Post: #26

(03-10-2014 06:36 PM)Vicious Wrote:  

(03-10-2014 06:33 PM)bodmon Wrote:  

(03-10-2014 05:12 PM)Vicious Wrote:  

(03-10-2014 10:05 AM)bodmon Wrote:  NLP seems to me like the prototypical seduction scam. it baffles me that anyone with a baseline of common sense and observational skills would give it credence. just think about it: billions of men have been getting together with women since the dawn of the species, and billions of men continue to do so in the world today ... how many of them do you think relied on 'NLP' to achieve this?

Very odd argument. The same could be said about game in general.

how so?

Game seems to me like the prototypical seduction scam. it baffles me that anyone with a baseline of common sense and observational skills would give it credence. just think about it: billions of men have been getting together with women since the dawn of the species, and billions of men continue to do so in the world today ... how many of them do you think relied on 'Game' to achieve this?


See?

no, i don't see. what is game to you that you see it fit to make that comparison?

Post: #27

Are you in any way familiar with NLP? Have you read any of its core books?
Your assumption that it has anything to do with "seduction" is tells me this isn't the case.

Post: #28

@bodmon Try to approach these things with an open mind.

People have been communicating for thousands of years, it doesn't seem plausible that some people have managed to gather techniques of communication that are especially persuasive?

Post: #29

(03-10-2014 07:00 PM)Vicious Wrote:  Are you in any way familiar with NLP? Have you read any of its core books?
Your assumption that it has anything to do with "seduction" is tells me this isn't the case.

My sentiments also. Assuming that NLP has anything to do with seduction is very telling.

Post: #30

(03-10-2014 05:27 PM)Neo Wrote:  Years ago I looked into NLP and hypnosis. When I started out in game it helped since my verbal game was weak. I never did any of those patterns, but I became aware of what words I used and how they affected the outcome.

I've always been fascinated by altered states and how the mind works. Using words and body language to implant subtle suggestions isn't that far fetched in my opinion. People do it everyday. Is it some kind of mind control or insane power? No. The biggest thing I came away from NLP was understanding the power of language.

Magic and mentalism is fascinating to me as well. I remember reading a book called Psychological Subtleties by Banachek, cool stuff.

Yeah - that is the most influential book on mentalism in recent times. All mentalism over the past 15 years has been influenced by that book.

As the title suggests - it doesn't contain many tricks. But it does have little subtleties which can be very effective when dropped into the middle of a trick. It is one of those books where each reader will come away with a different set of ideas inspired by the book. The more knowledgable the person reading the book - the more useful it will be.

Banachek (Steven Shaw) is an interesting guy. He helped Penn And Teller design their famous Bullet Catch routine (probably the best trick in magic today). And about 30 years ago - he was part of a secret James Randi project which fooled scientists into thinking he had real psychic and supernatual abilities.

I can't be the only serious magician on this forum. Would be interested to know if others are interested in magic? I consider msyself a well read and knowledgable person. But I have learned more from magic than I have from anything else I have learned. The ideas behind great magic are fascinating and also help you analyze other things from a fresh perspective.

And to add to my analysis of magic from earlier. You should y'all know that alot of the most powerful tricks in magic have more than one ending. Some more impressive than others. So - sometimes if the magician is a little bit lucky and can finish with the 'impressive' ending - you are left wondering how he does it?

But as with the best tricks - in asking the question you have already swallowed the lie which will stop you from finding the answer.

Since in this case - the magician cannot do it. He can only do it - some of the time...

Post: #31

Did anyone here do any real live NLP training? If you didn't, please don't. It is a scam. It's a waste of time. It doesn't work. It is a pseudoscience.

The less people have any real knowledge an experience in NLP (or even an awareness of it), the better for me.

I've seen and done things with NLP that completely messed (in a good way) the subject's psychology in a matter of doing a short 20-30 minutes intervention.

Ron Jeffreis is just a joker in terms of what actually can be done with NLP.

So, please don't take any training. I don't need no competition here.

Post: #32

I am not sure if anyone is interested in my explanations about magic and secrets.

But - to add to what I wrote before.

I missed out an important category of secret - which is neither sleight of hand, psychological or gimmick.

It is noticing some tiny detail - which most people would never notice. And then building on that little detail to make a magic trick.

For instance - ever noticed how the letter 'O' reads the same when it is upside down? And ever noticed that the letter 'M' upside down looks like the letter 'W'?

Tiny little thing. You have probably never noticed it. Or if you have - it was too minor an observation for you to ever show much interest in.

All well and good.

But - this week I learned a great little magic trick which is based on that exact idea.

A lot of great magic tricks - are tiny little things which most people ignore. And which the occasional magician can pick up, dust off and extend into a great magic trick.

For me it is one of the joys of magic. When most people look at the letter 'M' - it means nothing to them. But when I look at the letter 'M' - I smile to myself thinking about the ingenious magic trick which depends on the exact shape of the letter 'M' for it's secret.

Magic really does allow you to spot interesting patterns and notice hidden secrets which most people will never realise are hiding in plain sight. It is like being able to see subtle colours that others cannot perceive.

Post: #33

Not for lying, OP.

"Proponents of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) claim that certain eye-movements are reliable indicators of lying. According to this notion, a person looking up to their right suggests a lie whereas looking up to their left is indicative of truth telling. Despite widespread belief in this claim, no previous research has examined its validity. "

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Ado...ne.0040259

Post: #34

(03-24-2014 08:57 AM)BDawg Wrote:  Not for lying, OP.

"Proponents of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) claim that certain eye-movements are reliable indicators of lying. According to this notion, a person looking up to their right suggests a lie whereas looking up to their left is indicative of truth telling. Despite widespread belief in this claim, no previous research has examined its validity. "

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Ado...ne.0040259

Actually this is not quite right. Eyes up and to the left mean the person is visually remembering something, and up to the right mean they are visually constructing something. (Auditory eyes are a different matter altogether, so if you are asking someone to quote something, eyes up are irrelevant in terms of them telling the truth.) You have to apply context to eye movements (i.e. question asked or topic at hand) to the eye movements you see to determine truthfulness.

Post: #35

(03-24-2014 07:24 PM)Gimlet Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 08:57 AM)BDawg Wrote:  Not for lying, OP.

"Proponents of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) claim that certain eye-movements are reliable indicators of lying. According to this notion, a person looking up to their right suggests a lie whereas looking up to their left is indicative of truth telling. Despite widespread belief in this claim, no previous research has examined its validity. "

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Ado...ne.0040259

Actually this is not quite right. Eyes up and to the left mean the person is visually remembering something, and up to the right mean they are visually constructing something. (Auditory eyes are a different matter altogether, so if you are asking someone to quote something, eyes up are irrelevant in terms of them telling the truth.) You have to apply context to eye movements (i.e. question asked or topic at hand) to the eye movements you see to determine truthfulness.

At the risk of thread-jacking, someone I know posted this on Facebook the other day, I thought it was interesting: "Can you spot the liar?" http://nyti.ms/1rjddl8

Post: #36

(03-25-2014 12:48 PM)RockHard Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 07:24 PM)Gimlet Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 08:57 AM)BDawg Wrote:  Not for lying, OP.

"Proponents of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) claim that certain eye-movements are reliable indicators of lying. According to this notion, a person looking up to their right suggests a lie whereas looking up to their left is indicative of truth telling. Despite widespread belief in this claim, no previous research has examined its validity. "

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Ado...ne.0040259

Actually this is not quite right. Eyes up and to the left mean the person is visually remembering something, and up to the right mean they are visually constructing something. (Auditory eyes are a different matter altogether, so if you are asking someone to quote something, eyes up are irrelevant in terms of them telling the truth.) You have to apply context to eye movements (i.e. question asked or topic at hand) to the eye movements you see to determine truthfulness.

At the risk of thread-jacking, someone I know posted this on Facebook the other day, I thought it was interesting: "Can you spot the liar?" http://nyti.ms/1rjddl8

Great link, I got 3 wrong. I was dead ass wrong with the last two, and second guessed myself on the guy in the plaid shirt. Wish we could do this with more of a close up on faces.

Post: #37

(03-17-2014 11:48 PM)CaptainCrazy Wrote:  Did anyone here do any real live NLP training? If you didn't, please don't. It is a scam. It's a waste of time. It doesn't work. It is a pseudoscience.

The less people have any real knowledge an experience in NLP (or even an awareness of it), the better for me.

I've seen and done things with NLP that completely messed (in a good way) the subject's psychology in a matter of doing a short 20-30 minutes intervention.

Ron Jeffreis is just a joker in terms of what actually can be done with NLP.

So, please don't take any training. I don't need no competition here.

You just NLP'd me into wanting to learn NLP.

Post: #38

(03-25-2014 06:39 PM)JDresden Wrote:  You just NLP'd me into wanting to learn NLP.

Likewise. I looked on Meetup and there's a group local to me that practices NLP, I'm going to try to check it out.

In the meantime, any recommended background reading on NLP from some of you more experienced dudes? A couple books in this thread, "Mind Lies" and the Banachek one, but the Banacheck sounds like it's maybe more specific and Mind Lies from the Amazon reviews I'm not sure if it's a good first book.

Post: #39

(03-25-2014 07:06 PM)RockHard Wrote:  

(03-25-2014 06:39 PM)JDresden Wrote:  You just NLP'd me into wanting to learn NLP.

Likewise. I looked on Meetup and there's a group local to me that practices NLP, I'm going to try to check it out.

In the meantime, any recommended background reading on NLP from some of you more experienced dudes? A couple books in this thread, "Mind Lies" and the Banachek one, but the Banacheck sounds like it's maybe more specific and Mind Lies from the Amazon reviews I'm not sure if it's a good first book.

Reading won't get you far and...

read everything by Bandler and Grinder and ...

only when you read some introductory books like ...

Joseph O'Connor "Introduction to NLP", "NLP at Work" by Sue Knight isn't too bad.

"Sleight of Mouth" by Robert Dilts is the must for SoM. If you're good at SoM, you'll be good at flirting.

"Time Line Therapy and the Basis of Personality" is also a must read. Values (criteria is some schools of NLP) and timeline therapy are the things that can mess your personality up in no time if done by a good operator.

After you are comfortable with basics, get "The Big Book of NLP Expanded". This is a biggest calalogue of patterns to use.

However...

...if you want it for real, go to live training and do at least NLP Practitioner and NLP Master Practitioner. If you have means, get NLP Trainers Training as well.

PS. Ignore Tony Robbins. He was an NLP Trainer before Bandler kicked his butt for using NLP brand without permission and Tony went into his Neuro-Bullshit Repatterning or whatever he calls his stuff now.

Post: #40

(03-26-2014 03:41 AM)CaptainCrazy Wrote:  Reading won't get you far and...

read everything by Bandler and Grinder and ...

only when you read some introductory books like ...

Joseph O'Connor "Introduction to NLP", "NLP at Work" by Sue Knight isn't too bad.

"Sleight of Mouth" by Robert Dilts is the must for SoM. If you're good at SoM, you'll be good at flirting.

"Time Line Therapy and the Basis of Personality" is also a must read. Values (criteria is some schools of NLP) and timeline therapy are the things that can mess your personality up in no time if done by a good operator.

After you are comfortable with basics, get "The Big Book of NLP Expanded". This is a biggest calalogue of patterns to use.

However...

...if you want it for real, go to live training and do at least NLP Practitioner and NLP Master Practitioner. If you have means, get NLP Trainers Training as well.

PS. Ignore Tony Robbins. He was an NLP Trainer before Bandler kicked his butt for using NLP brand without permission and Tony went into his Neuro-Bullshit Repatterning or whatever he calls his stuff now.

Did you do the Trainers Training course? If so how was it?
I did the NLP Practitioner/Time line therapy/Hypnosis course last year and I didn't think i'd ever want to progress further but i've been using it alot more lately so i'm now considering the master practioner/trainers training later this year.

Post: #41

Do not get the Banachek book.

It is expensive (since it is a book for professional magicians). And does not cover NLP.

Instead it has various small ideas that experienced magicians can use as part of longer magic routines. It is information which wouldn't make much sense (or be of any use) to somebody who is not a magician.

Post: #42

(03-26-2014 06:20 AM)Brisey Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:41 AM)CaptainCrazy Wrote:  Reading won't get you far and...

read everything by Bandler and Grinder and ...

only when you read some introductory books like ...

Joseph O'Connor "Introduction to NLP", "NLP at Work" by Sue Knight isn't too bad.

"Sleight of Mouth" by Robert Dilts is the must for SoM. If you're good at SoM, you'll be good at flirting.

"Time Line Therapy and the Basis of Personality" is also a must read. Values (criteria is some schools of NLP) and timeline therapy are the things that can mess your personality up in no time if done by a good operator.

After you are comfortable with basics, get "The Big Book of NLP Expanded". This is a biggest calalogue of patterns to use.

However...

...if you want it for real, go to live training and do at least NLP Practitioner and NLP Master Practitioner. If you have means, get NLP Trainers Training as well.

PS. Ignore Tony Robbins. He was an NLP Trainer before Bandler kicked his butt for using NLP brand without permission and Tony went into his Neuro-Bullshit Repatterning or whatever he calls his stuff now.

Did you do the Trainers Training course? If so how was it?
I did the NLP Practitioner/Time line therapy/Hypnosis course last year and I didn't think i'd ever want to progress further but i've been using it alot more lately so i'm now considering the master practioner/trainers training later this year.

What's the training company? It depends seriously on a particular school of NLP.

Practitioner is nothing without Master Practitioner. All the meat is in the Master Prac.

I didn't do trainers training as I was a tight ass and now I am fully invested in business so I don't have much spare cash for good trainers training course and sworn only to use credit if I am dying of hunger (never gonna happen in Australia but I am traveling to Phillis).

Post: #43

(03-26-2014 01:16 PM)cardguy Wrote:  Do not get the Banachek book.

It is expensive (since it is a book for professional magicians). And does not cover NLP.

Instead it has various small ideas that experienced magicians can use as part of longer magic routines. It is information which wouldn't make much sense (or be of any use) to somebody who is not a magician.

There's somehow a mix between magic and NLP in this thread.

They are different.

Yes, Derren Brown use NLP (it is amazing how he installs the thought in a chick and she thinks she came up with it and he just guessed her thoughts) but generally they are different.

Post: #44

No - I promise you. Derren Brown doesn't use NLP to achieve any of his tricks.

I have written about this earlier in the thread.

Post: #45

Quote:What's the training company? It depends seriously on a particular school of NLP.

Practitioner is nothing without Master Practitioner. All the meat is in the Master Prac.

I didn't do trainers training as I was a tight ass and now I am fully invested in business so I don't have much spare cash for good trainers training course and sworn only to use credit if I am dying of hunger (never gonna happen in Australia but I am traveling to Phillis).

The company I used was Inspire360, based on the stuff from Tad James. I had a 20 CD set to get through and a couple of books before I did the 7 day course. It was a small group of around 8 people so we all got plenty of time with the trainer.

Post: #46

I have taken NLP practitioner and master practitioner. I found it very educational. It provides an understanding for how the mind works. In many respect, it is "hacking the subconscious" mind.

I won't say it solves all your problems. It will give you insights into how your mind works. You will also find yourself paying attention more to how people talk and what kind of things they do when they talk.

Ross Jeffires employs many principles of NLP, and his stuff works. However, NLP goes way beyond Ross Jeffries.

Post: #47

Derren Brown simply used NLP as a 'faux' explanation and misdirection in his performances. Very clever dressing!

I think that nlp is worth learning, but stay away from the multi thousand dollar courses. Pick up a good nlp book and learn the basic principles like mirroring, matching, pacing and leading (very very useful), yes sets, questioning techniques, meta/milton model and things like that.

It can make you a much more precise and efficient communicator, just be sure to integrate the principles naturally into your speech and communication style.

Post: #48

One of the more powerful concepts of NLP is that of representation systems. People often have a primary rep system, and it's either auditory, visual, or kinesthetic. People often think in one.

For example, I absolutely hate the movie 2001. After I got into NLP, I found out why. I'm a very auditory person, and 2001 goes over a half hour without dialogue. Because I'm auditory, I like dialogue.

NLP also tells you how to say things. Consider these two statements:

The bar closes at 2:00.
The bar is open until 2:00.

These statements mean exactly the same thing. NLP tells you why they will register differently in a person's head. One statement focuses on the word open. The other focuses on the word close.

Post: #49

Everybody who do NLP have their own favourite tool. Mine is value (criteria) hierarchy. Something not to be messed with. I've change #2 value in my hierarchy and it change my life in a matter of few months. I don't recommend moving or replacing the top value unless it's a life or death situation.

@Brisey Tad James' school is good. I once spoke with a guy who works in John Grinder's company and knows John personally. He admitted that Tad is good even though they are direct competitors.

Post: #50

(03-30-2014 01:50 AM)CaptainCrazy Wrote:  Everybody who do NLP have their own favourite tool. Mine is value (criteria) hierarchy. Something not to be messed with. I've change #2 value in my hierarchy and it change my life in a matter of few months. I don't recommend moving or replacing the top value unless it's a life or death situation.

@Brisey Tad James' school is good. I once spoke with a guy who works in John Grinder's company and knows John personally. He admitted that Tad is good even though they are direct competitors.

Thanks for the info