From: ohumukin@spectra.com (Kawika Ohumukini)
Subject: Re: Change, NLP, and science (was NLP)
Organization: Spectragraphics Corporation
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 22:32:50 GMT

In article <16863B381.JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com> JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com writes:
>In article <1541@newsserver.cs.uwindsor.ca>
>roussea@server.uwindsor.ca (ROUSSEAU PAUL            ) writes:
>>>I've just begun to monitor sci.psychology tonight.  I'm a master
>>practitioner in NLP and I've very pleased that people like Don Steiny
>>are around trying to make progress in the ongoing fight between NLP and
>>mainline psychology.
>
>Paul,
>
>I wonder about the accuracy of repeated NLPer's claims about some "war"
>between NLP and mainline psychology.  I am a psychologist - not a clinical
>psychologist, in fact I have a good deal of disrespect for many attitudes
>in clinical psychology.  What I have posted about NLP applies to all
>phenomena: when you make a claim of some effect, please provide evidence.
>That is no indication of a "war" between A and B.  It is an indication
>that science requires more than hearsay and anecdotes.
>
>I think if NLPers are sincere about getting mainstream psychologists to
>accept their work, and so on, they would be better advised to conduct
>impartial studies and post the results.  A lot of what I've seen about NLP is
>right out of intro psychology books under different names.  But claims about
>instant "cures" for phobias. . . well, it does alert the skeptical side of
>a scientist.  Calling this a "war" is a bit histrionic, don't you think?
>I doubt if too many psychologists have even heard of NLP, let alone spend
>much if any time thinking about it.  My experience with it is totally
>from net postings, and I must say, the posters are less than convincing.
>In fact, they tend to attack people who simply ask fro proof beyond anecdote.
>
>This "war" is in your mind.  Does NLP have a quick cure for paranoia?  :^)


	Hi,
	
	I agree.  This isn't a war.
	I have not done formal-scientific-process-controlled-investigation-
	documenting-finding-the-source type of testing but I have used
	it and it worked FOR ME AND MANY OTHERS I have come into contact
	with.  It didn't work for all of them, I don't know of any
	therapy that works all the time.

	I am only a private business owner that wants to improve my life
	in any way I can over the entire course of my life everyday.
	I would be deluding myself if I acted anyother way.  People who
	don't believe NLP/NAC work I hold with the highest regard.
	Most people have no opinion on something and never take action
	and live in reaction to life.  Disbelievers however have taken
	a stand and their actions go from there, granted you have a 
	direction that benefits you.  And also understand that believers
	also have made a decision and their actions go from the frame
	that some or all of NLP techniques work.

	IDEA: Let's enter into a discussion on how we can prove or disprove
	that NLP/NAC works or doesn't work and let's get off this name
	calling, second guessing, belief instilling, shot in the dark,
	abusive, fearful discussion and get something started that can
	be useful for both believers and disbelievers.  If NLP/NAC is
	BS so be it, disbelievers can have the satisfaction that they
	were right the whole time and they can forward all their email
	to the entire world and make "NLP practicers" look foolish.
	But you'll never know until we get serious and take action.

	Have a great day!

	Kawika 
Newsgroups: sci.psychology