Neuro-linguistic programming: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Line 12:

NLP adheres to the notion that the things people are aware of internally and externally, can always be described in terms of the five [[senses]] [http://www.purenlp.com/nlpresp.htm]. The methods of NLP involve [[programming]] and reprogramming habits and mental associations, which some NLP practioners consider to involve the altering of [[engrams]] (Sinclair, 1992; [http://www.media13.com/18559/Nurturing_the_Brain_using_Neuro-Linguistic_Programming.html] [http://www.nlptrainings.com/humanistic.html Overdurf & Silverthorn, 1995]; Drenth, 2003). The basic tenets of NLP include the [[map-territory relation]], the observation of [[body language]] such as the movements of the [[eye]]s, body, and use of [[NLP modalities | VAK language]]. Some NLP techniques include behaviour change, transforming [[belief]]s, and treatment of [[trauma]]s through techniques such as reframing (Andreas & Faulkner, 1994) and linguistic NLP "[[metamodel|meta-modeling]]".

[[The National Council Against Health Fraud]] (Loma 2001) considers NLP a "dubious therapy". NLP has been identified by the [[British Psychological Society]] as [[charlatan]]ry (Parker 1999) [note that the society itself does not lend its support to this statement at present] and by [[cult-watching group]]s as a [[cult]] or [[New Age]] movement[http://www.watchman.org/cat95.htm]. Scientists such as Heap (1988), Sharpley (1987), Lilienfeld, (2003) state that specific NLP principles and processes are scientifically unsupported. "CERTAINLY research data do not support the rather extreme claims that the proponents of NLP have made as the the validity of its principles or the novelty of its procedures" (Sharpley 1987). Due to this and a range of other reasons, scientists such as Eisner, (2000); Lilienfeld et al (2003), Helisch (2004); Williams et al (2000), Drenth (2003) state that NLP is a [[pseudoscience]]. However NLP is also considered to be effective in the field by a very wide variety of credible bodies, including health, law, therapy, education and training, supporting Sharpley's contention (1988) that "This does not necessarily reduce NLP to worthlessness for counseling practice. Rather, it puts NLP in the same category as psychoanalysis, that is, with principles not easily demonstrated in laboratory settings but, nevertheless, strongly supported by clinicians in the field."