On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 21:44:12 -0400 John Newman <jnn@synfin.org> wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuro-linguistic_programming
"..There is no scientific evidence supporting the claims made by NLP advocates and it has been discredited as a pseudoscience by experts.."
Somewhat related I guess, I wonder to what degree is hypnotism 'real'.
That's the interesting thing. They are related, in the sense that they play on susceptibility .. i.e. the willingness of a person to do what they are told. I don't buy into a lot of the models and so on that NLP advocates assert in terms of how it works, and so on. And any sort of testing is necessarily difficult, because of the variability of people's willingness to obey, and so on. NLP was "developed" by looking at the traits of effective public speakers, and finding commonalities on how they are able to persuade people. Even if the models, and explanations aren't correct, its undeniable that some people are more persuasive than others, and that it has nothing to do with logic. Salesmen don't debate with you, for example.