From: Hermit (virus@hermit.net)
Date: Fri Sep 19 2003 - 04:44:34 MDT
[Jonathan Davis] It is pity the useful bits at the bottom of your post are blighted by the now habitual Deeslike snipe at the object of your obsession.
[Hermit] Ooh, how cutting.
[Jonathan Davis] I note you have looked up the Sceptics dictionary article I referred you to on 3rd
September. As I said at the time, it is a superb resource.
[Hermit] Although you referred to it, I was already familiar with both the site which I had previously recommended [ Hermit, "virus: Cold water for distance viewing - or some people will swallow anything!", 2001-12-18 ] (http://forum.javien.com/XMLmessage.php?id=id::SShTRyhD-GhtT-SH4s-Vhtm-JwJ0KwheUWlb) and others, and the article in question, which I had previously referenced in [ Hermit, "Re:virus: brain and spirit", 2002-07-07 ] (http://forum.javien.com/XMLmessage.php?id=id::Kw9PcFNj-caZU-T3T_-Q6Yt-SrIsFBEQNFRe), when I said:In any case "cognitive therapy" seems to mean whatever its supporters want it to mean (similar in many ways to the approaches offered by e.g. Landmark Forum, Large Group Awareness Training programs and neurolinguistic programming. Brief, but helpful, descriptions of these may be found at http://skepdic.com), does not appear to be a recognized system and presumably remains distinguished as much by its failures than its successes or we would surely see more about it in peer reviewed
journals. Pharmacological intervention simply works.. And naturally, I agree it is a superb resource. Which is why, I don't cite them, and then a few lines later explain that their articles are "erroneous".
[Jonathan Davis] In defence of NLP, the Sceptics dictionary misplaces its emphasis and is consequently erroneous.
[Hermit] As I read it, the article in question seemed to cover NLP with a broad brush. What would you say it's emphasis was? Did you read the other referenced articles? If so, how do you see their critiques as differening from that of the Skeptical Dictionary?
[Jonathan Davis] NLP is simply "an attitude, backed by a methodology, which leaves a trail of
techniques". The attitude is simply "Use what works".
[Hermit] And how do you measure, "What works"?
[Jonathan Davis] The Sceptics dictionary article correctly attacks some of the adopted methodologies, but these are not NLP. For a good look at the subject I recommend "Dr. Sulo's
Crash Course in Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP)" [
http://www.covertcommunications.com/nlp/crashcourse.html ].
[Hermit] From the attached articles, and the included references to NLP materials, don't you consider NLP as being rather difficult to define? All things to all men? If not, how do you explain why its proponents describe it in so many different ways?
[Jonathan Davis] P.S. Please don't take this as a personal attack. I mean I am not posting
doctored pictures of you doing a Nazi salute or anything :-)
[Hermit] How did you determine that the included photograph was "doctored"? Has this "fact" been published elsewhere? If not, have you considered ink selling your proof? Afer all, the "fact" that Reuters is dissemenating "doctored" photographs would be a significant story. Or were you simply implying through insinuation that the picture was doctored? In which case, don't you think this might be a dishonest, or at least dubious practice?
[Hermit] Can you explain the purpose of the smiley? I think I missed it somewhere.
PS Please snip appropriately when a full quotation is apparently not required, and 13% of our readers still access the CoV via dial-up.
---- This message was posted by Hermit to the Virus 2003 board on Church of Virus BBS. <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=54;action=display;threadid=29280> --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Sep 19 2003 - 04:44:53 MDT