|
Post by enigma on Nov 29, 2012 15:14:50 GMT -5
So, here it is, one more tool of the NLP and manipulating. Taking a break from the discussion and talking on different subjects which are not connected directly with the main points is a well known tool.Talking, story telling, joking, - to have some time passed, and the whole atmosphere changed. Of course, it can be used in other types of communications as well. But for a NLPer it is a reprogramming tool. Some more stories, some more jokes which aim (often indirectly) at the same implanting of ideas will work on the subconscious level of those ignorant and unaware who keep on wasting their time on the NLPer's games. What is the worst those people don't understand that they are just used. Because the aim of the NLPer, and their ideas are more important for them than people. They don't worry about the harm they make to people. They never think about the harm they make by creating the implants in the subconscious mind of those who are unaware of what is going on. They don't care about anybody. They do care only about their ideas. They need to reprogrammed, then to continue programming again, - and they simply do that. Like machines. Arisha, your description of "NLPer" is whatever you want it to be so that it applies to the people you don't like. Clearly so. Something is disagreed with and a new NLP method is invented so as to dismiss it and make it wrong.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Nov 29, 2012 15:25:05 GMT -5
When someone - anyone - is inclined to manipulate someone or a situation, and maybe more so if they are aware that they are manipulating - the manipulation methods morph into whatever it needs to be in order to make the manipulation more effective - hopefully for the manipulator. So, a 'new method is invented' is all part and parcel of any attempts to manipulate, whether they have some sort of capitalized handle or just your everyday garden variety manipulations.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Nov 29, 2012 15:50:37 GMT -5
When someone - anyone - is inclined to manipulate someone or a situation, and maybe more so if they are aware that they are manipulating - the manipulation methods morph into whatever it needs to be in order to make the manipulation more effective - hopefully for the manipulator. So, a 'new method is invented' is all part and parcel of any attempts to manipulate, whether they have some sort of capitalized handle or just your everyday garden variety manipulations. My point is that NLP is a very specific practice. If someone invents a new "technique" that is outside that practice, then it is not an NLP technique. NLP is not synonymous with "manipulator". The other point is look at the description of this new "technique". You're telling me that when conflict dies down and people return to having functional conversation and then confrontation arises again that it is an intentional manipulation? The whole event of having a functional conversation was orchestrated by the manipulators for the purpose of performing manipulation? On who? For what? To What ends? That post alone is proof that she's willing to take a benign event and cast it as if it was an intentional manipulation by these 'master "NLP" manipulators' just so that she has more evidence of them being 'master manipulators'. It's a load of crap is what that is. Do you see the functional conversations that have been going on for the past few days as being orchestrated and controlled by 1 or 2 master manipulators?
|
|
|
Post by silver on Nov 29, 2012 16:00:51 GMT -5
When someone - anyone - is inclined to manipulate someone or a situation, and maybe more so if they are aware that they are manipulating - the manipulation methods morph into whatever it needs to be in order to make the manipulation more effective - hopefully for the manipulator. So, a 'new method is invented' is all part and parcel of any attempts to manipulate, whether they have some sort of capitalized handle or just your everyday garden variety manipulations. My point is that NLP is a very specific practice. If someone invents a new "technique" that is outside that practice, then it is not an NLP technique. NLP is not synonymous with "manipulator". The other point is look at the description of this new "technique". You're telling me that when conflict dies down and people return to having functional conversation and then confrontation arises again that it is an intentional manipulation? The whole event of having a functional conversation was orchestrated by the manipulators for the purpose of performing manipulation? On who? For what? To What ends? That post alone is proof that she's willing to take a benign event and cast it as if it was an intentional manipulation by these 'master "NLP" manipulators' just so that she has more evidence of them being 'master manipulators'. It's a load of crap is what that is. Do you see the functional conversations that have been going on for the past few days as being orchestrated and controlled by 1 or 2 master manipulators? I don't know just from your telling me that nlp methods can/will or cannot/will not morph into something just a shade different from what they originally started out as. It's a gray area that an average person would never know about. Plus, I don't think it takes a master manipulator to do a fan-freaking-tastic job of manipulating. People get lucky. It really doesn't matter, does it, what attempts (successful or not) - what category of type of manipulation is utilized? I'm not sure what you mean by "functional conversations". Do you mean in this thread? I'm not sure why anybody would say to another that it's a 'load of crap' when there seems to be no play-acting on her part. I mean, she could be the master of all masters, for all we know - now that would be funny.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Nov 29, 2012 17:37:50 GMT -5
My point is that NLP is a very specific practice. If someone invents a new "technique" that is outside that practice, then it is not an NLP technique. NLP is not synonymous with "manipulator". The other point is look at the description of this new "technique". You're telling me that when conflict dies down and people return to having functional conversation and then confrontation arises again that it is an intentional manipulation? The whole event of having a functional conversation was orchestrated by the manipulators for the purpose of performing manipulation? On who? For what? To What ends? That post alone is proof that she's willing to take a benign event and cast it as if it was an intentional manipulation by these 'master "NLP" manipulators' just so that she has more evidence of them being 'master manipulators'. It's a load of crap is what that is. Do you see the functional conversations that have been going on for the past few days as being orchestrated and controlled by 1 or 2 master manipulators? I don't know just from your telling me that nlp methods can/will or cannot/will not morph into something just a shade different from what they originally started out as. It's a gray area that an average person would never know about. Plus, I don't think it takes a master manipulator to do a fan-freaking-tastic job of manipulating. People get lucky. It really doesn't matter, does it, what attempts (successful or not) - what category of type of manipulation is utilized? Yes the category does matter. NLP as a formal system is very specific. Saying X,Y,Z are NLP when they are not is a dilution of the term. You might not care, but it is spreading misinformation about what NLP is and isn't. I'm not sure what you mean by "functional conversations". Do you mean in this thread? For the past week the tone of the forum has shifted from focussing on arguments to actually discussing and dialoging on issues. I'm not sure why anybody would say to another that it's a 'load of crap' when there seems to be no play-acting on her part. I mean, she could be the master of all masters, for all we know - now that would be funny. There need not be play acting. Arisha is trying to pass on her world view to others. That is all anyone else is doing here, so she falls into the category of "NLPer" if that is how she wants to define it. What is a load of crap is she creates a projection of "NLPer" and then claims to not be one when she does exactly what she defines an "NLPer" does. Go read again the description of her latest technique fr an NLPer and tell me who that description couldn't be applied to on this forum. It applies to everyone, including herself. That is why it is a load of crap, it's a useless definition unless your whole purpose with it is to apply it selectively. "NLPer" is cast on a person the way "Communist" was cast on a person in MCCArthyism. It's the perjorative labelling dujour.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Nov 29, 2012 17:48:07 GMT -5
Well, accusing me of spreading misinformation - whether deliberately or accidentally is really kinda moot. Everyone spreads whatever they got to spread - so don't try to put a blotch on me when that is life lifing to spread seed - heh.
I do believe I've seen a handful of people here trying to spread their world view - you make it seem as though it's only Arisha doing that.
I think when someone feels as though they've experienced too much - beyond their fair share of being manipulated, we'd all get testy and that comes from someone(s) seemingly successful attempts to create that feeling in an individual or individuals. Yes, it is up to the individual to maintain and it doesn't help matters for that person to find themselves accused of being full of crap or some of what they may say is crap. Of course, you don't have to help, but like the doc's oath - do no harm, also.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Nov 29, 2012 18:45:03 GMT -5
Well, accusing me of spreading misinformation - whether deliberately or accidentally is really kinda moot. Everyone spreads whatever they got to spread - so don't try to put a blotch on me when that is life lifing to spread seed - heh. I do believe I've seen a handful of people here trying to spread their world view - you make it seem as though it's only Arisha doing that. I think when someone feels as though they've experienced too much - beyond their fair share of being manipulated, we'd all get testy and that comes from someone(s) seemingly successful attempts to create that feeling in an individual or individuals. Yes, it is up to the individual to maintain and it doesn't help matters for that person to find themselves accused of being full of crap or some of what they may say is crap. Of course, you don't have to help, but like the doc's oath - do no harm, also. We are all sharing our world view and we are all manipulating each other. What we are not doing is intentionally using NLP techniques on each other. Arisha seems to be claiming that there are some on the board who are manipulating each other intentionally through using NLP techniques. The "techniques" she is identifying, however, are ordinary human behaviors, not NLP techniques. I didn't say you were spreading misinformation, I said she was.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Nov 29, 2012 20:10:51 GMT -5
Well, accusing me of spreading misinformation - whether deliberately or accidentally is really kinda moot. Everyone spreads whatever they got to spread - so don't try to put a blotch on me when that is life lifing to spread seed - heh. I do believe I've seen a handful of people here trying to spread their world view - you make it seem as though it's only Arisha doing that. I think when someone feels as though they've experienced too much - beyond their fair share of being manipulated, we'd all get testy and that comes from someone(s) seemingly successful attempts to create that feeling in an individual or individuals. Yes, it is up to the individual to maintain and it doesn't help matters for that person to find themselves accused of being full of crap or some of what they may say is crap. Of course, you don't have to help, but like the doc's oath - do no harm, also. We are all sharing our world view and we are all manipulating each other. What we are not doing is intentionally using NLP techniques on each other. Arisha seems to be claiming that there are some on the board who are manipulating each other intentionally through using NLP techniques. The "techniques" she is identifying, however, are ordinary human behaviors, not NLP techniques. I didn't say you were spreading misinformation, I said she was. It remains to be seen whether or not one or more are using nlp techniques - couldn't tell by me, anyway. The only thing I know about nlp is that eft has its base in nlp, which I learned a day or 2 ago and I've been using eft for several months and find it most helpful. We did talk about it before where nlp is a tool and can be used for 'good' or for manipulating others for selfish reasons. If it's true what you say that her claim of some employing nlp methods to manipulate her and others on this forum, then I suppose that is a sort of unfairness, but so are common manipulations - just because they're common doesn't mean that the person using them is using them for benign purposes. So, to me, it doesn't really matter which type one is using - it's the motivations behind it that matter.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Nov 29, 2012 20:50:35 GMT -5
Well, accusing me of spreading misinformation - whether deliberately or accidentally is really kinda moot. Everyone spreads whatever they got to spread - so don't try to put a blotch on me when that is life lifing to spread seed - heh. I do believe I've seen a handful of people here trying to spread their world view - you make it seem as though it's only Arisha doing that. I think when someone feels as though they've experienced too much - beyond their fair share of being manipulated, we'd all get testy and that comes from someone(s) seemingly successful attempts to create that feeling in an individual or individuals. Yes, it is up to the individual to maintain and it doesn't help matters for that person to find themselves accused of being full of crap or some of what they may say is crap. Of course, you don't have to help, but like the doc's oath - do no harm, also. We are all sharing our world view and we are all manipulating each other. What we are not doing is intentionally using NLP techniques on each other. Arisha seems to be claiming that there are some on the board who are manipulating each other intentionally through using NLP techniques. The "techniques" she is identifying, however, are ordinary human behaviors, not NLP techniques. I didn't say you were spreading misinformation, I said she was. Just a note-- I don't see 'sharing a worldview' as necessarily a form of manipulation. I can tell you how much I LOVE chocolate chip cookies. Such doesn't necessarily mean that I'm trying to suade you into eating one. The same applies here, I think--I can share what I understand to be true without manipulating anyone else to see it the same way (in fact, I might be suaded, myself, by a rebuttal. Does that mean I'm being manipulated?)
|
|
|
Post by topology on Nov 29, 2012 21:10:35 GMT -5
We are all sharing our world view and we are all manipulating each other. What we are not doing is intentionally using NLP techniques on each other. Arisha seems to be claiming that there are some on the board who are manipulating each other intentionally through using NLP techniques. The "techniques" she is identifying, however, are ordinary human behaviors, not NLP techniques. I didn't say you were spreading misinformation, I said she was. Just a note-- I don't see 'sharing a worldview' as necessarily a form of manipulation. I can tell you how much I LOVE chocolate chip cookies. Such doesn't necessarily mean that I'm trying to suade you into eating one. The same applies here, I think--I can share what I understand to be true without manipulating anyone else to see it the same way (in fact, I might be suaded, myself, by a rebuttal. Does that mean I'm being manipulated?) *reaches for a chocolate chip cookie and takes a bite* You might not have the intent of manipulating someone into eating or liking chocolate chip cookies, but your talking about it and my reading/listening seeds the mind with the thought, shifting the likelihood of eating a chocolate chip cookie. If you have no intent to manipulate then you are at least influencing. Coming to a board like this is different than talking about chocolate chips. You intentionally come here to be influenced and to influence. When you challenge what someone said, that is an attempt to manipulate them in some way. When you assert your POV it impacts others. Every word I read that you guys say shifts the mind in some way.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Nov 29, 2012 21:14:21 GMT -5
Just a note-- I don't see 'sharing a worldview' as necessarily a form of manipulation. I can tell you how much I LOVE chocolate chip cookies. Such doesn't necessarily mean that I'm trying to suade you into eating one. The same applies here, I think--I can share what I understand to be true without manipulating anyone else to see it the same way (in fact, I might be suaded, myself, by a rebuttal. Does that mean I'm being manipulated?) *reaches for a chocolate chip cookie and takes a bite* You might not have the intent of manipulating someone into eating or liking chocolate chip cookies, but your talking about it and my reading/listening seeds the mind with the thought, shifting the likelihood of eating a chocolate chip cookie. If you have no intent to manipulate then you are at least influencing. Coming to a board like this is different than talking about chocolate chips. You intentionally come here to be influenced and to influence. When you challenge what someone said, that is an attempt to manipulate them in some way. When you assert your POV it impacts others. Every word I read that you guys say shifts the mind in some way. Okay. Indeed, perhaps 'influence' is a more appropriate term. Otherwise, I'll stfu, now.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Nov 29, 2012 23:02:41 GMT -5
Just a note-- I don't see 'sharing a worldview' as necessarily a form of manipulation. I can tell you how much I LOVE chocolate chip cookies. Such doesn't necessarily mean that I'm trying to suade you into eating one. The same applies here, I think--I can share what I understand to be true without manipulating anyone else to see it the same way (in fact, I might be suaded, myself, by a rebuttal. Does that mean I'm being manipulated?) *reaches for a chocolate chip cookie and takes a bite* You might not have the intent of manipulating someone into eating or liking chocolate chip cookies, but your talking about it and my reading/listening seeds the mind with the thought, shifting the likelihood of eating a chocolate chip cookie. If you have no intent to manipulate then you are at least influencing. Coming to a board like this is different than talking about chocolate chips. You intentionally come here to be influenced and to influence. When you challenge what someone said, that is an attempt to manipulate them in some way. When you assert your POV it impacts others. Every word I read that you guys say shifts the mind in some way. The word has a somewhat foreboding connotation, perhaps, but yes, I think it's quite wonderful that we can influence each other's lives with mere words. It is hoped that what holds the power to do that is more truth than conviction.
|
|
|
Post by arisha on Nov 30, 2012 0:05:32 GMT -5
Speak not, lie hidden, and conceal the way you dream, the things you feel. Deep in your spirit let them rise akin to stars in crystal skies that set before the night is blurred: delight in them and speak no word. How can a heart expression find? How should another know your mind? Will he discern what quickens you? A thought once uttered is untrue. Dimmed is the fountainhead when stirred: drink at the source and speak no word. Live in your inner self alone within your soul a world has grown, the magic of veiled thoughts that might be blinded by the outer light, drowned in the noise of day, unheard... take in their song and speak no word.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Nov 30, 2012 2:39:04 GMT -5
Nice bit of poetry, Arisha.
Within the next 24-48, maybe everybody will have the poetry bug~*
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Nov 30, 2012 3:06:23 GMT -5
Silentium Speak not, lie hidden, and conceal the way you dream, the things you feel. Deep in your spirit let them rise akin to stars in crystal skies that set before the night is blurred: delight in them and speak no word. How can a heart expression find? How should another know your mind? Will he discern what quickens you? A thought once uttered is untrue. Dimmed is the fountainhead when stirred: drink at the source and speak no word. Live in your inner self alone within your soul a world has grown, the magic of veiled thoughts that might be blinded by the outer light, drowned in the noise of day, unheard... take in their song and speak no word. Translated by V.Nabokov FEDOR TYUTCHEV (1803-1873)
Attributions are appreciated.
|
|