- John Gianino
- Detroit, MI
- United States
This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Is gossip and NLP the same?
When we trust people they allow us to effect their beliefs. The small things we whisper in someone's ear can effect them if they believe you are speaking from the heart. Is this same as NLP? How can we help people with gossip? If everyone knows how to do this what will be the effect?
Topics:
education life technology
W. Ying 10+
.
My answer:
(1) "Gossip" ---- close symbiosis.
(2) NLP ---- programming the habit of thinking.
.
(For details, see the 1st article, points 4-7, 2(5), at
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=D24D89AE8B1E2E0D&id=D24D89AE8B1E2E0D%21283&sc=documents).
.
Aditi Sharma
John Gianino
Theodore A. Hoppe 200+
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFDWOXV6iEM
John Gianino
Theodore A. Hoppe 200+
John Gianino
Fritzie Reisner 100+
Theodore A. Hoppe 200+
Be authentic.
John Gianino
Edwin Nazarian 10+
Great Minds discuss ideas,
Average Minds discuss thinks
Little Minds discuss people.
for NLP I can say it depends on who and how uses it.
NLP was created based on Hypnosis, Communication (verbal and nonverbal), Linguistics and Neuro science.
if you think these things do not work, then NLP doesn't work either.
bear in mind, Nothing is created by itself, and nothing grows by itself.
you also asked: "HOW can we help people with gossip?"
I ask: "which people exactly are we talking about here?"
How can everyone know everything? if we all are unique and different, doesn't this mean, we all love / learn / use different people / things?
Theodore A. Hoppe 200+
Edwin Nazarian 10+
http://www.pennypresslv.com/Obama's_Use_of_Hidden_Hypnosis_techniques_in_His_Speeches.pdf
you may argue for the results that Milton Erickson and Virginia Satir achieved in their lifetime.
Comment deleted
Theodore A. Hoppe 200+
Does this sentence even make sense? Who's the we, they, and us?
It implies that if I trust you, you will allow me to influence your beliefs. This sounds like a magic trick.
Additionally, scientific evidence reveals NLP to be a largely discredited pseudoscience. Are we to compare gossip to pseudoscience? Do we need a better understanding of the questioner understanding of NLP?
Comment deleted
Theodore A. Hoppe 200+
Edwin Nazarian 10+
"scientific evidence reveals NLP to be a largely discredited pseudoscience"
this sentence is already NLP based sentence,
When you say "Scientists discovered that ...", "Scientific evidence shows that..." "Experience shows that ...", it can confer an air of authority. after hearing / reading sentences starting this way no average brain would question it, it would be accepted as a proven fact. if you talk like this to people you start to build consensus. one of the core principles of influence.
but as I haven't got that average brain I would ask you the following question;
How exactly do you know?
did you also know that Freudian Psychoanalysis paid attention on analyzing WHY people behave so and so and in the end the subject is given an diagnosis (but no means of cure or improvement).
did anyone come out from a psychiatric institution as a normal person?
once it is asked: "How many psychiatrist do wee need to change a light bulb?"
the answer was: "One is enough, but that will take very long time."
because they question WHY the light bulb wants to be changed? (to find a reason may take ages)
NLP asks: HOW questions, which set human mind on fire to find solution.
I can go on, because I am into NLP.
Theodore A. Hoppe 200+
This seems silly, as well unsupported to say this. Individuals develop a personal schema, which describes an organized pattern of thought or behavior. Schema resist any information that is in opposition to it's current view.
My expectation is that people investigate any claim for them self.
Out of 33 studies, 18.2% show results supporting the tenets of NLP, 54.5% - results non-supportive of the NLP tenets and 27.3% brings uncertain results. The qualitative analysis indicates the greater weight of the non-supportive studies and their greater methodological worth against the ones supporting the tenets. Results contradict the claim of an empirical basis of NLP."
http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/ppb.2010.41.issue-2/v10059-010-0008-0/v10059-010-0008-0.xml
When you say, " I am into NLP." What does this mean, you have a degree or license from someone?
I heard a different version of your joke: How many psychiatrist does it take to change a light build?
The psychiatrist is still trying to find the right medication that works for the lightbulb
Edwin Nazarian 10+
"I thought neurolingusitic programming was a particular set of strategies for manipulating people's points of view and behavior"
you have got a good point there...
Would you say that same thing about Anthony Robbins and Zig Zalger?
Theodore A. Hoppe 200+
Edwin Nazarian 10+
Psychologist: I will give your the key of your locked mind if you come to my office.
Church: I will give you God's word if you give me your gold.
Politics: I will solve all your problems if you vote for me.
isn't it how it works?
Edwin Nazarian 10+
"Out of 33 studies, 18.2% show results supporting the tenets of NLP, 54.5% - results non-supportive of the NLP tenets and 27.3% brings uncertain results."
Placebo doesn't do miracles for everyone. (but it is on the shelves for sale and still used widely by psychologist and psychiatrist.)
Thomas Hawkins
Edwin Nazarian 10+
if you are not aware of NLP techniques how can you use them? how exactly can you know you are using them for you or against you?
we all communicate, because we simply cannot NOT communicate, but how well we communicate, that is the question.
Thomas Hawkins
The ability to communicate via language is to effectively install/explain/share/etc something with another, therefore trying to understand or be understood. Therefore, you are quite literally programming someone with words no matter what you say, no?
I understand that their are theories and practices within the study of NLP, in that sense I can see the direction John is coming from when questioning gossip and NLP. I wanted to extend it from there, proposing the possible idea that most already know forms of NLP, subconsciously, but obviously differ in abilities to detect it if it is being used to manipulate rather than honest gossip/conversation.