Originally Posted by
surfs_up
What can one
say about all of this. When I studied NLP in its early day it was, then, in that time, a new, interesting thing.
Slowly it mutated into a weird, constipated, dismal "three easy keys to success" cheezeball freakshow. There may be
better than average teachers here and there but overall it's forgettable stuff. I studied with all the original
figures, often in small seminar settings,Linden, Bandler, Grinder, Dilts, Andreas, Dobson, James, even the
extraterrestrial Carmine Baffa. I promise you, if their system was anywhere close to being as effective as they
promoted it as being, I'd have all the goodies life has to offer, and then some. That there is some value in it
doesn't obviate the fact that it is a weak technology promoted by a bunch of mediocrities.
Pheromones are more
fun and work better. My preference is to roll my own according to the circumstance, and combine with a top quality
fragrance when called for. The basic choice is will it be a high -NONE mix (strong reactions, faster, and more
risky) or a high -NOL mix (moderated reactions, slower response time, varying degrees of sociability), or a high
-RONE mix (not often seen here, much more laid back, contemplative)... let's see... there are 6 -mones that I
regularly combine and there may be a seventh on the way...
I'm curious about how much overlap there is with La
Croy and the other mystery sauces...
On the subject of non verbal cuing, I think the most central thing to learn
is the concept of "congurity"... the only living teacher I know about who specifically teaches congruity skills is
David Dobson in Friday Harbor, an island outside of Seattle, and he's ancient, still working though. The brain is
hard wired to pick up on congruent and incongruent signals, it takes a real pro to sift through the fine
incongruities, there's some guy, a professor I think, who is the world's leading authority on facial signals.
Salesmen, politicans, and con men work hard at ironing out incongruities, often with masking behavious like
excessive gesticualition or consciously overworking their facial muscles to obscure their fine motor "tells". Women
seem to be more finely tuned to congruity and incongruity that men are as congrity has less to do with chucking a
speak through a hyena than it does with mate selection. If you are moderately incongruent, women will ready you as
"creepy" of "off putting" without exactly being able to say why, some bad asses succeed because they are congruent
as bad asses, it's the undigested, poorly integrated parts of the psyche that generate confusion or discomfort in
others, that translates into not getting laid.
Having said all of that, NLP paid lip service to the congruity
problem, with the lone exception of Dobson they didn't know what to do with it. It was one of those gassy
generalizations that forever hung in the air and nobody could shape into procedure.
Bookmarks