4 ms·
>Neuro-Linguistic Programming is often labelled as pseudoscience There's a definite link between language and cognition: e.g. semantic priming effects. Clear
by omginternets 10y ago
>Neuro-Linguistic Programming is often labelled as pseudoscience
There's a definite link between language and cognition: e.g. semantic priming effects. Clearly if we're able to be convinced by verbal argumentation, it follows that language can (in some sense) shape cognition.
Where NLP becomes a pseudoscience is when it's presented as therapeutic, or at least as systematically therapeutic. In other words, the first principles of NLP are (generally) sound. The application is not.
- saasthrowaway3 10y agoWhere NLP becomes a pseudoscience is when it's presented as therapeutic, or at least as systematically therapeutic. In other words, the first principles of NLP are (generally) sound. The application is not. I looked into scientific backing just now - seems its therapeutic effect is mostly not backed by science. Ie it doesn't cure phobias, as it says it does. Then again, I would have to look at those 18% of studies that DO show an effect, and see if they are doing something different than the ones that don't show an effect (NLP can mean a lot of things). https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/ppb.2010.41.issue-2/v10059-010-0008-0/v10059-010-0008-0.xml https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/ppb.2010.41.issue-2/v10059-...
- omginternets 10y agoYes ... that was exactly my point. Sorry, I'm a bit confused by your comment. Are you agreeing or refuting?