Page 3 of 4
Re: +++ The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming +++
Posted: Thu Jul 18, 2013 2:01 am
by Arising_uk
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?
I told you before, it's best if you stay well away from NLP.
That CD looks to be exactly what I was talking about with respect to parting with your money for no purpose.
Re: +++ The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming +++
Posted: Fri Jul 19, 2013 12:01 pm
by Arising_uk
Bill Wiltrack wrote:...
Similarly, experimental psychologist Corballis in his critique of lateralization of brain function (the left/right brain myth), ...
Oh!
That you quote this is just to funny given your other posts.
Re: +++ The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming +++
Posted: Fri Jul 19, 2013 2:18 pm
by Bill Wiltrack
.
...just too funny...
FTFY
.
Re: +++ The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming +++
Posted: Fri Jul 19, 2013 2:58 pm
by duszek
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 scientologist techniques are like illegal drugs, whereas NLP techniques are like legal drugs (coffee, tea, cigarettes, cocoa, chocolate).
Re: +++ The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming +++
Posted: Fri Jul 19, 2013 10:59 pm
by Bill Wiltrack
.
Could you describe for me a Neuro-linguistic Programming exercise that you use?
..........................................................................
.
Re: +++ The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming +++
Posted: Sat Jul 20, 2013 12:46 am
by Arising_uk
Bill Wiltrack wrote:.
...just too funny...
FTFY.
Still bloody funny and ironic no matter how you spell it.
I'd be a bit chary about correcting grammar if I was you as your posts are replete with misspellings and the wrong word being used, it's just bazaar.
Re: +++ The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming +++
Posted: Sat Jul 20, 2013 12:54 am
by Arising_uk
duszek wrote:Scientologists also persuade you that you can achieve quite a lot.
What´s the difference between their programming and the NLP programming ?
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.
I would say that scientologist techniques are like illegal drugs, whereas NLP techniques are like legal drugs (coffee, tea, cigarettes, cocoa, chocolate).
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.
Re: +++ The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming +++
Posted: Sat Jul 20, 2013 12:57 am
by Bill Wiltrack
.
You don't buy into the left brain/right brain theories.
That doesn't mean you concur with the critics of Neuro-linguistic Programming.
It's just a crossroads that happened to be mentioned.
...Long as I have you here, could you give me a Neuro-linguistic Programming exercise that you use?
What are the results?
What do you hope to achieve?
What has Neuro-linguistic Programming given to you?
....................................................
.
Re: +++ The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming +++
Posted: Sat Jul 20, 2013 1:27 am
by Arising_uk
Bill Wiltrack wrote:.
You don't buy into the left brain/right brain theories. ...
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.
That doesn't mean you concur with the critics of Neuro-linguistic Programming.
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.
It's just a crossroads that happened to be mentioned.
Nope, its a fucking hysterical irony that arises because you don't read what you cut-paste.
...Long as I have you here, could you give me a Neuro-linguistic Programming exercise that you use?
Depends what the outcome is?
What are the results?
Success.
What do you hope to achieve?
Achieving the goal or outcome that I've set.
What has Neuro-linguistic Programming given to you?[/size]
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.
Re: +++ The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming +++
Posted: Sat Jul 20, 2013 1:41 am
by Bill Wiltrack
.
Can we try this again?
...Long as I have you here, could you give me a Neuro-linguistic Programming exercise that you use?
What are the results?
What do you hope to achieve?
What has Neuro-linguistic Programming given to you?
....................................................
...if you don't have any better answers than the first time I asked you, just don't bother to respond.
I think you have finally convinced me of The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming. Yeah, I think we're done here...
I thank everyone who has participated in this thread.
.
Re: +++ The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming +++
Posted: Sat Jul 20, 2013 1:56 am
by Arising_uk
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?
You mean 'that I have used' I think. So, six step-reframe, timeline, TOTE, swish-pattern, are a few.
What are the results?
Success in resolving the issue at hand.
What do you hope to achieve?
Not hope, achieve and its to achieve a goal or outcome, which may be the resolution of a problem.
What has Neuro-linguistic Programming given to you?[/size]
Happiness that I've found a Phenomenology that works.
...if you don't have any better answers than the first time I asked you, just don't bother to respond.
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.
I think you have finally convinced me of The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming. Yeah, I think we're done here...
You are mental, one because you are talking to yourself and two because you were already convinced else why the OP?
I thank everyone who has participated in this thread.[/size]
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.
Re: +++ The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming +++
Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 12:38 am
by Bill Wiltrack
.
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.
Thank you for the examples that both of you represent.
...........................................
Perhaps now is an excellent opportunity for both of you to let go of this curious, unproductive, circular reasoning.
.
Re: +++ The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming +++
Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 4:00 am
by Arising_uk
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?
Re: +++ The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming +++
Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 8:33 am
by Bill Wiltrack
.
......................................
..........................................Let me refer you to the original post upon this thread. Adieu.
.
Re: +++ The Fallacy That is Neuro-linguistic Programming +++
Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 9:35 am
by duszek
Am I the other one meant by "both of you", Bill ?
I am not so impressed by the term "scientific". I happened to edit a doctoral thesis in medecine and I dealt with other stuff, supposed to be "scientific".
Scientific results are ephemeral and should not be overestimated. They can lose their weight again tomorrow. Many of them contradict each other.
What counts and should count among people who want to be intellectually honest are arguments one can look at and consider oneself.
In the area of accelaration of particles we need to trust what experts tell us but in the area of psychology a normal person can think and observe himself.
I have spoken.
Peace.