The CULT of the PHD
Tom Vizzini
Personally I an sick of the PhD cult members trolling this
group for there own selfish gratification. This PhD cult
continuously tries to inflict others with its mind limiting thoughts.
Think of the lengthy indoctrination process that they go through.
It is no wonder that anything that is outside of their cult reality
MUST be fake. Six to eight years of indoctrination so the can
put Dr. in front of their name and PhD after it. It is pretty well
know that anything between Dr and PhD is usually bullshit.
I wonder if I were to attack the PhD cult if they would
rally and defend their right to believe in the PhD. I wonder
if I decided that they were ATTACKING me for my view
that PhDs were useless and never really amount to anything
of VALUE that they would back off and apologize? I wonder
if this 'mean spirited' defense would be justified in their eyes?
It seems that PhDs have a shared hallucination that they
are more educated and superior that anyone who actually
learns any other skill set. They feel free to barely examine
any other subject and pass judgment on it.
I suggest that the PhD CULT is a cult that limits the minds
of their followers. IT MUST BE STOPPED!
You can buy a PhD at a variety of resellers for 125.00.
Many try to get into the cult with fake credentials so that
the other cult members will respect them.
Remember PhD stands for Pretty Hopelessly Dim.
Have fun
--
Tom Vizzini
ADVANCED ESSENTIALS
Http://www.essential-skills.com/seminar.html
Http://www.Essential-Skills.com
Now there is a difference
between learning and DOING
David Gould
<tviz...@ga.prestige.net> wrote:
> You can buy a PhD at a variety of resellers for 125.00.
Tell me more :)
Dave, ICQ# 64815562
www.deep-trance.com
Tom Vizzini
David Gould <da...@deep-trance.com> wrote in message
news:JiO9OZVD4rone3...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 11 Sep 2000 16:51:42 GMT, "Tom Vizzini"
> <tviz...@ga.prestige.net> wrote:
>
> > You can buy a PhD at a variety of resellers for 125.00.
>
> Tell me more :)
Try the universal life church in Modesto California. I know at least
one NLP trainer who bought one there and pretends that it is real :)
I thing a Doctorite in Divinity is a favorite for frauds :)
>
> Dave, ICQ# 64815562
> www.deep-trance.com
loren...@my-deja.com
approach each person as a unique individual? I remember way back when
I read "Structure of Magic vol. 1" I thought that those guys were
really onto something, that just maybe people who read it would go out
into the world and break down divisions and false generalizations. I
guess I shouldn't have invested such faith in those moron cult-members,
Dr. Grinder and Dr. Bandler. BTW where did Dr. Bandler get that
Ph.D.? Did he buy it or is it honorary? If it's legit. I'd sure like
to read his dissertation. Have you ever seen it? Can I assume that
you won't in future be attending any more of Richards trainings? I
suppose though if it's not really a real Ph.D. then he is just wanting
to be a member of the dim cult, but isn't really. Why he would want to
be a member of that cult when he hasn't gone through the requirements
would be suspect, but probably not fatal...certainly forgiveable.
If the point you were making Tom is that each person should be judged
on their own merits without regard for degree then I would heartily
agree. It speaks volumes about your experience in life though Tom if
you have never met a bright, intelligent Ph.D. You should probably get
out a little more. I recently had the chance to meet and learn from
John Grinder. I can say quite honestly that in spite of his degree he
is quite brilliant, skilled and open-minded.
If you are planning a fire-sale on all your Bandler/Grinder books
tapes, will you please list the items here? :-)
Take care Tom,
Loren
In article <y48v5.1$5m....@skycache.prestige.net>,
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
lun...@my-deja.com
> Hi Folks,
>
> Personally I an sick of the PhD cult members trolling this
> group for there own selfish gratification. This PhD cult
> continuously tries to inflict others with its mind limiting thoughts.
>
Hmmm....am not sure about this, yes there are some fakes as there are
in any feild including NLP. Does this make all PhD's fake/cultish? If
this were true then I guess all of NLP is crap too...
I am not sure what to believe...
I am pursuing a Phd at a pretty well known school and it seems pretty
hard....even though I have been told to be of above average
intelligence and have won admirers for my creativity in my subject.
> Think of the lengthy indoctrination process that they go through.
> It is no wonder that anything that is outside of their cult reality
> MUST be fake. Six to eight years of indoctrination so the can
> put Dr. in front of their name and PhD after it. It is pretty well
> know that anything between Dr and PhD is usually bullshit.
indoctrination??? or is it path to mastery...hmmm...
skill require practice and practice requires time. AM not sure I again
agree on this count.
Took me over 12 years to get my Master ranking in a esoteric Japanese
martial art. Have I been indoctrined as have some of the masters in
martial arts??
NLP itself takes more than a couple of months to even get a hold
of...and it can take atleast a year before people really can start
using it big time ( am not speaking about a little part like anchoring
or rapport). Does this not render us indoctorined by NLP?
>
> I wonder if I were to attack the PhD cult if they would
> rally and defend their right to believe in the PhD. I wonder
> if I decided that they were ATTACKING me for my view
> that PhDs were useless and never really amount to anything
> of VALUE that they would back off and apologize? I wonder
> if this 'mean spirited' defense would be justified in their eyes?
>
> It seems that PhDs have a shared hallucination that they
> are more educated and superior that anyone who actually
> learns any other skill set. They feel free to barely examine
> any other subject and pass judgment on it.
I dont agree on this either. More educated maybe...superior NO!!! I
think most of us realize we have "but scratched the surface" of the
feild we love....
>
> I suggest that the PhD CULT is a cult that limits the minds
> of their followers. IT MUST BE STOPPED!
>
So how will we stop PHd's?? Stop people from loving their discipline so
much that they decide to put everything else aside and not pursue thier
quest for knowledge....Jeez what ever happens to " knowledge is power"
and "live your dreams" and "do what you love and do it whole heartedly"
> You can buy a PhD at a variety of resellers for 125.00.
> Many try to get into the cult with fake credentials so that
> the other cult members will respect them.
>
YES AND SO CAN YOU BUY NLP CERTIFICATION, CAN YOU NOT NOW? YOU CAN GO
THROUGH A COUPLE OF EASY VIDEOS AND BE CERTIFIED TO EVEN BE A TRAINER?
DOES THIS MAKE SOME OTHER NLP TRAINERS BAD? HMMMM...FOOD FOR THOUGHT
> Remember PhD stands for Pretty Hopelessly Dim.
HMMMMM....am laughing hard, enjoy acronyms and new twists and
perceptions we have to things...
also hear the following
Pretty Handsome Dude
Passed Highschool with Difficulty
and scores of others,,,,
I guess filters come in here and shape reality...
>
> Have fun
>
as always cheers
> --
> Tom Vizzini
> ADVANCED ESSENTIALS
> Http://www.essential-skills.com/seminar.html
> Http://www.Essential-Skills.com
>
> Now there is a difference
> between learning and DOING
>
>
Lynn Seiser PhD MFCC
IMHO, yes a Ph.D. does make you more "educated" by definition. It just doesn't
necessarily make you more intelligent or valuable. But then, not having ones
doesn't necessarily make you more intelligent or valuable either.
I always feel the value of information is in how I use it, not the degrees, or
lack of degrees, of the person I got it from.
Sorry for whatever pain fostered this post. I too have been on the receiving
end of judegemental academic elitism since I rely more on personal experience
than research data.
Lynn
"We do not rise to the level of our expectations. We fall to the level of our
training." Train well. KWATZ!
Lynn Seiser, PhD MFCC (Sei...@AOL.com)
http://members.aol.com/SeiserL/index.html
http://hometown.aol.com/AikiSolutions/AikiSolutions.html
Tom Vizzini
<lun...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8pjek0$7f9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>
>
> > Hi Folks,
> >
> > Personally I an sick of the PhD cult members trolling this
> > group for there own selfish gratification. This PhD cult
> > continuously tries to inflict others with its mind limiting thoughts.
> >
> Hmmm....am not sure about this, yes there are some fakes as there are
> in any feild including NLP. Does this make all PhD's fake/cultish? If
> this were true then I guess all of NLP is crap too...
"FIELD"
My point is that here in the last week or so we were privledged to
have a Phd grace us with his presence. He decided that because
people on this group defended NLP as a viable resource and did
so with passion that NLP must be a cult.
I personally get a little tired of the so called 'highly educated
having sich narrow minds.
>
>
> indoctrination??? or is it path to mastery...hmmm...
> skill require practice and practice requires time. AM not sure I again
> agree on this count.
> Took me over 12 years to get my Master ranking in a esoteric Japanese
> martial art. Have I been indoctrined as have some of the masters in
> martial arts??
Well there you go spouting the cult mantra. "I am on the path to
mastery" :)
You know the same was said last week and it was called an attack by NLP
cult members.
>
>
> I dont agree on this either. More educated maybe...superior NO!!! I
> think most of us realize we have "but scratched the surface" of the
> feild we love....
"FIELD"
There you go with the cult hallucination that you are more educated.
Must be nice to sit on such a lofty tower. I interesting tower of judgement
of other peoples intelligence and education.
>
>
> >
> > I suggest that the PhD CULT is a cult that limits the minds
> > of their followers. IT MUST BE STOPPED!
> >
>
> So how will we stop PHd's?? Stop people from loving their discipline so
> much that they decide to put everything else aside and not pursue thier
> quest for knowledge....Jeez what ever happens to " knowledge is power"
> and "live your dreams" and "do what you love and do it whole heartedly"
Ya know...that is what was said about NLP just last week
but it was called a cult..... Interesting.
>
> > You can buy a PhD at a variety of resellers for 125.00.
> > Many try to get into the cult with fake credentials so that
> > the other cult members will respect them.
> >
> YES AND SO CAN YOU BUY NLP CERTIFICATION, CAN YOU NOT NOW? YOU CAN GO
> THROUGH A COUPLE OF EASY VIDEOS AND BE CERTIFIED TO EVEN BE A TRAINER?
> DOES THIS MAKE SOME OTHER NLP TRAINERS BAD? HMMMM...FOOD FOR THOUGHT
Well then I guess we are as good as a Phd. Thanks for noticing how EQUAL
we all are. What you example really shows is that everything is for sale
if you do not value the 'thing' and only value the letters.
BTW I think video certification is a bunch of crap. There is NO way
for anyone to judge the skills without actually seeing them in person.
You can learn by video and even audio. I don't think I can judge the skills
of
anyone who has bought our video set as competent without ever seeing them
in person. I can in a seminar. I don't certify NLP BTW.
About 3 times a year some moron pops in here and throws the 'cult'
word around. They usually are a bit psychotic of have Phd in their sig.
I guess there is a fine line :)
> >
>
> as always cheers
Back to you. Whatever you do leave the Phd on the paper when you get
it. Just be some guy who knows some cool stuff and leave it at that.
Have fun
Tom
Tom Vizzini
<loren...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8pja39$1h4$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Geez Tom, is this an example of how your students will learn to
> approach each person as a unique individual?
Again Loren you are sitting on your sense of humor. Grab your ears and
tug.
Maybe you will then see the light of day instead of your usual view.
Tom Vizzini
"Lynn Seiser PhD MFCC" <sei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000911175340...@nso-fl.aol.com...
> I always heard it meant Piled Higher and Deeper. ;-)
>
> IMHO, yes a Ph.D. does make you more "educated" by definition. It just
doesn't
> necessarily make you more intelligent or valuable. But then, not having
ones
> doesn't necessarily make you more intelligent or valuable either.
HAH! another cult member! They are EVERYWHERE!!!!!!
>
> I always feel the value of information is in how I use it, not the
degrees, or
> lack of degrees, of the person I got it from.
>
> Sorry for whatever pain fostered this post. I too have been on the
receiving
> end of judegemental academic elitism since I rely more on personal
experience
> than research data.
Good for you. Careful ...if the pther members find out the will get you!
My point is that many of those who can't help from attaching those
little letters
to the end of their names, seem to want to feel better than others. Just
look at
the attitude that we have seen here today. Is it the cult of the supposedly
well educated?
It was so easy for some moron to pop in here and spout off about NLP
being a cult mentality but when you suggest that something has the SAME
mentality, there is the SAME reaction that he cried about. Interesting don't
you think?
Just a thought...
--
Tom Vizzini
ADVANCED ESSENTIALS
Http://www.essential-skills.com/seminar.html
Http://www.Essential-Skills.com
Now there is a difference
between learning and DOING
>
PStuart
>It seems that PhDs have a shared hallucination that they
>are more educated and superior that anyone who actually
>learns any other skill set.
PhD = Phoney Distinction
93 93/93
Phil
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Paradigm Shift! -- http://members.aol.com/para93/
Phil's Magick Page -- http://members.aol.com/pstuart/
PStuart
>Dr. Grinder and Dr. Bandler. BTW where did Dr. Bandler get that
>Ph.D.? Did he buy it or is it honorary?
Bandler's PhD came later... The Structure of Magic was actually his doctoral
thesis that WAS REJECTED. He went on to build NLP anyhow... Another nice
example of PhD = Phoney Distinction.
Paul Kline
also got 2 degrees in theology too... *chuckle*
I find certification FOR THE MOST PART both in the computer industry and
psychology field means they can say the right buzzwords...
Though, all these degree makes me think, I could start a diplomea
business... operate it outside the us. It would make alot of money
$$$.<grin>
Paul
Tom Vizzini <tviz...@ga.prestige.net> wrote in message
news:y48v5.1$5m....@skycache.prestige.net...
> Hi Folks,
synergi
Just an observation or so...
In my business I have come across a decent number of PhD's
and MBA's. Some have been absolutely brilliant, most have
been so-so. But an interesting distinction...the best of the
best have never put the letters behind their name. I have
asked a few why, and the answer surprised me...because it
was right in line with how I think. (I guess they know their
market, and I am not as unique as I like to think...)
Anyway, the answer is (paraphrased across several) "the
people I deal with base whether they hire me or not on the
results I can produce. If the best I can do when I am
introduced is to point out that I spent years in school,
they won't give me a second look." I have a rule...that is
dead on with this...if someone mentions their academic
credentials in the first 30 minutes of meeting them, there
is no way in hell they'll ever work for me. Like I said,
they know their market.
Oh...the one industry that does not apply to this is when
letters are going after lawyers for clients. As in
professional testimony. They suck up credentials, for
obvious reasons.
all the best,
syn
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> > Hi Folks,
> >
> > Personally I an sick of the PhD cult members trolling this
> > group for there own selfish gratification. This PhD cult
> > continuously tries to inflict others with its mind limiting thoughts.
> >
> Hmmm....am not sure about this, yes there are some fakes as there are
> in any feild including NLP. Does this make all PhD's fake/cultish? If
> this were true then I guess all of NLP is crap too...
>
> I am not sure what to believe...
>
> I am pursuing a Phd at a pretty well known school and it seems pretty
> hard....even though I have been told to be of above average
> intelligence and have won admirers for my creativity in my subject.
>
> > Think of the lengthy indoctrination process that they go through.
> > It is no wonder that anything that is outside of their cult reality
> > MUST be fake. Six to eight years of indoctrination so the can
> > put Dr. in front of their name and PhD after it. It is pretty well
> > know that anything between Dr and PhD is usually bullshit.
>
> indoctrination??? or is it path to mastery...hmmm...
Observe the statements and behavior of the typical PhD of psychology,
sociology or "education" and one can walk away with the feeling that
the only subject which they have a 'mastery' of is self-serving
nonsense.
In the last couple of decades, PhD's in the subjects of English
and Literature also fall into this group.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> I always heard it meant Piled Higher and Deeper. ;-)
>
> IMHO, yes a Ph.D. does make you more "educated" by definition.
How so? I still don't have my bachelor's degree, and yet, despite
being an ENGINEERING major, I am better educated in the humanities
than many who hold bachelors' degrees in the humanities.
This doesn't count any of my education in engineering, computer
science, nor my medical, radio communications, supervision, and
other training that I got from the military (and use on a
regular basis).
A lot of it depends on the PhD candidate's advisor. Some advisors
push a PhD student to push into groundbreaking territory that
genuinely warrants a PhD....but most PhD candidates do nothing more
than repeat a Masters' education...but because they paid their $$$,
they get a "social promotion" to PhD.
> It just doesn't necessarily make you more intelligent or valuable.
This is a very, very, telling admission.
By what you are saying, the PhD has no meaning, or valuable.
If a PhD has not come up with anything intelligent or valuable to
say, then why in the hell was the PhD ever conferred in the first place?
> But then, not having ones doesn't necessarily make you more
> intelligent or valuable either.
>
> I always feel the value of information is in how I use it, not the degrees, or
> lack of degrees, of the person I got it from.
>
> Sorry for whatever pain fostered this post. I too have been on the receiving
> end of judegemental academic elitism since I rely more on personal experience
> than research data.
>
> Lynn
>
> "We do not rise to the level of our expectations. We fall to the level of our
> training." Train well. KWATZ!
> Lynn Seiser, PhD MFCC (Sei...@AOL.com)
> http://members.aol.com/SeiserL/index.html
> http://hometown.aol.com/AikiSolutions/AikiSolutions.html
synergi
> Anyway, the answer is (paraphrased across several) "the
> people I deal with base whether they hire me or not on the
> results I can produce. If the best I can do when I am
> introduced is to point out that I spent years in school,
> they won't give me a second look." I have a rule...that is
> dead on with this...if someone mentions their academic
> credentials in the first 30 minutes of meeting them, there
> is no way in hell they'll ever work for me. Like I said,
> they know their market.
I have the exact same reaction when an NLP trainer makes who
certified them a key credential. Come back when you have
something meaningful...to me. :)
Just thought I'd add that, to be fair.
all the best,
syn
lun...@my-deja.com
BUT SOMETIMES IT IS NECESSARY TO ALSO KNOW WHAT YOU ARE BUYING
In article <%1hv5.3871$zC.2...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
Tom Vizzini
Hi Syn,
"synergi" <syn...@NOSPAM.HERE.cymetrix.com> wrote in message news:%
>
> I have the exact same reaction when an NLP trainer makes who
> certified them a key credential. Come back when you have
> something meaningful...to me. :)
This is a great point. As someone who has never been officiallycertified
by anyone,I like to think that the value in what Kim and I teach comes from
the
substance of what we teach. Nowhere in our site is it ever mentioned
that Kim is a "master practitioner and certified clinical hypnotherapist"
These things are true but they add no value to our seminars.
I think that I MIGHTstill have the practitioner certificate that Lavalle
gave me last year. It was honorary but I am sure if I dig I can find
it under something more important.
I have a rule. The more letters at the end of your signature the less
confident you are in your abilities. OK it is more of a guideline than a
rule
but it is true more times than not.
I personally consider myself someone who know some cool stuff.
I know more cool stuff than some and not as much as others. What I like
is when I find someoone who knows different cool stuff than I do.
That is when life gets interesting.
BTW I never ask the people I meet who certified them to teach
me a new skill. I just want to learn it! Of course I do strongly believe
in the money back guarantee :)
Have fun,
Tom
HaYehudiKafir
I wonder how many of these "intellectuals" got their Phds via posting ten ceral
box lables and an SASE to some po box? : )
HaYehudiKafir
Tell me more :)
Dave, ICQ# 64815562
www.deep-trance.com>>
You can also buy noble titles and become a diplomat : )
Davis Rowell
I'm replying to your message 'cause you seem (a) to have a more centrist
view than some and (b) 'cause you raise a couple of interesting points.
> Anyway, the answer is (paraphrased across several) "the
> people I deal with base whether they hire me or not on the
> results I can produce. If the best I can do when I am
> introduced is to point out that I spent years in school,
> they won't give me a second look."
How many people without the doctorate get to sit at that table? ;-)
I tend to think of the doctorate -- or any degree, license or certificate --
as being a filter with a very large screen. Someone who has one of the above
has demonstrated to *someone* that he/she knows *something* about the
specified field. Even if what they know is no more than Bishop Kirby's
address in Modesto and the current price of his DD.
The resume qualifies an applicant to sit for an interview. The suitability
of any particular person for any particular activity can't be reliably
determined by reading their resume, though. That's why the interview gets
done. Still, it's the resume that enables us to make necessary assumptions
about who can or can't do what. An applicant packin' a DD from the Universal
Life Church school can be safely assumed to be able to write small checks
and successfully address and mail a letter. An applicant with an Masters in
International Business from U. of South Carolina can be safely assumed to be
able to handle moderately complex administrative tasks and speak a language
other than (and in addition to) English.
The reason, I guess, that many NLPers are concerned about the name of the
trainer one worked with is not just because of the perception of value (And
some of the "my trainer can beat your trainer" arguments that I've heard
have expanded the boundaries of silly.), but because different trainers
focus on different skills and have different sets of strengths and
weaknesses. The provenance of the diploma can be as informative as the
diploma itself.
> I have a rule...that is
> dead on with this...if someone mentions their academic
> credentials in the first 30 minutes of meeting them, there
> is no way in hell they'll ever work for me. Like I said,
> they know their market.
I will assume that you have some other criteria you haven't mentioned and
don't make your hiring decisions just using a stopwatch. I want to be clear:
I'm not questioning your ability to make decisions, nor am I pointing
fingers at your criteria. I'm just saying that you might reconsider "no way
in hell" if an applicant started an interview by saying, "I'm sure I'm a bit
different than your average applicant because I got my doctorate so much
later in my career. Honestly, I'd gone for years thinking that my skill
level was more important than my resume. Then I realized the opportunities I
was missing because I wan't properly marketing myself."
> Oh...the one industry that does not apply to this is when
> letters are going after lawyers for clients. As in
> professional testimony. They suck up credentials, for
> obvious reasons.
'Cause it's more difficult to qualify an uncredentialled witness as an
expert?
> all the best,
> syn
And likewise with you.
--
Davis
There are two group of people in this world: those who believe that people
can be arbitrarily divided into two groups, and those who don't.
Lee Lady
PStuart <pst...@aol.comnojunk> wrote:
>93
>
>>Dr. Grinder and Dr. Bandler. BTW where did Dr. Bandler get that
>>Ph.D.? Did he buy it or is it honorary?
>
>Bandler's PhD came later... The Structure of Magic was actually his doctoral
>thesis that WAS REJECTED. He went on to build NLP anyhow... Another nice
>example of PhD = Phoney Distinction.
Slight correction: The Structure of Magic was his MASTERS thesis
(in linguistics). According to what I remember being told by Robert
Dilts, the linguistics department wasn't sure they should accept it
because it was cowritten with Grinder. And at that point, John and
Richard were becoming so involved with developing NLP that they
never pursued the matter.
To the best of my knowledge, Richard Bandler has no earned advanced
degree. He is certainly not a mathematician, despite what he has
sometimes said and what people often say about him.
I mean just give this a little thought. Aside from the fact that in
all the discussions and arguments about Bandler, I have never seen
anyone mention a specific university that Bandler holds a PhD
from.... Can you actually imagine that Bandler, AFTER becoming
involved in NLP, would have spent five years of his life in some
graduate program taking courses and writing a dissertation? It's
not his style and the degree would have been useless to him and the
time spent getting it would have been an enormous waste of his
talents.
AND if he had such a degree, he would make damned sure that
everybody knew about it and where he got it and what the subject
od his dissertation was, etc.
Of course in any realistic terms, developing a discipline such as
NLP is a much greater distinction than any piece of paper that a
university can confer. I say this as a university professor
myself.
--
It is a question not of being happy or fulfilled, but of being on fire.
--- Anais Nin
Michael DeBusk
Lee Lady <la...@idiot.Hawaii.Edu> wrote:
> To the best of my knowledge, Richard Bandler has no earned advanced
> degree. He is certainly not a mathematician, despite what he has
> sometimes said and what people often say about him.
I asked someone who would know, and he told me Richard has three or
four doctoral degrees, all but one of which are honorary.
> Can you actually imagine that Bandler, AFTER becoming involved in
> NLP, would have spent five years of his life in some graduate
> program taking courses and writing a dissertation?
Can any of us presume to think what Richard Bandler would find useful
or interesting? Hell, I'm barely qualified to determine what *I* think
is useful and interesting.
> AND if he had such a degree, he would make damned sure that
> everybody knew about it and where he got it and what the subject
> od his dissertation was, etc.
Would he? I don't know. He's more than a little unusual. ;)
> Of course in any realistic terms, developing a discipline such as
> NLP is a much greater distinction than any piece of paper that a
> university can confer. I say this as a university professor
> myself.
Agreed.
Good to see you back here again, Dr. Lady! Are you going to stick
around?
> It is a question not of being happy or fulfilled, but of being
> on fire.
-- Richard Pryor
<grin>
--
Thanks to my regular e-mail account overflowing with canned pork, I
have switched to deja.com. I never check the my-deja e-mailbox. I can
be reached at the address below if you delete the truth.
debu...@eclipsetel.SpammersHaveSmallPenises.com
Ross Jeffries
<T...@Essential-Skills.com> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
>
> Think of the lengthy indoctrination process that they go through.
> It is no wonder that anything that is outside of their cult reality
> MUST be fake. Six to eight years of indoctrination so the can
> put Dr. in front of their name and PhD after it. It is pretty well
> know that anything between Dr and PhD is usually bullshit.
>
>
Look even broader and deeper at the con-job being sold without
question to the public: that "education"(a nominalization if ever there
was one) is a scarce "resource" that can ONLY be found by paying through
the nose to attend an official "institution" of learning, such as a
"university" or "college".
Fuck education; let's all engage in LEARNING. As in acquiring REAL,
down to the ground, street-level skill. Including, the skill of how to
THINK clearly and see through frames of reference that are SO pervasive,
it is difficult often to even know that they are there.
Ross..who's entire group of siblings have Ph.D's or the equivalent and
still don't have an original thought among the bunch of them.
--
Get Laid NOW!
Ask me how!
http://www.seduction.com
Free Newsletters and Real Audio files!
Ross Jeffries
wrote:
> I
> guess I shouldn't have invested such faith in those moron cult-members,
> Dr. Grinder and Dr. Bandler.
Lori, Lori...you really don't get it, do you?
Bandler and Grinder contributed to the extent they thought OUTSIDE the
box of "academic" thinking. They made great strides because them came
from OUTSIDE the very disciplines they were modelling and studying and
were thus NOT bound by the framework and mindsets that the PHD's and
others of those disciplines held.
Pointing out that someone is generalizing hardly negates the thrust of
their argument; one can ALWAYS point out exceptions to what is generally
correct. It's next to spelling flames in the skill required......but
your brain is so jellified by all that Baffa worship that I would expect
nothing less.
BTW where did Dr. Bandler get that
> Ph.D.? Did he buy it or is it honorary? If it's legit. I'd sure like
> to read his dissertation. Have you ever seen it? Can I assume that
> you won't in future be attending any more of Richards trainings?
My, you are ranting. Hey...where did that guy you brown-nosed get
HIS Ph.d? Amazing, how you're still refusing to look into THAT little
closet, Lori....
It speaks volumes about your experience in life though Tom if
> you have never met a bright, intelligent Ph.D.
Getting the Ph.D. didn't MAKE them intelligent and probably RETARDED
their ability to think originally, Lori. Speaking of thinking
originally, have you learned to fly an airplane in one hour while doing
plastic surgery and painting a Picasso on only one hour sleep a month?
Ross Jeffries
>
> Try the universal life church in Modesto California. I know at least
> one NLP trainer who bought one there and pretends that it is real :)
> I thing a Doctorite in Divinity is a favorite for frauds :)
>
I am issuing Ph.D's from the University of Tabby Tigress in
Sea-Food Studies and Consumption. Applicants must Air Express ship a
sample of scallops, yellowtail sashimi, shrimp or tuna(raw).
Davis Rowell
directly to Lee.
"Lee Lady" <la...@idiot.Hawaii.Edu> wrote
<snip>
> To the best of my knowledge, Richard Bandler has no earned advanced
> degree.
<snip>
Bandler has been quoted as saying that he holds two doctorates and that one
of them is honorary.
If anyone is arguing that his posession of a Ph.D. validates his NLP work,
they're arguing a fallacy.
If anyone is arguing that his failure to possess a Ph.D. invalidates his NLP
work, they're working up the flip-side of the previous fallacy.
If anyone is trying to catch Bandler in a lie, it's too late. In more than
one instance he's admitted, proudly, not only to lying, but to
institutionalizing lies and being paid to do so. He teaches lying as a
therapeutic technique.
If his resume is such an important issue, why not get in touch with him and
ask for a copy?
--
Davis
What is the sound of one hand clapping? I don't know, but I swear I've heard
it on Usenet.
Gary Goode
Damn, All these years I thought it stood for ....Piled higher and Deeper...
Ahh I do miss the life in the teaching/research hospitals watching as young
residents modeled the arrogant MD's so one day they to could be that
arrogant
--
Gary Goode
hyp...@mindspring.com
Lee Lady
Ross Jeffries <sand...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>In article <8pja39$1h4$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, loren...@my-deja.com
>wrote:
>
>> guess I shouldn't have invested such faith in those moron cult-members,
>> Dr. Grinder and Dr. Bandler.
>
>
>
> Bandler and Grinder contributed to the extent they thought OUTSIDE the
>box of "academic" thinking. They made great strides because them came
>from OUTSIDE the very disciplines they were modelling and studying and
>were thus NOT bound by the framework and mindsets that the PHD's and
>others of those disciplines held.
Well, this is not completely true. Grinder was a linguist who had
learned a fair amount about systems theory from George A. Miller
while they were both at Rockefeller University. Grinder, together
with Suzette Haydin Elgin, wrote the first actually readable
textbook on Chomsky's transformational grammar.
Bandler was a graduate student working with Grinder, and THE
STRUCTURE OF MAGIC, as those who have read it will know, was heavily
based on transformational grammar. Although certainly it did
involve thinking outside the box (as in fact much of the best
academic research does), its roots were in the academic theory
of linguistics.
It was of course totally outside the usual boundaries for clinical
psychology. Bandler was an amateur gestalt therapist and ran a
gestalt group at UC Santa Cruz, but I think that of the original
core group of NLP developers, Leslie was the only one with any
academic training in psychotherapy.
Much of the original development of NLP was based on existing
academic work, primarily in systems theory. If you look at the
book PRAGMATICS OF HUMAN COMMUNICATION by Paul Watzlawick (at
Stanford), you will recognize that it is the source of a lot of
basic NLP concepts and terminology.
The articles on the history of NLP in the NLP Archive section of my
web site (Http://www2.Hawaii.Edu/~lady/archive) contain a lot of
additional information about this.
There are certainly a number of people with PhD's (some in
psychology, some in other fields) who have made notable
contributions to NLP. Connirae Andreas (who got her PhD long after
initially becoming involved with NLP) and Michael Banks are two, but
the most notable example is Stephen Gilligan who, after being part
of the original Santa Cruz core group and then becoming a long-term
student of Milton Erickson's, went on to do graduate work and get a
PhD in Pyschology at Stanford.
But although one can quibble about details, I think it is clear that
Ross's main point is correct. Although research taken from the
academic world was valuable in the development of NLP, NLP could
never have become the powerful discipline that it has if it had
been developed by academics within the university system.
Since I'm mentioning my web site, let me also mention the article
"Cowboys Versus Bean Counters in Science" in the Ramblings section
of my site, <Http://www2.Hawaii.Edu/~lady/ramblings>.
--
Trying to understand learning by studying schooling
is rather like trying to understand sexuality by studying bordellos.
-- Mary Catherine Bateson, Peripheral Visions
<http://www2.Hawaii.Edu/~lady/ >
Michael DeBusk
Lee Lady <la...@bogus.Hawaii.Edu> wrote:
> Grinder, together with Suzette Haydin Elgin, wrote the first actually
> readable textbook on Chomsky's transformational grammar.
I'd love to know the title of that book. Care to share? :)
loren...@my-deja.com
Your ability to make everything about Baffa still astonishes me. Your
desire to somehow make this a personal battle based on some inaccurate,
and definitely outdated view of who you think I am is almost as
astonishing. I hope your personal evolution in other contexts is
faring better.
If you would like to carry on a respectful and mature discussion about
the topic at hand I would be happy to do that.
Take care,
Loren
In article <sandworm-75BAAE...@nntp.we.mediaone.net>,
Ross Jeffries <sand...@mediaone.net> wrote:
> In article <8pja39$1h4$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, loren...@my-deja.com
> wrote:
>
> > I
> > guess I shouldn't have invested such faith in those moron cult-
members,
> > Dr. Grinder and Dr. Bandler.
>
> Lori, Lori...you really don't get it, do you?
>
> Bandler and Grinder contributed to the extent they thought OUTSIDE
the
> box of "academic" thinking. They made great strides because them came
> from OUTSIDE the very disciplines they were modelling and studying
and
> were thus NOT bound by the framework and mindsets that the PHD's and
> others of those disciplines held.
>
> Pointing out that someone is generalizing hardly negates the thrust
of
> their argument; one can ALWAYS point out exceptions to what is
generally
> correct. It's next to spelling flames in the skill required......but
> your brain is so jellified by all that Baffa worship that I would
expect
> nothing less.
>
> BTW where did Dr. Bandler get that
> > Ph.D.? Did he buy it or is it honorary? If it's legit. I'd sure
like
> > to read his dissertation. Have you ever seen it? Can I assume that
> > you won't in future be attending any more of Richards trainings?
>
> My, you are ranting. Hey...where did that guy you brown-nosed get
> HIS Ph.d? Amazing, how you're still refusing to look into THAT
little
> closet, Lori....
>
> It speaks volumes about your experience in life though Tom if
> > you have never met a bright, intelligent Ph.D.
>
> Getting the Ph.D. didn't MAKE them intelligent and probably RETARDED
> their ability to think originally, Lori. Speaking of thinking
> originally, have you learned to fly an airplane in one hour while
doing
> plastic surgery and painting a Picasso on only one hour sleep a month?
>
> --
> Get Laid NOW!
> Ask me how!
> http://www.seduction.com
> Free Newsletters and Real Audio files!
>
Lee Lady
Michael DeBusk <m_de...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>In article <8prrfl$311$1...@news.hawaii.edu>,
> Lee Lady <la...@bogus.Hawaii.Edu> wrote:
>>
>> readable textbook on Chomsky's transformational grammar.
>
I'm a little confused about your smiley, unless it's because of my
having misspelled Haden. Anyway, here's the information:
AUTHOR(s): Grinder, John T.
TITLE(s): Guide to transformational grammar : history, theory,
practice / [by] John T. Grinder [and] Suzette
Haden Elgin.
New York : Holt, Rinehart and Winston, [1973]
xiii, 237 p. : illus. ; 24 cm.
Bibliography: p. 220-228.
OTHER ENTRIES: Generative grammar.
Elgin, Suzette Haden.
Michael DeBusk
Lee Lady <la...@bogus.Hawaii.Edu> wrote:
> >I'd love to know the title of that book. Care to share? :)
>
> I'm a little confused about your smiley, unless it's because of my
> having misspelled Haden.
The smiley was to indicate that I was... well, smiling. Smiling in
response to your post, the information you offered. I was pleased to
learn that Grinder and Elgin had worked together on a book and was
pleased at your recommendation of it as well.
> Anyway, here's the information:
Damn. I can't find it on any of the online used bookshops. Ah, well...
I'll keep looking. Thank you again.
--
Thanks to my regular e-mail account overflowing with canned pork, I have
switched to deja.com. I never check the my-deja e-mailbox. I can be
reached at the address below if you delete the truth.
debu...@eclipsetel.SpammersHaveSmallPenises.com
Lee Lady
Michael DeBusk <m_de...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>SNIP<
>response to your post, the information you offered. I was pleased to
>learn that Grinder and Elgin had worked together on a book and was
>pleased at your recommendation of it as well.
>Damn. I can't find it on any of the online used bookshops. Ah, well...
>I'll keep looking. Thank you again.
If you live anywhere near a university library, you might be able to
find it on the shelves and look through it.
Although I've always been interested in languages, I'm not a linguist,
so what I say about the Grinder-Elgin book represents only what I've
heard from others. In any case, there are now lots of textbooks on
transformational grammar which are at least as good.
As you probably know, Suzette Haden Elgin is another of those damned
PhD's. I believe that she teaches at the University of Missouri.
Here are a couple more books, more obscure, written by Grinder back when
he was still pursuing an academic career.
AUTHOR(s): Grinder, John T.
TITLE(s): On deletion Phenomena in English / by John Thomas Grinder Jr.
The Hague : Mouton, 1976.
154 p. ; 23 cm.
Janua linguarum. Series minor ; 221
Bibliography: p. [148]-150.
AUTHOR(s): Grinder, John T.
TITLE(s): Conjunct splitting in Samoan / John Grinder.
San Diego : University of California at San Diego,
Dept. of Linguistics, 1969.
46-79 p. 28cm.
Photocopy.
Detached from Linguistic notes from La Jolla, 2, 1969.
Michael DeBusk
Lee Lady <la...@bogus.Hawaii.Edu> wrote:
> If you live anywhere near a university library, you might be able to
> find it on the shelves and look through it.
I do, and I shall.
> As you probably know, Suzette Haden Elgin is another of those damned
> PhD's. I believe that she teaches at the University of Missouri.
I am aware of that, being in possession of most of what she's written
on the "Gentle Art" series.
I am also fully aware that there are shining examples of extraordinary
skill and ability among those who happen to hold Ph.D. degrees. Drs.
Grinder and Elgin are among them, as are you. I have never seen an
example of "Because I'm a doctor, that's why" from the writings of any
of the three of you.
I'm sure you know of people who would, if it suddenly became illegal to
write abbreviations after one's name, suddenly become non compos
mentis. I've seen it more times than I'd care to recall.
And then there are those who are more like the doctor I met in a
department store. A customer had had a stroke in, of all places, the
pharmacy aisle, and I happened to walk up and see several people
debating what they should do with him until the medics got there. He
was postictal at the time.
"Put his head up." "Keep his head down." "Put his feet up." I walked up
and said, "Hi, I'm an Emergency Medical Technician. Roll him over on
his left side and put his jacket under his head."
One of the guys there looked at me and said, "I'm a medical doctor. You
know more about this stuff than I do, so..." and he stepped back.
I thought to myself, I'd be one of his patients.
> Here are a couple more books, more obscure, written by Grinder
> back when he was still pursuing an academic career.
Thanks again.
Lee Lady
Michael DeBusk <m_de...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>In article <8q1j53$hh7$1...@news.hawaii.edu>,
> Lee Lady <la...@bogus.Hawaii.Edu> wrote:
>I am also fully aware that there are shining examples of extraordinary
>skill and ability among those who happen to hold Ph.D. degrees. Drs.
>Grinder and Elgin are among them, as are you. I have never seen an
>example of "Because I'm a doctor, that's why" from the writings of any
>of the three of you.
I think that you and I are fully in agreement on this issue. (As to
the idea that I am one of the shining examples, well, after thinking
it over I've decided not to argue the point. :-) ) The amazing
thing to me was that so many people didn't see that Tom Vizzini's
original comments about PhDs were facetious and still didn't get the
point even after he explained the joke.
If one understands the nature of PhD programs, one will realize that
there's no reason to expect PhD's to be more intelligent or better
educated or have better judgement than anyone else. In a PhD program
one is taught a very specialized type of reasoning, which is what is
required to write credible books and articles in one's particular
discipline.
On the other hand, if someone who goes into a PhD program is fairly
intelligent to begin with, it's not necessarily true that the
program will destroy his intelligence. (However in some cases he
may have to learn to hide it!)
Michael DeBusk
Lee Lady <la...@bogus.Hawaii.Edu> wrote:
> I think that you and I are fully in agreement on this issue.
I'm glad to know that.
> (As to the idea that I am one of the shining examples, well, after
> thinking it over I've decided not to argue the point. :-) )
Good move. Your work would win over your arguments. :)
> The amazing thing to me was that so many people didn't see that Tom
> Vizzini's original comments about PhDs were facetious and still
> didn't get the point even after he explained the joke.
It's interesting, sometimes, what falls to the ground when somebody
shakes the tree around here.
> there's no reason to expect PhD's to be more intelligent or better
> educated or have better judgement than anyone else.
True, but most people don't understand Ph.D. programs in that way, and
most folks with a Ph.D. aren't saying anything. ;)
> On the other hand, if someone who goes into a PhD program is fairly
> intelligent to begin with, it's not necessarily true that the
> program will destroy his intelligence. (However in some cases he
> may have to learn to hide it!)
For his own safety and professional credibility, yes.
Davis Rowell
"Lee Lady" <la...@bogus.Hawaii.Edu> wrote in message
news:8q20cm$1jd$1...@news.hawaii.edu...
> In article <8q1spi$r0q$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
<snip>
> I think that you and I are fully in agreement on this issue. (As to
> the idea that I am one of the shining examples, well, after thinking
> thing to me was that so many people didn't see that Tom Vizzini's
> original comments about PhDs were facetious and still didn't get the
> point even after he explained the joke.
>
Satire is wasted on Usenet.
Regardless of how boldly ludicrous a statement might be made, there are some
who will mount the battlements to defend it from all detractors, even the
original poster when he attempts to provide a clue.
The flip side is also true: no matter how elemental a truth one might post,
there is someone who will claim that it is not only a lie but a malicious
lie propagated only by rabid satanists, or rampaging Mormons, or gay baby
whales or whoever "they" happen to be today.
There are also so many folks around Usenet who really, truly, BELIEVE that
Elvis faked his death to join forces with the MIBs in an effort to stave off
the invasion forces from Alpha Centauri who have joined with some unknown
element of our own military (the black helicopter people) to get them to use
the mind control rays on unsuspecting, law-abiding folks like us that
satiric hyperbole becomes quite impossible. (You think you're spreadin' it
with a shovel, they think you're reportin' the news.)
In RL, the middle holds sway. The lunatic fringe doesn't have a loud enough
voice to get the attention of the mass of people. Is the reverse true in
Usenet? Do the cooler heads merely lurk?
--
Davis
We could've used nails or glue, but, following the government model, we let
wing nuts hold the floor.
And furthermore....
"You canna fool me. I know there ain'na no Sanity Claus." -- Chico Marx
BigJiim
>Sea-Food Studies and Consumption. Applicants must Air Express ship a
>sample of scallops, yellowtail sashimi, shrimp or tuna(raw)
I'm laughing my ass off! How funny is this!
"Seafood studies and consumption". where the hell did you get this?
"Creativity is the currency of the future" Richard Bandler
Gary Lavine
What did I ever do to get hit with the these broad generalizations.
Earning a PhD is probably my biggest accomplishment, yet I feel no
desire to impose limiting beliefs on anyone and I have yet to be
introduced to any PhD cult leader.
What you call an indoctrination process, I consider a great
educational experience. In my experience getting a PhD is all about
independent thought and contributing something new to a field. I
personally found myself constantly forced to strengthen and defend my
own ideas rather than absorb established dogma.
Just because there are some useless PhDs out there doesn't mean that
we are all useless.
Gary "don't call me doctor" Lavine PhD
Tom Vizzini wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> Personally I an sick of the PhD cult members trolling this
> group for there own selfish gratification. This PhD cult
> continuously tries to inflict others with its mind limiting thoughts.
>
> Think of the lengthy indoctrination process that they go through.
> It is no wonder that anything that is outside of their cult reality
> MUST be fake. Six to eight years of indoctrination so the can
> put Dr. in front of their name and PhD after it. It is pretty well
> know that anything between Dr and PhD is usually bullshit.
>
> I wonder if I were to attack the PhD cult if they would
> rally and defend their right to believe in the PhD. I wonder
> if I decided that they were ATTACKING me for my view
> that PhDs were useless and never really amount to anything
> of VALUE that they would back off and apologize? I wonder
> if this 'mean spirited' defense would be justified in their eyes?
>
> It seems that PhDs have a shared hallucination that they
> are more educated and superior that anyone who actually
> learns any other skill set. They feel free to barely examine
> any other subject and pass judgment on it.
>
> I suggest that the PhD CULT is a cult that limits the minds
> of their followers. IT MUST BE STOPPED!
>
> You can buy a PhD at a variety of resellers for 125.00.
> Many try to get into the cult with fake credentials so that
> the other cult members will respect them.
>
> Remember PhD stands for Pretty Hopelessly Dim.
>
> Have fun
Tom Vizzini
Hi Gary,
"Gary Lavine" <lav...@helix.nih.gov> wrote in message
news:39C980BA...@helix.nih.gov...
> Hey,
> What did I ever do to get hit with the these broad generalizations.
> Earning a PhD is probably my biggest accomplishment, yet I feel no
> desire to impose limiting beliefs on anyone and I have yet to be
> introduced to any PhD cult leader.
You make my point. You have been convinced that a PhD is an
accomplishment. This is cult mentality at its best. The fact that
you felt compelled to defend this cult shows that you have been
indotrinated into it. You are no longer an individual but a member
of a group. I suggest immediate deprogramming.
> What you call an indoctrination process, I consider a great
> educational experience. In my experience getting a PhD is all about
> independent thought and contributing something new to a field. I
> personally found myself constantly forced to strengthen and defend my
> own ideas rather than absorb established dogma.
Yes but those ideas were formed by the indotrination process
that lasted years. How can you even be sure that they are your own
ideas? They could have been planted by years of guided thinking.
> Just because there are some useless PhDs out there doesn't mean that
> we are all useless.
Telling others that you are a PhD is useless. I don't know how many
times
I have seen a debate that includes the words "I am a PhD". As if this
should mean something more than everyone elses experiences.
Gary I am really just having some fun with the 'highly educated'
The responses to this have been so funny. Every once in a while a
so called PhD will stumble in here and pronounce NLP a cult because
people who know it are willing to stand up for it. The when the SAME
points are made about their PhD the exhibit the SAME behaviour
that was cult like when they were sitting in judgement.
Just having fun,
Tom
--
Tom Vizzini
ADVANCED ESSENTIALS
http://www198.pair.com/eskills/advanced.html
Michael DeBusk
"Tom Vizzini" <T...@Essential-Skills.com> wrote:
> You make my point. You have been convinced that a PhD is an
> accomplishment. This is cult mentality at its best. The fact that
> you felt compelled to defend this cult shows that you have been
> indotrinated into it. You are no longer an individual but a member
> of a group. I suggest immediate deprogramming.
Aw, Tom, haven't the poor PhDs had enough? ;)
synergi
| You make my point. You have been convinced that a PhD is an
| accomplishment. This is cult mentality at its best. The fact that
| you felt compelled to defend this cult shows that you have been
| indotrinated into it. You are no longer an individual but a member
| of a group. I suggest immediate deprogramming.
Shhhhhhhhhhh... Didn't the Inner Victim Society let you in on the
skinny? Being an individual is BAD and SELFISH.
All the best,
syn
--
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of society but the
people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to
exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not
to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education."
- Thomas Jefferson
Gary Lavine
Tom Vizzini wrote:
>
> Hi Gary,
>
> "Gary Lavine" <lav...@helix.nih.gov> wrote in message
> news:39C980BA...@helix.nih.gov...
> > Hey,
> > What did I ever do to get hit with the these broad generalizations.
> > Earning a PhD is probably my biggest accomplishment, yet I feel no
> > desire to impose limiting beliefs on anyone and I have yet to be
> > introduced to any PhD cult leader.
>
> You make my point. You have been convinced that a PhD is an
> accomplishment. This is cult mentality at its best. The fact that
> you felt compelled to defend this cult shows that you have been
> indotrinated into it. You are no longer an individual but a member
> of a group. I suggest immediate deprogramming.
>
Well that clears that if believing that earning a PhD is an
accomplishment qualifies me as a cult member, then obviously I am a cult
member. The interesting thing about this cult is that the most extreme
true believers do not have a PhD. To most PhDs I know, and I know a
lot, the PhD means very little on a day to day basis. A PhD is simply a
past accomplishment and credential, just like any other degree. However
to some people who don't have a PhD, it seems to be a big deal.
Anyway I am all for deprogramming, however I can assure you that any
indoctrination I recieved in grad school is miniscule in comparision to
the indoctrination I recieved before grad school. I simply had less
tools to defend myself with in my early days.
> > What you call an indoctrination process, I consider a great
> > educational experience. In my experience getting a PhD is all about
> > independent thought and contributing something new to a field. I
> > personally found myself constantly forced to strengthen and defend my
> > own ideas rather than absorb established dogma.
>
> Yes but those ideas were formed by the indotrination process
> that lasted years. How can you even be sure that they are your own
> ideas? They could have been planted by years of guided thinking.
LOL! Years of guided thinking, why would anyone bother. If they wanted
to further indoctrinate me they could of just kept using the same old
techniques.
>
> > Just because there are some useless PhDs out there doesn't mean that
> > we are all useless.
>
> Telling others that you are a PhD is useless. I don't know how many
> times
> I have seen a debate that includes the words "I am a PhD". As if this
> should mean something more than everyone elses experiences.
Agreed, Just because someone is a Phd doesn't mean they are right. My
point has been that it doesn't mean that they are wrong either and it
doesn't mean that they are just "full of shit". (Lynn Seiser already
said this better than I)
>
> Gary I am really just having some fun with the 'highly educated'
> The responses to this have been so funny. Every once in a while a
> so called PhD will stumble in here and pronounce NLP a cult because
> people who know it are willing to stand up for it. The when the SAME
> points are made about their PhD the exhibit the SAME behaviour
> that was cult like when they were sitting in judgement.
>
> Just having fun,
>
> Tom
>
> --
>
Yup, people are funny, no doubt about that.
The Other point I am trying to make is that the grad school education
model is a good one. I guess that is why I think Montessori schools
are very cool.
Enjoying the ride,
Gary