NLP is not based on science. NLP is just something pulled out of someone's ass

[MrShit]

Originally Posted by ClarkKent

You are so good to me, M. Merde. I wanted to come back to some of this stuff and you've kindly set it up for me

So I'm sorry I have to tell you that this comment is worthless, BECAUSE, "NLP" is a specific modelling technique, nothing else.

If you are referring to any of the NLP-related techniques then your comment is equally worthless because only a handful of techniques have actually been tested.

So lack of proof invariably means nothing more than just that - no one has ever investigated it. Absence of evidence DOES NOT per se indicate evidence of absence.

I never claimed it did. I merely stated that there's no evidence supporting it, and it's a very testable method. Since it's been around for 30 years that's a pretty good sign that it's bullshit. Why haven't bandler & co tested it? Maybe they did , but didn't like the results? This is the number one sign for pseudoscience and quackery.

You say "nlp is a modelling technique and nothing else". Are you saying Bandler lies about the use of NLP in frogs to princes? Because everything he mentions can be measured.

Originally Posted by ClarkKent

"Placebo-controlled", "confounding variable", etc.?
This is more psycho-babble.

Worse still, your constant harping on about placebo's is clear evidence of your lack of genuine knowledge. Because:

One of the big problems in carrying out psychological tests, as compared to tests of medicines, for example, is that subjects look for clues as to what is expected of them, and will in many cases try to meet whatever they think those requirements are.

Naturally this is likely to interfere with the results of the test, so it is normal practice to MISLEAD subjects as to the purpose of the test. That way they can adjust their behaviour without interfering with what is really going on.

What one tries to shield subjects from is ANY kind of "observer effect" - any activity by the researcher which might be the cause of a particular result and which interferes with the real purpose of the experiment.

This will include:

- Order effect

Which you apparently think was involved in the Hammer study, though I'll be jiggered if I know how you came to that conclusion because it wasn't there (your interpretation of the information in the abstract is obviously inaccurate)

- Experimentor expectancy effect. Any action (usually non-verbal) that might indicate to the subject what the experimenter expected to happen

- Demand characteristics. Any action by the experimenter which might help a subject to figure out what the experiment was really about.

And so on.

But consider the difference.
In a genuine placebo trial the subjects who take an active part in the trial are deliberately told what the trial is about and what results the experimenters hope to get.

If you tell the subjects in a psychological test exactly what results you genuinely hope to get then what you are likely to get is a set of useless results which pretty well match your description.

If you lie to one group then you will still most likely get results which pretty much match what you said you were looking for.

Thus a placebo group in the kind of experiment we're talking about would be self-defeating.

Moreover, you say that Gumm, Walker and Day's study screened out the unwanted effects, but they did nothing of the kind. They simply tested the subjects in three ways - eye movements, verbal predicates and self-reporting and then compared the results - in the belief that all three were regarded by the co-creators of the FoNLP as ways to determine someone's PRS and that they should therefore agree (as if!).
There was NO intentional "placebo group". So even that defeats your claims.

A valid method will have results that exceeds those produced merely by expectancy, confirmation bias, demand characteristics. How many times do I have to explain this? Gumm walker and day's study appears to be double-blind from the abstract, where it's described that eye-movements have been recorded, verbal speech has been recorded, and the subjects submitted self-reported measures. Content analysis was then performed and a kappa-analysis (a way to measure interrater reliability) failed to support the predicaments of PRS.

Why did you lie about studying social psychology? It's so obvious that you have no idea what you're talking about, referring to basic jargon as "psychobabble"

[MrShit]

Originally Posted by ClarkKent

To put it another way, if you want a guarantee, buy a toaster.
Don't waste your time on anything to do with NLP. It belongs to a whole different mindset.

What mindset? The mindset of saying you can cure phobias in under an hour without exposure, then later saying you actually don't know if you can do that?

Then charging money for it?

I believe that's called being a scammer and/or a con-artist.

[NLPGuy]

Originally Posted by MrShit

Since it's been around for 30 years that's a pretty good sign that it's bullshit.

Bullshit? According to whom? Where is your prove for this, or it just your opinion?

Originally Posted by MrShit

Why haven't bandler & co tested it? Maybe they did , but didn't like the results? This is the number one sign for pseudoscience and quackery.

Is this really number one sign for pseudoscience or just your opinion?

Originally Posted by MrShit

You say "nlp is a modelling technique and nothing else". Are you saying Bandler lies about the use of NLP in frogs to princes? Because everything he mentions can be measured.

Do you really believe that is he lieing or is this just personall attack?

Mr. Shit this is kind of skepticizm I don't like that on one side bad skeptics(ihmo) ask others for provide proves for their claims and at same time they make make claims without providing proves themself. This could be pretty good discussion and in certain moments it was. The rest was just pure arguing with few trolls appearing here and there.

Peace.

[MrShit]

Originally Posted by NLPGuy

Bullshit? According to whom? Where is your prove for this, or it just your opinion?


Is this really number one sign for pseudoscience or just your opinion?

Do you really believe that is he lieing or is this just personall attack?

Mr. Shit this is kind of skepticizm I don't like that on one side bad skeptics(ihmo) ask others for provide proves for their claims and at same time they make make claims without providing proves themself. This could be pretty good discussion and in certain moments it was. The rest was just pure arguing with few trolls appearing here and there.

Peace.

Yes that's my opinion(that it's probably bullshit) and, seeing as NLP is largely ignored in the scientific community, I also assume I am not the only one holding that opinion.

It is defined as such by many renowned scientists, amongst them Keith Stanovich in "How to think straight about psychology".

This is just childish nit-picking. I could do the same to you and say

This could be pretty good discussion and in certain moments it was.

Is it? Or is that just your opinion? Can you prove that?

The answer is: Who cares because it's irrelevant. Skepticism is used to assess the validity of very specific claim through investigation of the evidence. I did not call Bandler a liar, so you should probably re-read my post. Other then that I've given proof for every statement I have made that has been challenged.

If you are trying to invalidate this entire thread by attempting to label me as a "bad skeptic", that's a logical fallacy.

[GuitarBlaze]

Hypnosis is awesome, I dont know about NLP, but basically you are a big fool if you bash hypnosis. Hypnosis is the most advanced most under-rated system of Western mental-discipline, it fixes people up. I want to go into this more, but to summarize, you are a dumbass, you are an idiot, f--- you. Other ridiculous bullsh-- deserves scorn, alot of stupid sh-- has been derived from hypnosis, you dont know nothing. Placebo is the most effective medicine of all time, more humans have been cured by a placebo than any other type of medicine, why shouldnt a placebo work on mental issues? Dude, you are a dumbass, you are an unworthy piece of junk, talking about scientifically proven. Alot of things arent scientifically proven - global warming, tobacco - are you going to buy that detractor sh--? What a bunch of nonsense, you are unworthy of an intelligent response. What is your alternative? Every alternative you could mention is ridiculous, there isnt one! Being ignorant and proclaiming ignorance as the gospel, that doesnt work - western psychology doesnt work - past life therapy doesnt work - scientology doesnt work - peyote works but nobody ever claimed it would zero in on mental issues like a laser and cleanse them out. Your method - being ignorant and preaching ignorance - works - but only for you - and only so long as you are the one who defines success. Every alternative to hypnosis is a bunch of un-proven ridiculous nonsense. Go ahead and bash those PUAs.

[twothreeoh]

Thanks but these are
Really garbage and
Obviously
Lame
Lines you've strung together.

Originally Posted by GuitarBlaze

Hypnosis is awesome, I dont know about NLP, but basically you are a big fool if you bash hypnosis. Hypnosis is the most advanced most under-rated system of Western mental-discipline, it fixes people up. I want to go into this more, but to summarize, you are a dumbass, you are an idiot, f--- you. Other ridiculous bullsh-- deserves scorn, alot of stupid sh-- has been derived from hypnosis, you dont know nothing. Placebo is the most effective medicine of all time, more humans have been cured by a placebo than any other type of medicine, why shouldnt a placebo work on mental issues? Dude, you are a dumbass, you are an unworthy piece of junk, talking about scientifically proven. Alot of things arent scientifically proven - global warming, tobacco - are you going to buy that detractor sh--? What a bunch of nonsense, you are unworthy of an intelligent response. What is your alternative? Every alternative you could mention is ridiculous, there isnt one! Being ignorant and proclaiming ignorance as the gospel, that doesnt work - western psychology doesnt work - past life therapy doesnt work - scientology doesnt work - peyote works but nobody ever claimed it would zero in on mental issues like a laser and cleanse them out. Your method - being ignorant and preaching ignorance - works - but only for you - and only so long as you are the one who defines success. Every alternative to hypnosis is a bunch of un-proven ridiculous nonsense. Go ahead and bash those PUAs.

[MrShit]

Originally Posted by GuitarBlaze

Hypnosis is awesome, I dont know about NLP, but basically you are a big fool if you bash hypnosis. Hypnosis is the most advanced most under-rated system of Western mental-discipline, it fixes people up. I want to go into this more, but to summarize, you are a dumbass, you are an idiot, f--- you. Other ridiculous bullsh-- deserves scorn, alot of stupid sh-- has been derived from hypnosis, you dont know nothing. Placebo is the most effective medicine of all time, more humans have been cured by a placebo than any other type of medicine, why shouldnt a placebo work on mental issues? Dude, you are a dumbass, you are an unworthy piece of junk, talking about scientifically proven. Alot of things arent scientifically proven - global warming, tobacco - are you going to buy that detractor sh--? What a bunch of nonsense, you are unworthy of an intelligent response. What is your alternative? Every alternative you could mention is ridiculous, there isnt one! Being ignorant and proclaiming ignorance as the gospel, that doesnt work - western psychology doesnt work - past life therapy doesnt work - scientology doesnt work - peyote works but nobody ever claimed it would zero in on mental issues like a laser and cleanse them out. Your method - being ignorant and preaching ignorance - works - but only for you - and only so long as you are the one who defines success. Every alternative to hypnosis is a bunch of un-proven ridiculous nonsense. Go ahead and bash those PUAs.

Lies. The only legits form of mental treatment is Eckhart Tolle.

And tobacco isn't scientifically proven no one even knows if it's so shut up

[Chaxi]

Hypnosis worked wonders for me in curing avoidant personality disorder. Some NLP stuff worked really well too.

At some point in your life Mr Shit, you have to try things to see what works for yourself, and not wait until Mummy, Daddy or Science gives you a green light. NLP and hypnosis will never be proved scientifically in the way you mean it; proof of their efficiency is only empirical, for obvious reasons.

Everybody is unique: some stuff will work with some, not with others. It's not a problem with a skilled therapeutist who will adapt and sometimes invent a way to help you deal -because you're the one curing yourself after all- with what you want to change.

That's part of life: actually living and experiencing things, instead of waiting for someone to tell you what to do and how to do it.

Empirical results are numerous for hypnosis and NLP.

[MrShit]

Originally Posted by Chaxi

Hypnosis worked wonders for me in curing avoidant personality disorder. Some NLP stuff worked really well too.

At some point in your life Mr Shit, you have to try things to see what works for yourself, and not wait until Mummy, Daddy or Science gives you a green light. NLP and hypnosis will never be proved scientifically in the way you mean it; proof of their efficiency is only empirical, for obvious reasons.

Everybody is unique: some stuff will work with some, not with others. It's not a problem with a skilled therapeutist who will adapt and sometimes invent a way to help you deal -because you're the one curing yourself after all- with what you want to change.

That's part of life: actually living and experiencing things, instead of waiting for someone to tell you what to do and how to do it.

Empirical results are numerous for hypnosis and NLP.

No results for NLP read the goddamn topic. If you don't need scientific proof before testing something then that's your choice, have fun being scammed.

[Chaxi]

I actually did have a lot of fun resolving my issues. But you cannot go inside my head, so I can't prove that. You can only know by trying for yourself. Your obsession over being scammed is actually pretty close to the fear of failing: you need a 100% secured success path, guaranteed. A little like a PUA ebook, somehow.

If you have to wait till people tell you what to do, have fun not doing anything.

[I Got The Man Tan]

Sounds like someone has been underestimating NLP here....

The original poster has made me more certain than ever about NLP.

I gotta go.

Time to trance some bitches!

By the end they dont even know their names.

[MrShit]

Originally Posted by Chaxi

I actually did have a lot of fun resolving my issues. But you cannot go inside my head, so I can't prove that. You can only know by trying for yourself. Your obsession over being scammed is actually pretty close to the fear of failing: you need a 100% secured success path, guaranteed. A little like a PUA ebook, somehow.

If you have to wait till people tell you what to do, have fun not doing anything.

Ok thank you for sharing your super nlp psychic alpha reading of me. I'm sure you've taken a lot of internet ebook courses to master it. This topic is about the scientific validity of NLP, contribute or gtfo.

[MrShit]

Originally Posted by I Got The Man Tan

Sounds like someone has been underestimating NLP here....

The original poster has made me more certain than ever about NLP.

I gotta go.

Time to trance some bitches!

By the end they dont even know their names.

Don't forget to run the hidden illegal octoberman sequence revealed to a select few from a disclosed location now avaliable for the low low price (we're not making any money of it) of $728346 (total value infinity billion dollars) hurry up our youtube videos filmed in my mothers basement are running out as I type.

[Chaxi]

Originally Posted by MrShit

Ok thank you for sharing your super nlp psychic alpha reading of me. I'm sure you've taken a lot of internet ebook courses to master it. This topic is about the scientific validity of NLP, contribute or gtfo.

Nothing psychic or alpha here, and certainly no need for ebooks (there are other sources of knowledge in the world than ebooks you know), it's pretty obvious, and I can tell I hit something. Why do you need people to tell you what you should believe? Experiment and decide for yourself.

I'll add that since this is a troll site, I will say whatever I want to say, and if you have a problem with that, well, shut up.

NLP, as psychotherapy in general, will never be proven, because there is no way you can be 100% certain that a person telling you that she feels better actually does. You have to try things. What don't you understand about that?

[MrShit]

Originally Posted by Chaxi

Nothing psychic or alpha here, and certainly no need for ebooks (there are other sources of knowledge in the world than ebooks you know), it's pretty obvious, and I can tell I hit something. Why do you need people to tell you what you should believe? Experiment and decide for yourself.

I'll add that since this is a troll site, I will say whatever I want to say, and if you have a problem with that, well, shut up.

NLP, as psychotherapy in general, will never be proven, because there is no way you can be 100% certain that a person telling you that she feels better actually does. You have to try things. What don't you understand about that?

That's wrong, there are tons of tests outside of self-report to measure the effect of treatment. NLP has failed to produce predictable results every time, while other forms of therapy have shown statistically significant results . Like all other NLP-champions in this topic, you apparantly have no idea how mental health professionals control for quality, but you're still more certain of it then a nobel prize winner.

Wonderful example of the dunning-kruger effect.

If you knew anything about what it actually means that something is scientifically valid, you'd know that it has literally nothing to do with what another person tells you.

Example of how stupid your suggestion is(a bit exeggerated but it's there to make a point):

Why do you need someone to tell you cyanide is deadly? Experiment and drink it for yourself.

[Stinger]

Originally Posted by MrShit

That's wrong, there are tons of tests outside of self-report to measure the effect of treatment. NLP has failed to produce predictable results every time...

Well, I can say that some NLP patterns actually work pretty well if subject is in somnabulism. But if used like NLP Comprehensive markets and intends to use them, then using patterns turns into total crapshoot. Of course, NLP Comprehensive would never admit this, because it would mean admitting their product is pretty flawed.

[twothreeoh]

Hey, It's the Hypno-toad!

Welcome back!

What patterns work well?

Originally Posted by Stinger

Well, I can say that some NLP patterns actually work pretty well if subject is in somnabulism. But if used like NLP Comprehensive markets and intends to use them, then using patterns turns into total crapshoot. Of course, NLP Comprehensive would never admit this, because it would mean admitting their product is pretty flawed.

[Japan]

If learning NLP and believing that it works means that you somehow gain more confidence and in doing so increase your success with women, then your belief in NLP, not NLP per se, works.

I see nothing wrong with learning and believing in NLP if your delusion/stupidity helps you obtain what you are looking for.

It's sort of like people who get into religion as a way of coping with their anxieties and life problems... their faith is what heals them... in other words, they heal themselves.

[Stinger]

Originally Posted by twothreeoh

What patterns work well?

For example, the classic film strip technique works well for phobias. Mind, its not really original idea, and its all about disassociating yourself from the situation.

[Chaxi]

Originally Posted by MrShit

That's wrong, there are tons of tests outside of self-report to measure the effect of treatment. NLP has failed to produce predictable results every time, while other forms of therapy have shown statistically significant results . Like all other NLP-champions in this topic, you apparantly have no idea how mental health professionals control for quality, but you're still more certain of it then a nobel prize winner.

Wonderful example of the dunning-kruger effect.

If you knew anything about what it actually means that something is scientifically valid, you'd know that it has literally nothing to do with what another person tells you.

Example of how stupid your suggestion is(a bit exeggerated but it's there to make a point):

Why do you need someone to tell you cyanide is deadly? Experiment and drink it for yourself.

I still have to meet someone who has taken cyanide and experienced benefits from it.

I don't care about your scientific proof. It worked for me. Should I throw away my real-life experience just to fit with your books? That sounds pretty PUA to me

[Chaxi]

btw I read that dunning effect page. Interesting but I'm an exception: i am highly confident and competent at the same time

It's good for you that you found a (sort of) scientific name for self-confidence though. Thereby, you remain the most knowledgeable member of a hate forum

[MrShit]

Originally Posted by Chaxi

btw I read that dunning effect page. Interesting but I'm an exception: i am highly confident and competent at the same time

It's good for you that you found a (sort of) scientific name for self-confidence though. Thereby, you remain the most knowledgeable member of a hate forum

It's a completely different thing then self-confidence. I'm not going to argue whether or not you felt NLP worked for you, that's impossible for me to assess. But this topic is about how NLP does not have any scientific basis.

But since you do find psychological biases interestng you might also want to read about belief bias and confirmation bias. Pretty cool stuff.

[MrShit]

Originally Posted by Chaxi

I still have to meet someone who has taken cyanide and experienced benefits from it.

I don't care about your scientific proof. It worked for me. Should I throw away my real-life experience just to fit with your books? That sounds pretty PUA to me

And, supposing you read the links above on belief and confirmation bias, what you describe as "my books" is actually reports of people testing out methods where stuff like confirmation bias and belief bias is taken out of the equation(along with a billion other things). The results are also tested against a placeb group to make sure the effect observed is not placebo.

I'll leave it up to you to decide what's closer to the truth of this and your personal experience.

[Chaxi]

One question:

If something (hypnosis and some NLP) works for me in terms of the result I wanted to obtain (feeling better, being generally confident about myself etc), why would I even want to test it against placebo groups or such?

There is not one reality. Some stuff works for me and not for you, and vice versa. That's because it uses differents things in our minds which we do not have in common.

Having experienced this stuff first hands on myself and seen it on others, I can tell you this: NLP, hypnosis and all of this doesn't even exist. There is no method, it's about getting a person to use his own mind to solve whatever self-inflicted mental wounds his upbringing has taught him to have. For some people, manipulating symbols will work. For others, rephrasing beliefs and offering new perspectives will work better. For others, just pointing out the way the person thinks will be enough to help her gain another perspective.

In the end, you suffer from something when you think you have to. If you change this, you feel better. Of course there are bad therapists, and bad contents. But really, it's about the power of the human mind, and provoking placebo effect.

For some people it will come instantly. Sometimes it will take a week for a person to get that "a-ha" moment where the problem just disappears. That's why stuff like NLP and hypnosis will never be proved scientifically.

Which is in itself an issue, since it enables any moron to claim anything and then say that everybody's different if it doesn't work. You need to find a real professional; my therapist gave me free sessions everytime an issue wasn't solved in the first meeting or came back. That guy has a passion about helping people. It's the type of therapist we need.

Contrary to hat you seem to believe, saying NLP can work doesn't necessarily equate being a blind devotee to any guru. I say NLP can work because, in my experience, the human mind can really accomplish anything. I guess i'm more of a humanist

[Chaxi]

Originally Posted by MrShit

And, supposing you read the links above on belief and confirmation bias, what you describe as "my books" is actually reports of people testing out methods where stuff like confirmation bias and belief bias is taken out of the equation(along with a billion other things). The results are also tested against a placeb group to make sure the effect observed is not placebo.

I'll leave it up to you to decide what's closer to the truth of this and your personal experience.

Dude, think: it's necessarily my own experience. I can't pretend that what happened to me didn't, just because nobody is able to prove that it's possible! It makes no sense at all.

[MrShit]

Originally Posted by Chaxi

One question:

If something (hypnosis and some NLP) works for me in terms of the result I wanted to obtain (feeling better, being generally confident about myself etc), why would I even want to test it against placebo groups or such?

There is not one reality. Some stuff works for me and not for you, and vice versa. That's because it uses differents things in our minds which we do not have in common.

Having experienced this stuff first hands on myself and seen it on others, I can tell you this: NLP, hypnosis and all of this doesn't even exist. There is no method, it's about getting a person to use his own mind to solve whatever self-inflicted mental wounds his upbringing has taught him to have. For some people, manipulating symbols will work. For others, rephrasing beliefs and offering new perspectives will work better. For others, just pointing out the way the person thinks will be enough to help her gain another perspective.

In the end, you suffer from something when you think you have to. If you change this, you feel better. Of course there are bad therapists, and bad contents. But really, it's about the power of the human mind, and provoking placebo effect.

For some people it will come instantly. Sometimes it will take a week for a person to get that "a-ha" moment where the problem just disappears. That's why stuff like NLP and hypnosis will never be proved scientifically.

Which is in itself an issue, since it enables any moron to claim anything and then say that everybody's different if it doesn't work. You need to find a real professional; my therapist gave me free sessions everytime an issue wasn't solved in the first meeting or came back. That guy has a passion about helping people. It's the type of therapist we need.

Contrary to hat you seem to believe, saying NLP can work doesn't necessarily equate being a blind devotee to any guru. I say NLP can work because, in my experience, the human mind can really accomplish anything. I guess i'm more of a humanist

Yeah I've never questioned whether NLP can cause a placebo effect. But for something to be proven scientifically, it has to have an effect that's more potent then placebo. And there are actually methods that have that, meaning that there are methods that work better then NLP (mostly because they actually do something and are not just placebo). NLPers charge money for treatment that induces the placebo effect, but you could get the same effect by talking to a caring friend or a priest.

Whether or not NLP actually worked for YOU is actually irrelevant. What's relevant is whether or not it will probably work for someone else. When you're dealing with people who have serious mental issues, suddenly an inneffective treament isn't ethical to give (or even safe in the case of depression, schizophrenia etc). It also might take away the persons motivation of pursuing actual treatment. ("I knew it! I'll never get better.")

[MrShit]

Originally Posted by Chaxi

Dude, think: it's necessarily my own experience. I can't pretend that what happened to me didn't, just because nobody is able to prove that it's possible! It makes no sense at all.

Did you read the links on confirmation and belief bias? They apply to pretty much all of humanity, and I'm pretty sure you're not exempt.

[Chaxi]

Originally Posted by MrShit

Yeah I've never questioned whether NLP can cause a placebo effect. But for something to be proven scientifically, it has to have an effect that's more potent then placebo. And there are actually methods that have that, meaning that there are methods that work better then NLP (mostly because they actually do something and are not just placebo). NLPers charge money for treatment that induces the placebo effect, but you could get the same effect by talking to a caring friend or a priest.

Whether or not NLP actually worked for YOU is actually irrelevant. What's relevant is whether or not it will probably work for someone else. When you're dealing with people who have serious mental issues, suddenly an inneffective treament isn't ethical to give (or even safe in the case of depression, schizophrenia etc). It also might take away the persons motivation of pursuing actual treatment. ("I knew it! I'll never get better.")

Yes, you should generally do something that is adapted to your condition. However, means to cure evolve. I know a hypnotherapist I know manages to maintain a schizophrenic without using any drug. It's possible, though there is no clue that it could be systematized.

Alos, some placebo do work better than others. A friend of mine, working in the pharmaceutical company, told me that if you inject a placebo and make the person pay a lot of money for it, it will work better than if you give him an inexpensive pill of actual proven cure. It's actually pretty crazy when you think about it.

Lastly, the biases apply to everyone, including myself, and including you. But I know what I feel like now. I know that a year ago, I couldn't even talk to a person for more than 20 seconds without feeling terrified. I know it's not the case anymore. The funny thing is that it can either be due to the method or to the fact that I really wanted it to work. And as an answer, as my therapist says: "Who cares? If people are better because hypnosis work, because they believe it will happen or because they want to please me, as long as they are better, I am happy".

Funny things happen when you realize that what you think is true is actually true. For you, that is. But you can only experience the world in your own eyes.

[Chaxi]

you could get the same effect by talking to a caring friend or a prie

Only if you believe you will. It depends on your mental structure. If you think your friend has magic powers, go see him. If you think the priest does, go see the priest. And if you think NLP is magic, then go see a NLP therapist!

It all comes down to what you think will work, not in the objective value of the treatment, which might very well be zero. That's why hypnosis, which works crazy well on me, doesn't work on others. It's a matter of what you value.

I don't believe that talking to my friends about my issues makes me feel better. But my therapist is a fucking shaman in my eyes

[MrShit]

Originally Posted by Chaxi

Yes, you should generally do something that is adapted to your condition. However, means to cure evolve. I know a hypnotherapist I know manages to maintain a schizophrenic without using any drug. It's possible, though there is no clue that it could be systematized.

Alos, some placebo do work better than others. A friend of mine, working in the pharmaceutical company, told me that if you inject a placebo and make the person pay a lot of money for it, it will work better than if you give him an inexpensive pill of actual proven cure. It's actually pretty crazy when you think about it.

Lastly, the biases apply to everyone, including myself, and including you. But I know what I feel like now. I know that a year ago, I couldn't even talk to a person for more than 20 seconds without feeling terrified. I know it's not the case anymore. The funny thing is that it can either be due to the method or to the fact that I really wanted it to work. And as an answer, as my therapist says: "Who cares? If people are better because hypnosis work, because they believe it will happen or because they want to please me, as long as they are better, I am happy".

Funny things happen when you realize that what you think is true is actually true. For you, that is. But you can only experience the world in your own eyes.

He maintains a schizophrenic? That should be documented, schizophrenia is a chemical disturbance in the brain so I'm pretty curious about how he could "talk" somone out of that. And yeah that relationship between cost and effect is known in science, sadly however a lot of that effect is thought to be rationalization from the subject for spending all the money.

Again, if you've gotten better the exact means aren't very important, but when you're recommending treatment for others or selling treatment having something that's proven to work suddenly becomes important.