(05-02-2011 02:50 AM)Jon Wrote: First: NLP makes a number of claims that have been proven false. The eye accessing cues aspect of NLP has no evidence behind it. NLP therapy cannot reduce anziety in one session.
Yeah, like any art, there are better and worse aspects of it. My greatest interest is NLP is the approach it takes to analyzing peoples' use of spoken and other language as a means of helping them change in the way that they want. Which I think is one of the most solid parts of NLP and has a deep and well-respected heritage in clinical therapy.
The eye accessing cues are one of those weird "black magic" parts of NLP that I am more skeptical of. On the other hand, the more general underlying concept of sensory acuity - observing people's behavior (movement, body language, speaking, etc) gives you clues to their internal state - makes a lot of sense. It's harder to teach as a specific rule, other than something very general like "watch people and see what they do".
That said, I think NLP does best in areas where it provides broad philosophies, rules of thumb, and generalities. Of course, some NLP marketers have gone overboard promising very specific results and universal rules, and that behavior has unfortunately tainted the whole field. (Actually, it's a very similar problem to what we observe in the PUA marketing industry too - some bad apples exaggerate and overreach, some clients have a bad experience because of expanded expectations, and it leads some guys to write the whole thing off as nonsense, instead of being critical and evaluating individual methods or teachers case-by-case.)
(05-02-2011 02:50 AM)Jon Wrote: Second: many of the techniques that NLP credits as so important are actually taken, without attribution, from other fields (see, e.g. unconscious competence).
Some texts that I have read do present NLP as this unified body of work, which is pretty inaccurate - it's a wild blend of a lot of different results from linguistics, philosophy, Gestalt and family therapy, psychology, computer science, neuroscience. Its practical standpoint means that "whatever works" tends to get assimilated into the NLP body of knowledge.
The reverse has also apparently happened - some authors have claimed that some of the commonly used therapeutic NLP patterns have made their way back into mainstream therapy without citing their origins.
(05-02-2011 02:50 AM)Jon Wrote: Third: NLP has very lax accreditation standards. NLP practitioners require far less training than actual therapists. You can get certified in a matter of days.
That's true - a Practitioner course consists of about 100 hours of training and a Master Practitioner is about 200. So the certifications basically say that you've attended class, which is fine, but it's not the 1000s of hours of formal course work that a person gets in (e.g.) a university degree.
For me, the certification process was a great learning experience but hardly the final word. As with any skill, ongoing study and growth is the key factor. If a person wanted to really learn NLP well, I'd say the best way to do it would be to get a small, dedicated mastermind group together (maybe 4-8 people) and meet for a few hours a week to practice the techniques on each other.
In any case, for a man wanting to "get better with women", I think the promise of NLP is somewhat of a distraction. Will it screw you up? No. Anything you learn probably won't hurt and may help a bit.
But spending the same number of hours going out and working your core pickup/seduction habits and skills (i.e. approaching, communicating with women, making mistakes, and learning) is the most direct way to improve.