP used by psychologists is not the same that PUA's use - one is a noble big lie, the other is a pervert bigger lie. Why bother about it if it doesn't work? Does it have any harm on people that I'm not aware of? (And I really want to know, I'm not being confrontational). Should there be something to fear? Apart from the fact that the books by those PUA's are selling like ice-cream on the beach wisch leads me to believe that there are A LOT of average mind-sized people out there who wouldn't regret having sex with a stranger unwilling to do it with them.

 

[remirol]

Isn't NLP making people act against their usual will? Isn't that the big-whoopy aspect of it? Or are these doctors aware that they are just playing a profitable charade with a fancy name?

Some doctors are certainly aware. Some probably aren't and have bought into the woo aspect of it.

That's why I'm saying that the NLP used by psychologists is not the same that PUA's use - one is a noble big lie, the other is a pervert bigger lie. Why bother about it if it doesn't work? Does it have any harm on people that I'm not aware of?

Just because someone intends to help people doesn't change how efficacious NLP is -- it just means they're doing it with good intentions, instead of ethically shaky ones.

As far as "what's the harm" -- since NLP does not work, these purveyors and authors bilk many honest people out of money for their books selling a "secret" that is complete garbage. They will point to the "success stories" and tell you to "try it for yourself" (see what Joe Black had to resort to on his 2nd post, for example) -- not because they think it works, but because they just want you to buy the book/video/whatever it is they're selling. Once you've bought that, it doesn't matter if it works anymore, they already have your money.

I consider this activity largely fraudulent, but P.T. Barnum knew that there was no shortage of suckers in the world, and it'd be difficult to prove in court because the NLP sellers can always fall back on the time-honored excuse of "You didn't say the magic words right." So, why bother about it? Well, there are better things out there to waste my time and effort taking real-world action on -- so you won't see me carrying a picket at a book signing or anything silly like that. But that also doesn't mean that we shouldn't promote clear thinking where possible, and in this case, this thread can serve as a reference for people who want to find out the truth of whether there's anything to this NLP junk -- specifically, that there isn't.

 

[Pedro De Mello]

I like your answers. You're a good person. =)

Yes, I think it's very urgent to promote clear thinking. I started a new group of skeptics in Portugal - the translation to English would be something like "Skeptics And Humanists For The Advancement Of Rational And Scientific Thought"... One of my friends, we are currently three (yes, three...), was invited to go on this TV show to try to rebuke this Chiromantic who was there to do a live reading. And we all know how stupidly easy it is to rebuke that praticse more than any other.
Still, I advised him with all my heart to decline because I know he would be regarded as the party-pooper, the nerd who doesn't open his mind, etc, etc. He ended up declining it. Maybe it was not the wisest decision but it felt the right to do at the time. It's one of those morning shows only old catholic widows and poor eneducated people watch, a very anti-intellectual feel to it, so... we are not worried...

We are currently sticking to a Blog that is still on the making and we'll do some presentations without any debate (because we all know what it is to debate with those f**kers).

Anyway, gotta keep up the good fight. (At least until we die and find out we should all have accepted the Mormon doctrine...)

 

[Lothario]

I turn my back for a second and this thread comes back to life. Where's MikeSun? And JFrankA?

 

[Prometheus]

I turn my back for a second and this thread comes back to life. Where's MikeSun? And JFrankA?

NLP was used to make us reanimate the thread against our will.

 

[MikeSun5]

I turn my back for a second and this thread comes back to life. Where's MikeSun? And JFrankA?

remirol seems to be doing just fine without us...