HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: slf@netcom.com (Sharon Fisher)
Subject: Re: Neuro-Linguistic Programming (FAQ)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 17:18:09 GMT

georgec@eng.umd.edu (George B. Clark) writes:

>In article <1992Dec11.213516.15746@netcom.com> slf@netcom.com (Sharon Fisher) writes:
>>
>>>By the way, I notice you and Friday post from the same site, and you two
>>>post identical opinions. As far as I'm concerned, you two are in fact
>>>one person trying to create the illusion of a consensus.

>This NLP zealot who sometimes goes by the name Sharon, and at other
>logins goes by the name Friday, has already been ejected by ridicule
>from both sci.med and sci.psych. As a last resort, she's trying to
>practice her sorcery here in alt.hypnosis.

>I think I speak for the silent majority when I say it's time we lay
>this hen to rest.

Gee, George, you must think I'm pretty powerful.  Why is that?

Let's pretend that you're right, and that Carol and I are the same
person.  What would that mean?  Would the arguments posted under the
names Carol and Sharon have any less validity?
From: SL500000@brownvm.brown.edu (Robert Mathiesen)
Newsgroups: alt.hypnosis
Subject: Re: George Clark Proposes Silencing Friday re
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 15:22:30 EST
Organization: Brown University - Providence, Rhode Island  USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: brownvm.brown.edu
News-Software: BNN via BNN_POST v1.0 beta

If you form an ALT.NLP I will probably subscribe, and I might well drop ALT.
HYPNOSIS.  So far as I can see, since I've been reading it, there are only
two people who have anything solid to say about hypnosis, and Friday is one
of them.  Postings specifically about hypnosis seem to have been relatively
rare since I started reading, and I would guess that about 60%-80% of them
have verged on the mindless.

Robert Mathiesen, Brown University, SL500000@BROWNVM
From: lady@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Lee Lady)
Newsgroups: alt.hypnosis
Subject: Re: Neuro-Linguistic Programming (FAQ)
Summary: Audiotapes are very limited.
Date: 12 Dec 92 02:33:55 GMT
Followup-To: alt.hypnosis
Organization: University of Hawaii (Mathematics Dept)

In article <1992Dec11.120701.1@sscvx1.ssc.gov> lwebb@sscvx1.ssc.gov writes:
|       .... 
|I have watched him work and had many conversations with him, and the two things
|I know to be elementary basics of NLP are that you always start from where a 
|person is -- pace their reality and then lead them where they need to be; and 
|that if what you're doing isn't working, do something else.  There's no such 
|thing as "resistance" -- only bad pacing on your part.  

This is why, in my opinion, you are unlikely to get the benefit from NLP
by listening to any set of audiotapes, no matter how good the people
recording them are.  

--
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: alt.hypnosis
From: slf@netcom.com (Sharon Fisher)
Subject: Re: Neuro-Linguistic Programming (FAQ)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 21:35:16 GMT

georgec@eng.umd.edu (George B. Clark) writes:

>In article <1992Dec10.145850.17929@netcom.com> slf@netcom.com (Sharon Fisher) writes:


>>What evidence do you have that this is being done with NLP?

>What a stupid counter argument.

Simply calling one's opponent or their argument names doesn't rank up
there with brilliant rhetorical techniques, either.

>Sharon, on my own home-study NLP course, the "NLP expert" who does much
>of the talking says he went from being a laboratory chemist to being an NLP
>consultant because he felt working with people is more rewarding than
>working with test tubes. 

Heavens, no wonder you could tell.  Any *real* person would much
prefer working with test tubes.

>NLP training was his only credential for this
>career transisition.

Presumably he has some experience, yes?  Presumably you checked out
and were satisfied with his level of experience before you paid for
your home-study NLP class?

(Which boggles my mind anyway.  Studying NLP at home, by yourself,
sounds like studying sex by yourself, since both are inherently about
making connections with other people.)

>Furthermore, the promotional I got in the mail says you can become an
>NLP Practitioner in one month and an NLP Master Practitioner in two
>months. It's a matter of how much money you're willing to spend.

*Only* a matter of how much money you're willing to spend?  Send them
a check and they send you a piece of paper for the wall?  Then why
does it take an extra month to be a master?  There's *no* classes or
study of any type?

>There is no state licensing, board certification, and so forth, as with
>clinical psychologists, social workers, and others who put their
>names in the phonebook Yellow Pages.

Are you sure that *all* counselors are required to be state licensed
and board certified?

>By the way, I notice you and Friday post from the same site, and you two
>post identical opinions. As far as I'm concerned, you two are in fact
>one person trying to create the illusion of a consensus.

I've gotten mail to this effect from George as well, saying he knows
the "truth" and we can't fool him any more.  Guess he's on to us, eh,
Carol?  Say, isn't it amazing that George has learned something that
my boyfriend and your lover haven't figured out yet?

I'm not sure how I would go about "proving" that we're separate
people, and I'm not sure I'm particularly inclined to try.  I'm not
that interested in proving my existence to somebody who grasps at such
weak strawss.
From: farris@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Lorenzo Farris)
Newsgroups: alt.hypnosis
Subject: Re: George Clark Proposes Silencing Friday re NLP
Date: 17 Dec 92 17:09:14 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <1992Dec16.153024.27099@netcom.com>, friday@netcom.com (Carol Anne Ogdin) writes:
:In <Dec.16.03.36.32.1992.28195@ruhets.rutgers.edu:farris@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Lorenzo Farris) writes:
:
:>	2) All claims, for or against, based on documented evidence.
:
:Lorenzo, I'm afraid that if you really enforce #2, alt.hypnosis will
:cease to exist.  I don't know of any replicable experiments or falsi-
:fiable theories which completely explain the phenomenon ('tho those of
:you with a more academic inclination might be able to offer us some
:from the literature; I, for one, would be interested in seeing them).
:

As I said, they were just suggestions. My own approach to this, since
many of my areas of interest haven't been very good for applying the
scientific method, per se, is to base what I say based on what I have
experienced personally, examining this with liberal use of Occam's and
Hanlon's razors.

I think the sceptics of various phenomena often reject things out of
hand, assuming that if it doesn't fit in with their belief system
(BS), it can't be. If they were prepared to present, and open-mindedly
discuss their experiential evidence, we could have much more fruitful
discussions on all my favorite groups, with 'believers' perhaps
getting a little better grounded, and sceptics opening their minds a
little more.

:
:In those newsgroups where a referee is used, orthodoxy prevails, IME.

I didn't want to suggest a standard newsnet-type referee. I was
actually thinking of a open "referee", who would present comments on
the presentation of both sides, and indicate infringement of any
'rules of discussion', explicitly, with posts to the group.

			-lorenzo


				
-- 
Happiness is just a                     ******************************
remembrance away.                       *  Lorenzo Farris            *
                                        *  farris@ruhets.rutgers.edu *
                                        ******************************
Newsgroups: alt.hypnosis
From: slf@netcom.com (Sharon Fisher)
Subject: Re: Neuro-Linguistic Programming (FAQ)
Keywords: NLP Hypnosis
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 20:35:44 GMT

georgec@eng.umd.edu (George B. Clark) writes:

>I purchased that memory enhancement, home-study cassette course that
>you see advertised on half-hour TV infomercials. It was worthless.

You buy things from infomercials and you call *NLP* a crock?  Well,
never mind.  Carry on.

>The underlying theory is that your brain thinks in pictures. You
>imagine a peg board, and then you imagine hanging pictures of things
>you want to remember onto the imaginary peg board. It was intriguing,
>but it got me nowhere.

>Another strategy for recall is to associate words to be remembered with
>rhymes, and to associate numbers to be remembered with words. Again,
>another intriguing idea, but it got me nowhere.

Perhaps you're not a visual (as the first example) or an auditory (as
the second example) person.  For example, think about the sorts of
words you use to describe things.  If someone says something that you
understand, do you say something like, "I see," something like "I hear
what you're saying," or "That feels right"?  If the last, then you
would be predominantly kinesthetic, and visual or auditory methods
would indeed not work well. Instead, you might try doing something
like writing the thing to be remembered over and over, or associating
a particular motion with it.

>I threw the memory home-study course in the trash.
   ^^^^^

Further evidence that you may be predominantly kinesthetic (as opposed
to your saying, "I could see that it was a complete waste," or "It
sounds like crap to me").
Newsgroups: alt.hypnosis
From: georgec@eng.umd.edu (George B. Clark)
Subject: Re: Neuro-Linguistic Programming (FAQ)
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 13:05:18 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland

In article <1992Dec11.213516.15746@netcom.com> slf@netcom.com (Sharon Fisher) writes:
>
     [ much deleted ]
>
>>By the way, I notice you and Friday post from the same site, and you two
>>post identical opinions. As far as I'm concerned, you two are in fact
>>one person trying to create the illusion of a consensus.
>
>I've gotten mail to this effect from George as well, saying he knows
>the "truth" and we can't fool him any more.  Guess he's on to us, eh,
>Carol?  Say, isn't it amazing that George has learned something that
>my boyfriend and your lover haven't figured out yet?
>
>I'm not sure how I would go about "proving" that we're separate
>people, and I'm not sure I'm particularly inclined to try.  I'm not
>that interested in proving my existence to somebody who grasps at such
>weak strawss.

This NLP zealot who sometimes goes by the name Sharon, and at other
logins goes by the name Friday, has already been ejected by ridicule
from both sci.med and sci.psych. As a last resort, she's trying to
practice her sorcery here in alt.hypnosis.

I think I speak for the silent majority when I say it's time we lay
this hen to rest.

Newsgroups: alt.hypnosis
From: pwh@bradley.bradley.edu (Pete Hartman)
Subject: Re: George Clark Proposes Silencing Friday re
Organization: Bradley University
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 19:26:08 GMT

In <1gdhmpINN8sr@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> SL500000@brownvm.brown.edu (Robert Mathiesen) writes:
>If you form an ALT.NLP I will probably subscribe, and I might well drop ALT.
>HYPNOSIS.  So far as I can see, since I've been reading it, there are only
>two people who have anything solid to say about hypnosis, and Friday is one
>of them.  Postings specifically about hypnosis seem to have been relatively
>rare since I started reading, and I would guess that about 60%-80% of them
>have verged on the mindless.

One might infer that anyone else who might have posted here has been
driven away by the interminable discussion/flamewar over NLP.

Not necessarily a good basis for assuming that alt.hypnosis would be void
if the strong NLP supporters were shuffled off to another newsgroup.
-- 
Pete Hartman		       Bradley University	pwh@bradley.bradley.edu
         So the odds against him were higher than a vanload of hippies
                   on a blotterful of Owlsley's Old Original.
                           There was still a chance.
Newsgroups: alt.hypnosis
From: isilver@meena.cc.uregina.ca
Subject: RE: hypnosis to quit smoking
Date: 17 DEC 92 22:12:38 GMT
Organization: University of Regina, Regina, Sask., Canada

      This is amazing! I have 2 students who want me to use hypno
sis to get them to quit smoking. I'm inclined to be interested,
though my facilities at school aren't perfect, & I'd prefer to
work through an integrated program, of which hypnosis is just a
part.
      I think that when kids come to you with problems, it's
usually another, especially when they opt for a 'quick fix'. I'm
a firm believer in hypnosis, but not solo.
       Regards
                            Ian

Newsgroups: alt.hypnosis
From: georgec@eng.umd.edu (George B. Clark)
Subject: Re: hypnosis to quit smoking
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 20:24:27 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland

In article <1992Dec12.173351.19050@netcom.com> friday@netcom.com (Carol Anne Ogdin) writes:

>Did he train a successor, George?  Is there anyone else who now
>continues his methods?

He was a consultant to the Georgetown University Medical School. He had
a few disciples floating around after his death from old age, but I no
longer recall their names.



>Can you give us any more details on the procedures he used?  Do
>you have any further information about the specific *ways* he got
>the group to visualize the appropriate images?  Were there other
>post-hypnotic suggestions he made that might've been powerful
>interventions, too?
>
Sixteen years have past, so I remember very little. I did purchase
several of his cassettes, which I still own, and I can tell you that
listening to an audio cassette is not as effective as being there in
person. The personal interaction is important. 



>If the individual's needs and wants are unique from the other members
>of the group, how would group hypnosis work?  And, I'm wondering,
>did Mr. Michaluk observe you (along with 29 others), or did he
>only have a specific pattern of induction he used, irrespective
>of the group?

My eyes were closed most of the time. I knew he was observing me,
though, because I heard his voice move to different areas of the
room, so nobody felt isolated.
B
A
>In other words, I wonder if he could've done the
>same thing with a drapery hanging between him and the group of
>subjects?

I doubt it. The relation was one of leader and follower, or teacher and
student. Had there been a physical barrior, the influence would have
been reduced to that of a pre-recorded cassette tape.
From: georgec@eng.umd.edu (George B. Clark)
Newsgroups: alt.hypnosis
Subject: Re: George Clark Proposes Silencing Friday re NLP
Date: 16 Dec 92 22:13:02 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland

In article <1992Dec16.153024.27099@netcom.com> friday@netcom.com (Carol Anne Ogdin) writes:
>
>In those newsgroups where a referee is used, orthodoxy prevails, IME.
                             ^^^^^^^ 

Moderator is the word you're looking for.

In unmoderated newsgroups, King Richard The Lion Hearted prevails.

Unfortunately, he doesn't reads alt.hypnosis. You'll only find him at
sci.med, rec.food.veg, and other groups devoted to health, fitness, and
nutrition.
From: sherwood@adobe.com (Geoffrey Sherwood)
Newsgroups: alt.hypnosis
Subject: Re: Hypnosis and the Soul
Date: 15 Dec 92 22:48:57 GMT
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated

steve.crabtree@synapse.org (Steve Crabtree)  writes:
> What puzzles me is that so little work seems to be done these days
> exploring the possible links between hypnosis and parapsychology with a
> view to exploring the nature of humankind.

If I were so gifted, the last thing I would do would be to make a big
deal about it.  If the government actually believed I had this power,
I think my freedom would be measured in days.
	geoff sherwood
Newsgroups: alt.hypnosis
From: dlb@fanny.wash.inmet.com (David Barton)
Subject: Re: Neuro-Linguistic Programming (FAQ)
Organization: Intermetrics Inc., Washington Division, USA
	<1992Dec11.220141.2970@news.Hawaii.Edu>
	<1992Dec13.182903.6826@samba.oit.unc.edu>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 15:03:06 GMT

A response to only one part of this:

In article <1992Dec13.182903.6826@samba.oit.unc.edu>
wilkman@med.unc.edu (Alice Wilkman) writes:

   Lee Lady has on several occasions implied that NLP is not 
   suitable for "self-improvement" type programs, sometimes in 
   the same posting where he mentions NLP Comprehensive.  I 
   understand that because of his training, especially his 
   training in the early 80's with Leslie Cameron-Bandler when 
   NLP  was geared mainly toward therapists, he continues to 
   stress its usefulness as techniques for therapy, for 
   therapists working with clients.  

I think you may be over-generalizing Mr. Lady's statements.  The
following is my own opinion, but I believe that he would agree (Lee?
Any comments?).

NLP is indeed valuable for self-help in many instances (Hell's bells,
I am using it myself for several things, including controlling my
diabetes).  Most of the instruction courses assume a helper / client
situation, as observation is more effective this way.  Therapy is only
one aspect of these situations; others include management, training,
and education.

Applying various NLP techniques to oneself has various problems.
Among them are those grouped under the term "ecology" (does this
change agree with the total mind/body/spirt/belief matrix that makes
up the person? (a slightly more general definition than that Mr. Lady
gave in a previous message)).  It can be much more difficult to
identify these in oneself than in another person; this level of
introspective objectivity is fairly rare.  Usually some will work and
some not.

					Dave Barton
					dlb@hudson.wash.inmet.com
Newsgroups: alt.hypnosis
From: slf@netcom.com (Sharon Fisher)
Subject: Re: hypnosis to quit smoking
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 18:45:04 GMT

friday@netcom.com (Carol Anne Ogdin) writes:

>In <1992Dec12.125615.5196@eng.umd.edu> georgec@eng.umd.edu (George B. Clark) writes:

>>In a dimly lit room, the session began by our staring at a rotating
>>spiral projected on to a big wall. Then Dr. Michaluk asked us to
>>imagine ourselves in a variety of business and social situations,
>>where smokers often smoke. Someone would offer us a cigarette, and we
>>imagined ourselves saying, "No thank you. I don't smoke."

>Can you give us any more details on the procedures he used?  Do
>you have any further information about the specific *ways* he got
>the group to visualize the appropriate images?  Were there other
>post-hypnotic suggestions he made that might've been powerful
>interventions, too?

You know, it sounds like the guy was using kinesthetic 'images' --
imagining yourself in a situation and how you would react and
suchlike.  That would certainly explain why it would work well for
George, given my suspicion that he's a kinesthetic person.

>>I recommend group hypnosis over individual sessions because in a
>>group you can remain anonymous, which is helpful if you are timid
>>about others observing you while suggestions are in progress.

I actually had trouble in group hypnosis classes for the same reason
-- feeling self-conscious about the other people and were they
watching me and was I doing as well as they were and suchlike.  Your
mileage may vary.

Newsgroups: alt.hypnosis
From: dlb@fanny.wash.inmet.com (David Barton)
Subject: Re: Neuro-Linguistic Programming (FAQ)
Organization: Intermetrics Inc., Washington Division, USA
	<1992Dec07.003607.20848@eng.umd.edu>
	<1992Dec8.021707.14543@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>,<1992Dec8.040257.13347@bradley.bradley.edu>
	<00964C94.0A7C7DC0@vms.csd.mu.edu> <1992Dec9.022637.10415@netcom.com>
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 17:37:27 GMT

In article <1992Dec9.022637.10415@netcom.com> friday@netcom.com (Carol
Anne Ogdin) writes:

   Perhaps Lee Lady and Dave Barton can also make some distinctions
   here that are better than my own.  Lee?  Dave?

Well, upon request:

Hypnosis and NLP have a significant intersection.  Neither is wholly
contained in the other.

Hypnosis is focused upon the creation of altered states of
consciousness.   This usually, but not always, involves the use of a
formal induction technique of some sort.

NLP (Neuro-Linguistic Programming) is focused upon understanding and
changing the internal mental representation that a person makes of the
world around him or her.  This may be applied to therapy (as
emphasized in the latest flame war), management, sales,
communications, training (a prime use), education, politics, and
virtually any other realm of working with people.

The intersection between the two is typified by the work of Dr. Milton
Erickson.  He was indeed the foremost medical hypnotist of this
century.  He often worked with a formal induction process; however,
(particularly in his later years) he often worked without a formal
induction, by use of metaphor and indirect suggestions.

A lot of this intersection is in the area of rapport (the intentional
observation and use of another person's vocabulary and behavior to
foster communication and empathy) and linguistic patterns that are
often collectively called "hypnotic language patterns".

I *think* this is just a re-phrase of Friday's response.  I am
certainly open to corrections or comments.

					Dave Barton
					dlb@hudson.wash.inmet.com
Newsgroups: alt.hypnosis
From: georgec@eng.umd.edu (George B. Clark)
Subject: hypnosis to quit smoking
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 12:56:15 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland

Physicians with years of experience still sometimes claim hypnosis
is worthless for those trying to quit smoking. However, people who
lived in the Washington, D.C. area during the 1970's know better.

A man named M. Michaluk, now deceased, used to hold free smoking-
cessation clinics each Wednesday night at his Institute of Applied
Natural Sciences (IANS). His success made him a local celebrity, and
he appeared on all the local radio and TV talk shows. To schedule
an appointment, you had to book two months in advance, since he was
so popular.

I know three smokers, including myself, who quit cold turkey
without withdrawal after attending one of these sessions. I had
been smoking maybe two packs per day.

The group session with about 30 participants lasted two hours. The
first hour was a lecture describing what hypnosis is, there were
simple demonstrations, and he discussed motivation to ensure we weren't
trying to quit just because someone else insisted we quit. He said the
treatment wouldn't work unless the motivation came from ourselves alone.
The second hour was the group hypnosis.

In a dimly lit room, the session began by our staring at a rotating
spiral projected on to a big wall. Then Dr. Michaluk asked us to
imagine ourselves in a variety of business and social situations,
where smokers often smoke. Someone would offer us a cigarette, and we
imagined ourselves saying, "No thank you. I don't smoke."

At the end of the session, I was uncertain whether I was cured, but
as I left the clinic I noticed two people walking down the sidewalk
with funny little pieces of paper burning in their hands. It took
a moment for me to realize they were smokers, and that was my first
hint that hypnosis had worked.

The next morning, I experienced no craving for a cigarette. I got
rid of the ash trays, and I cleaned my car up nicely, taking pride
in my new lifestyle.

The amazing thing is that I went from two packs per day to being a
non-smoker. There was no withdrawal at all. This happened in 1976,
and I haven't smoked a single cigarette since.

I recommend group hypnosis over individual sessions because in a
group you can remain anonymous, which is helpful if you are timid
about others observing you while suggestions are in progress.
Newsgroups: alt.hypnosis,sci.psychology