Bill Wiltrack wrote:
You need to LISTEN to me...BOTH of you.
You are not persuading me.
Your phoney psychobabble is not working on me.
I don't know what to tell you, other than that...
Who asked you? Oh!Bill Wiltrack wrote:...
Similarly, experimental psychologist Corballis in his critique of lateralization of brain function (the left/right brain myth), ...
That you quote this is just to funny given your other posts.
Still bloody funny and ironic no matter how you spell it.Bill Wiltrack wrote:.
...just too funny...
FTFY.
Same base, i.e. Psychology, but L. Ron in his book Dianetics also used ideas from neuropsychology, i.e. engrams, and some of the psychoanalytic techniques at the time. The main difference is that he was prescriptive as to the aim of his program, to become a 'clear', whereas NLP makes no such prescriptions.duszek wrote:Scientologists also persuade you that you can achieve quite a lot.
What´s the difference between their programming and the NLP programming ?
I would say that what the scientologists do is more like brain-washing and pre and proscribes what you can do, whereas NLP prescribes choice.I would say that scientologist techniques are like illegal drugs, whereas NLP techniques are like legal drugs (coffee, tea, cigarettes, cocoa, chocolate).
Not what I've said, as I accept the two hemispheres idea I just don't 'buy' into the blunt nonsense that gnus like you promote to further your aims, e.g. your crass picture generalizations which use terms that are philosophically ambiguous in the first place. The point of philosophy now and at least since Descartes has been to think clearly and critically examine ideas, not just uncritically parrot them.Bill Wiltrack wrote:.
You don't buy into the left brain/right brain theories. ...
Are you mental? Where have I given the impression that I concur with the quotes you posted? I know what to critique about NLP as I've studied it, what you post is not it.That doesn't mean you concur with the critics of Neuro-linguistic Programming.
Nope, its a fucking hysterical irony that arises because you don't read what you cut-paste.It's just a crossroads that happened to be mentioned.
Depends what the outcome is?...Long as I have you here, could you give me a Neuro-linguistic Programming exercise that you use?
Success.What are the results?
Achieving the goal or outcome that I've set.What do you hope to achieve?
A Phenomenology that makes sense and a set of techniques to test it with. I think of it as a Buddhism for the western philosophical mind.What has Neuro-linguistic Programming given to you?[/size]
You mean 'that I have used' I think. So, six step-reframe, timeline, TOTE, swish-pattern, are a few.Bill Wiltrack wrote:.Can we try this again?
...Long as I have you here, could you give me a Neuro-linguistic Programming exercise that you use?
Success in resolving the issue at hand.What are the results?
Not hope, achieve and its to achieve a goal or outcome, which may be the resolution of a problem.What do you hope to achieve?
Happiness that I've found a Phenomenology that works.What has Neuro-linguistic Programming given to you?[/size]
They were damn good answers, you just don't like them because they didn't fit what you wanted. Express yourself more clearly and you may get what you want....if you don't have any better answers than the first time I asked you, just don't bother to respond.
You are mental, one because you are talking to yourself and two because you were already convinced else why the OP?I think you have finally convinced me of The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming. Yeah, I think we're done here...
I think the two of us might have more to discuss but I thank you for raising the topic and allowing me to expound upon it.I thank everyone who has participated in this thread.[/size]
What is it, exactly, that you did not understand about my responses in relation to what you were asking?Bill Wiltrack wrote:.If this is your reasoning...If this is your response to my direct questions about NLP exercises and results then yes, both of you have confirmed the essence of this thread; The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming.
You are rude and blinded by the purpose of your OP as it's obvious that duszek knows little about it and was just asking questions. Me, I just think that, as usual, you know not what you talk about.Thank you for the examples that both of you represent.[/size]
What is it that you find curious, unproductive, and circular in my reasoning? Especially, what are you curious about? What's unproductive about curiosity? And please show me the circularity?Perhaps now is an excellent opportunity for both of you to let go of this curious, unproductive, circular reasoning.