Important new concerns in NLP
Balthazar balthgracian@hatmail.com
rigidly defending their own positions then in promoting the growth and
development of these innovative methods. Just look at threads such as
Rapport Is Tougher Than I Thought for a current example.
Why is their such dissonance? Why is marketing such a higher
concern than growth and new learning? Why is there no real overseing
body concerneing NLP? At the very least wouldnt it make sense for the
larger associations of psychology to oversee its develpoment? The lack
of coordination, indeed the lack of respect from most people outside
the field are roadblocks to development. The -codification- of the
philistines in NLP and the bitter rivalries are little more than sad
attempts to muffle truly creative thoughts.
Bandler put it wonderfuly:
Its a lie, you know. Everything we're going to tell you here is a lie.
All generalizations are lies. Since we have no claim on truth or
accuracy, we will be lying to you consistently...
Frogs into Princes
It makes so little sense that people will argue how their way is
-truly correct- in a field that was founded on such statements as
above! The primary focus is to learn what works. Try everything. Have
choices.
Only time will really tell who truly has the most innovative ideas
in the field. Who today recognizes Hegel as a contemporary of
Schopenhauer? Schopenhauer spent most of his life in obscurity,
realizing that he was contributing something special to the world. And
he knew he was doing the right thing. I hope that together the
practitioners of NLP can set aside their fractious differences. I hope
that all these brilliant minds involved in NLP will work together as a
community, sharing and developing ideas as a whole.
I sincerely thank you for thinking about such changes.
Balthazar
synergi[@]cymetrix.com
> Why is marketing such a higher concern
> than growth and new learning?
Growth and new learning for whom?
It seems to me the responsibility for growth and new
learning lies with the grower and the learner. Done
properly, it should not matter whether the people and
resources you grow and learn from meet your hierarchy of
criteria -- or your definition of what the criteria really
is.
Me, I think all the bickering and arguing spurs as much
"growth" as it stunts. The idea of an overseeing body of
NLP...is a nightmare. ;)
There is one person in the NLP community whose ethics (based
on my experience with his actions) I think are absolutely
trash.
Funny enough, he is a leading proponent of "ethics" and the
various things you mentioned in your message.
But ya know what?
I still buy his products.
I still learn from him.
And I recommend his products to others.
The fact that I dislike his behavior has no bearing on that,
unless I choose to cheat myself. And that is something I
have no interest in doing.
Michael
Rex Steven Sikes
"Balthazar balthg...@hatmail.com" wrote:
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Dates fill fast so book Rex Now!!! Call 262-790-1993
http://www.AmazingRex.com
Rex Sikes World's First Motivational Mind Reader - Corporate Speaker
Expert in persuasion & influence, specialist in non-verbal communication
and intuition.
"Mystery is the fundamental emotion that stands at
the cradle of true art and true science." Albert Einstein
Rex Steven Sikes
trainers and providers need not and should not take any credit for that.
I say we are reposnsible to the grower and learner to offer accurate
information, to make it easier to see the "truth" not harder. We should
not obfuscate the truth with silly exaggerated claims, and we should
demonstrate by our behavior what we are talking about.
For example - matching and mirroring may lead to rapport, but they may
lead to whatever intent you have i mind. You can match right into
warring - heck I just demostrated that. Nothing new - I have pointed
that out for at least 20 years as have others. What I have asked is that
we be given a demonstration of quality in posting and posting behvaior -
something that is lacking in a faction here, that we be given examples
of ehtics, of innovation, of accuracy. I say the grower and the learner
deserve better than what has been offered here frequently and it is up
to some of us to raise the bar and demand better.
And when inaccuracy and dishonesty in posting rear their ugly head we
should call it - bring it to light.
Everyone can see an obvious commercial, every one can see obvious
hypocriscy, most can see s smattering of truth mixed in with lies but
that is harder determine - especailly for the newer person.
You can go anywhere and learn nlp or related disciplines. But I know
where I wouldn't go. I wouldn't go anywhere I had questions about a
person's ethics and honesty. I wouldn't spend an hour in a training room
with someone whose behavior is so questionable and outrageous in public.
Why - not because they might "install" anything bad covertly - belieeve
me they can't and aren't powerful enough but because I don't want to
hang around with people and get contaminated.
I cut loose from some nlpers over the years because being around them
was a horrible expereince. Publically and or privately. I have not
traveled to speak at seminars I once spoke or hung out with people
because it wasn't worth being around them. I have stated for years here
- find people whose lives are wonderful and worth modeling. Find people
whose success is rooted in honest accomplishment, who value those things
you need more of to be better off. Don't hang with people who drain you
because they themselves are drained of anything valuable. I have said
here before it is a matter of good taste. So I have refused to meet
with, train with and for many people who I think make poor role models
and have chosen to go outside the community and hang with people who
inspire me and have talent, and abilities and happiness factors and
quotients I can aspire to.
That is what we need here but will rarely find. We need more light not
more darkness. More lightness not more power, control and domination. We
need more compassion, kindness, aliveness, - all stuff some people
consider fluffy. We need more enlightenment not more ad space for rants
and raves.
I saw we all should demand higher quality from our providers. I know its
hard for newbies to look at and understand what went on here recently.
even for some who may have been in nlp for awhile. Fighting fire with
fire as an example of the these news group airwaves are dominated and
comprised of less than glorioius quality. demand higher quality in your
provider.
Go learn nlp related tools from peopl whose lives actually work and they
can demonstrate their talk with their walk. Go to the very best - forget
the speed metaphors and street fighting metaphors and ugly wasteful dark
metaphors - go where people are happy, where people get what they want
by using the skills in their conversations, their wrtitings, their
posts, their private and public lives, their hobbies and their jobs -
who demonstrate happy harmonious friendships and famly life. Those are
where rapport smarts come from, where language skills thrive, where true
positive powerful anchoring occurs.
It doesn't happen in the secret top secret thrill kill session of speed
kick ass anchoring and total world domination hype
but that is what purveyors of such trite trash would have you believe.
And if someone asks you to buy their latest without a free taste or
demonstration on the internet - maybe we should run fast in the opposite
direction. Cause if it really worked they'd prove it first - not wait
till after you spent your money. Ask for proof here. Ask for proof now -
don't settle for less - you are too important to fall victim to kick ass
marketing schemes. Ask for more don't settle for less and choose wisely.
But above all realizae that you are choosing for you - and just for you.
Are you worth the very best or just worth adequate training that's hyped
a great deal.
I don't offer training anylonger - but seek it out. Go find some good
providers - 2 days, 3, days or longer programs - there are some out
there - you will have to look hard but they can be found. ANd when you
find someone with good taste and who is classy and ethical, honest and a
good role model - hang on to him or her. Learn from them absorb all the
wonderful stuff they have to offer becasue the alternative
is....well...less than desireable..
Just ask me - I hung out with some of the worst. What a load off when I
said no more. You to can do the same.
synergi[@]cymetrix.com
This is not the kind of post I want to respond to, however,
since you used my post as a springboard for this...thing...I
feel I have to.
> I say we are reposnsible to the grower
> and learner to offer accurate information,
> to make it easier to see the "truth" not
> harder. We should not obfuscate the truth
> with silly exaggerated claims, and we
> should demonstrate by our behavior what
> we are talking about.
Hmmm. I think when NLP trainers start talking about "truth"
it is time to run the other way.
> I say the grower and the learner deserve
> better than what has been offered here
> frequently and it is up to some of us to
> raise the bar and demand better.
Well, this is the first thread I have read in this newsgroup
in some weeks. So I'm not sure what your talking about here.
It is probably one of those threads I'd either laugh at or
killfile anyway.
> And when inaccuracy and dishonesty in
> posting rear their ugly head we should
> call it - bring it to light.
Cool.
I ain't got no problem with warring maps. ;)
> Everyone can see an obvious commercial, every
> one can see obvious hypocriscy, most can see s
> smattering of truth mixed in with lies but
> that is harder determine - especailly for the
> newer person.
Here's that "truth" thing again.
So what you see as an obvious commercial and obvious
hypocricy you believe everyone else can see the same way as
you?
And... Even if something is an obvious commercial (I like
those) or obvious hypocricy (I stay away from people who do
this, though I still learn from them)...does not mean what
they offer is not useful. Right?
> You can go anywhere and learn nlp or related
> disciplines. But I know where I wouldn't go.
> I wouldn't go anywhere I had questions about a
> person's ethics and honesty.
Sheesh.
This is a piss-poor mentality, IMO. Some of the best lessons
I have ever learned have been from people who I wouldn't
trust to feed my cat.
It seems to me people can seperate LEARNING FROM and GETTING
IN BED WITH a person. Isn't NLP about taking what is useful
and getting rid of the rest? Why not take the good stuff
being taught and trash or filter the rest?
Rex, I have heard the "ethics and honesty" excuse as a
reason not to attend everyone from Bandler to You to Michael
Hall to Ross to Tom and on and on. Seems to me people should
shut the fuck up, attend if they want the skills, and
evaluate after that.
> I wouldn't spend an hour in a training room
> with someone whose behavior is so questionable
> and outrageous in public. Why - not because
> they might "install" anything bad covertly...
Nice covert installation.
> - belieeve me they can't and aren't powerful
> enough but because I don't want to hang around
> with people and get contaminated.
So they can't install things, but they can contaminate you?
The distinction is what? Intent?
> I cut loose from some nlpers over the years
> because being around them was a horrible
> expereince.
Good for you. I think that is as it should be.
> Find people whose success is rooted in honest
> accomplishment, who value those things you
> need more of to be better off.
What happened to take what is useful and leave the rest.
One of the most impressive people I know of with "NLP-like"
skills spent years as a con man. He got good because he had
to. And it was by doing arguably less-than-honest things.
Does Not Mean His Skills Are Not Worthy Of Modeling.
Or That His Success Then Translates In Different Ways Now.
> I saw we all should demand higher quality
> from our providers.
I demand value.
> Go learn nlp related tools from peopl whose
> lives actually work and they can demonstrate
> their talk with their walk.
Amen.
> Go to the very best - forget the speed metaphors
> and street fighting metaphors and ugly wasteful
> dark metaphors - go where people are happy, where
> people get what they want by using the skills
> in their conversations, their wrtitings, their
> posts, their private and public lives, their
> hobbies and their jobs - who demonstrate happy
> harmonious friendships and famly life.
Ugh.
One can not be the best in a given context AND use dark
metaphors?
> And if someone asks you to buy their latest
> without a free taste or demonstration on the
> internet - maybe we should run fast in the opposite
> direction. Cause if it really worked they'd
> prove it first - not wait till after you spent
> your money. Ask for proof here. Ask for proof now -
More installations, Rex?
This is such utter crap. Going by your criteria, I would
have never bought the courses I bought from you. I would
have never bought any of the stuff I have from Bandler. And
on and on.
No Taste = Doesn't Really Work.
C'mon.
Talk about a marketing scheme.
> don't settle for less - you are too important
> to fall victim to kick ass marketing schemes.
This is really ugly.
> Ask for more don't settle for less and choose
> wisely. But above all realizae that you are
> choosing for you - and just for you. Are you
> worth the very best or just worth adequate
> training that's hyped a great deal.
Tell people to choose, then innoculate against the choice
you are biased against. (I finally figured out who you are
talking about, BTW.)
> I don't offer training anylonger - but seek
> it out. Go find some good providers - 2 days,
> 3, days or longer programs - there are some
> out there - you will have to look hard but
> they can be found. ANd when you find someone
> with good taste and who is classy and ethical,
> honest and a good role model - hang on to him
> or her.
Rex, again... Using your criteria do you think the founders
of NLP would have modeled Erickson? By most accounts, he
wasn't exactly the perfume-and-roses kinda guy you are
telling people to find.
> Learn from them absorb all the wonderful stuff
> they have to offer becasue the alternative
> is....well...less than desireable..
More ugliness.
> Just ask me - I hung out with some of the worst.
> What a load off when I said no more. You to can
> do the same.
Hung out with does not equal learn from.
Which was the point of my original post.
Rex, if I applied the criteria you tried to install in this
post... I would burn all of your products that I own. Ok?
Hypocrisy and restricting choice.
Maybe you don't see it that way. And that's ok. Maps are
wonderful things. Acknowledging you have them and they may
not match others is even better.
I'm not sure what spawned all this, and maybe it was so bad
that you felt a need to post this. But it is really, really
ugly. At least to me... The stupid fuck who likes blatant
ads and other trite stuff so long as it furthers my outcomes
and intentions.
And I wish you would not have used my post to launch your
rant.
Best,
Michael -- who recommends every course Rex has ever sold --
if you can still find them.
Adam Sargant
message news:a8f9965f.02121...@posting.google.com...
> The field of NLP is crowded with people who are more interested in
> rigidly defending their own positions then in promoting the growth and
> development of these innovative methods. Just look at threads such as
> Rapport Is Tougher Than I Thought for a current example.
I don't think the very small number of NLP practitioners who use USENET are
in the least bit representative of the population of NLPers as a whole.
Adam
--
"If the Aborigine drafted an I.Q. test, all of
Western civilization would presumably flunk it."
Stanley Garn
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 07/12/2002
James Petry
news:atpng5$1gbae$1...@ID-75919.news.dfncis.de...
> "If the Aborigine drafted an I.Q. test, all of
> Western civilization would presumably flunk it."
> Stanley Garn
Here's me talking about Alan Garner and I overlook
mentioning "Strandloper".
It's based on the true story of a transportee from the
Midlands to Australia who escapes and lives with
the Aborigines for many years as a wise man.
Best Regards,
James
--
"Be excellent to each other", Bill & Ted
Michael DeBusk
<balthg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Why is their such dissonance?
Because, contrary to popular opinion, NLPers are people.
> Why is marketing such a higher concern than growth and new learning?
Have you ever tried to grow or learn while your bills went unpaid?
People tend to behave in response to their beliefs and values. If they
value the buck so highly that they buck adding value to the group, or
if they believe their income is more important in the scheme of things
than whatever they have to offer in exchange for it, they'll focus on
how to get money before they realize that to get it that have to offer
something we want.
> Why is there no real overseing body concerneing NLP?
There are lots of them. Many NLPers pick one and ignore the rest as
petty upstarts. Or something.
> It makes so little sense that people will argue how their way is
> -truly correct- in a field that was founded on such statements as
> above! The primary focus is to learn what works. Try everything. Have
> choices.
Well said.
> Only time will really tell who truly has the most innovative ideas
> in the field.
Yes, it's sad that, in any field, they're troublemakers until they die,
and only then do they mysteriously become geniuses.
--
Same old web page, new location: http://home.earthlink.net/~debu4335/
Barnaby Wilson
> on my experience with his actions) I think are absolutely
> trash.
>
> Funny enough, he is a leading proponent of "ethics" and the
> various things you mentioned in your message.
>
> But ya know what?
>
> I still buy his products.
>
> I still learn from him.
>
> And I recommend his products to others.
>
> The fact that I dislike his behavior has no bearing on that,
> unless I choose to cheat myself. And that is something I
> have no interest in doing.
>
> Michael
============================================================================
That is a liberating intellectual hurdle to jump over. To recognize
one can learn from or appreciate someone with whom they are at
emotional/ethical odds.
I and many other 20th Cent. Literature fans appreciate Louis Celine
("Death on the Installment Plan") even though he essentially said "the
only thing the Nazis got right was that part with the Jews."
Rex Steven Sikes
Never said you couldn't. What I said was consider yourself worth a good
decision and choose to learn from the highest sources of inspiration rather
than the lowest. But we are all capable of learning without anyone teaching us
too. we are already good at unconscious modeling - so I suggest that people
choose their role models carefully rather than indiscriminately.
In addition - I have no investment in where one goes to learn. But I do think
people who provide NLP and related disciplines owe it to their potential
clients to strive to be above board, to reach for a higher ideal, to uphold
accuracy in representing themselves, their skills, the material they and others
teach, others business practices and demonstrate that they do know what they
are talking about, not lie or mislead or name call etc. The should demonstrate
in their posts and online behavior that they can do what they calim when they
speak about having skills or teaching skills.
If they can't do it online why should we be lead to believe they can do it
anywhere else. They may in fact be quite able to in everyday life, or in a
seminar room, but I ask that they demonstrate it where we can see it before
enterting the seminar room.
If anyone chooses to enter without evindence that is their choice. But I do
feel, for my self as well, that when you sell or market to a community or the
public you should strive to be squesky clean (even though everyone has feet of
clay).
You should strive to actually offer the very best - not just sell us on the
notion that you do elsewhere. you should model the behaviors you claim you
possess. Truthfulness in advertising.
PLease don't make semantic arguments about eternal truth etc. just consider it
accuracy of representation. And if you are asking to have people give you money
you should give them something first. HOnest, accurate representation, accuracy
of information, and a demonstration of your skills first before taking their
cash.
The seminar room is not the place you demonstrate it first - you demonstrate it
before - so they come and learn.
I do not find it unreasonable (my criteria of course) to ask that providers act
mature, respectable if they feel they really have the goods. I don't think it
unreasonable to be called upon to model out what one has. I don't think it is
unreasonable to expect people to maturely respond to critism without name
calling, sidestepping, or spreading falsehoods.
What kind of NLP provider do you want? There are skilled wones without ethics
and just as skilled ones with ethics. The choice is the consumers. As a
previous NLP provider and a continuing practioner in the art, as a fan of NLP -
it is reasonable to assume I will speak out when I determine an inaccuracy. If
they wish to debate the merits of the critique then let's do so without name
calling, sidestepping etc. Why not just address the issues?
Again it is up to the consumer to chose wisely. To make an informed choice. No
there are no NLP police or standardizing board. A good and not so good thing.
Both having and not having have benefits and limitations and I am not certain
which would outway which. But since there is nothing restricing what can be
claim and there is a mishigosh of information out their surrounding all sorts
of personalities, the field and practice itself - it is more difficult to make
an informaed choice.
Yes coke can scream - we are better than pepsi without having to back it up.
But then it is a whole lot easier to obtain, pay for and discard soda than it
is a training.
So let's help the consumer out from the front end rather than after they have
invested their time, effort, money, good will and faith. Let's truly be user
friendly. That is what I have asked for - and my only claims on this topic for
years before any of the current players made it to the scene. For a long long
while. So it is not something I felt recently because currrent;ly someone runs
a program or a list. That is just false.
A clearner provider is the answer - not one who calls names and can't get facts
straight. Again you decide what you want. Thta's what will help the field - and
if we don't have a standardizing board then perhaps we should police ourselves
and not only offer the very best - but represent that on the internet too.
Sorry I used your post to make some comments here
Barnaby Wilson wrote:
--