From: lady@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Lee Lady)
Subject: Re: NLP  (WAS Re: Xanax
Followup-To: sci.psychology
Summary: I guess you take responsibility for any statement by any psychiatrist. 
Keywords: NLP  NeuroLinguistic Programming
Organization: University of Hawaii (Mathematics Dept)
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 04:22:41 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.164641.24805@newstand.syr.edu> mdkline@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Mark D. Kline) writes:
>In article <1992Sep10.003648.19808@news.Hawaii.Edu> lady@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Lee Lady) writes:
>>
>>This discussion belongs in sci.psychology, not sci.med, but it is an
>>excellent example of the way in which the rules are stacked so as to make
>>it totally impossible for any alternative approach, even the very
>>simplest, to get serious attention from the scientific establishment.  
>
>What baloney; yet another conspiracy.  Nevermind the fact that NLPers
>are making unsupported claims in a righteous "we've got it all figured
>out" kinda tone.  So it surprises the NLP partisans that people here
>react impatiently?  Suggests a possible absense of psychological 
>sophistication... I guess I'm gonna have to steer clear of sci.psychology! :) 

Unfortunately, there are lots of lots of instances of large groups of
people all behaving in the same unintelligent way without the need for
a conspiracy.  (Take one of my calculus classes, for instance :-) 

Yes, there are lots of NLPers who are very naive about psychology (and, in
fact, about NLP, when you come right down to it!)  Eventually some of
them will learn that nobody using any approach is successful 100% of the
time and that there is a lot of good work done by therapists who never
heard of NLP.  And that, contrary to what they may believe, NLP did not
invent the wheel.  

(I suppose you take responsibility for every statement any
psychiatrist ever makes.  Yeah, we could generate all sorts of great
anti-psychiatry flames that way.  "Psychiatry is no good and the proof is
that I once heard a psychiatrist say blah blah blah.")  

On the other hand, I wonder if academics will ever come to realize that
sometimes ideas can be valuable even when they come from outside the
academic world.  And that when it comes to something as simple as some of
the NLP techniques it might be a good idea to try them out before
condemning them.  

We all tend to condemn people who don't behave according to our
standards.  In some circles, people would be condemned for frequently
wearing shabby, even unwashed clothing, for never picking up a
check at a restaurant and being meager tippers.  In other circles, poverty
is not regarded as a character defect.  

Likewise, it is easy for academics who have positions where research is
not only supported and encouraged but actually required to point the
finger at those who can barely manage to survive from their work with
clients and the seminars they offer and say "How come you haven't done any
empirical studies?  Obviously this is proof of a totally unscientific
attitude."  

Then there is me.  I do have an academic position.  I suppose that if
I really wanted to I might be able to do some credible research on NLP
although it would involve learning about a lot of things like
experimental design that I have no education in.  The Math Department
here wouldn't really like that, but I have tenure and there's no much
they could do.  But I don't choose to do that.  With all respect to those
who spend their time doing empirical studies, I think that for me to do
so would be a waste of my talents.  Right now I'm committed to my
teaching and to finishing a book I've been working on for two years.
("Finite Rank Torsion Free Modules over Dedekind Domains" -- I thought
you'd never ask!)  

I take some time out from that to offer you a GIFT -- some topics which I
think can lead to some very valuable research in both scientific and
clinical psychology.  If you find an interest in these ideas and do the
research, I doubt that you'll even acknowledge me in a footnote, but
that doesn't bother me.  If you don't find my gift of value, then fuck
you too!  Why not put  /lady@uhunix.uhcc/:j  in your kill file and save
us both a lot of aggravation.

--
It is a poor sort of skepticism which merely delights in challenging
those claims which conflict with one's own belief system.  
                                                          --Bogus quote 
lady@uhunix.uhcc.hawaii.edu         lady@uhunix.bitnet
Newsgroups: sci.psychology