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.
What is it, exactly, that you did not understand about my responses in relation to what you were asking?
Thank you for the examples that both of you represent.[/size]
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.
I thank you for the opportunity to talk about NLP as unlike you I'm not an aspiring gnu so find proselytising slightly embarrassing but compared to the nonsense that you talk NLP is a breath of fresh air with respect to the Phenomenology of Mind and, like Buddhism, actually supplies you with techniques and presuppositions you can test. It makes no claim other than this is 'true' in a subjective sense not some scientific sense, take it or leave it but learn the Modelling before you go, it might be useful.
Perhaps now is an excellent opportunity for both of you to let go of this curious, unproductive, circular reasoning.
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?