= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Blueberry comments on I attempted the AI Box Experiment again! (And won - Twice!) - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (163)
If you don't know what you are doing and retell something that actually designed to put people into emotional turmoil you can do damage to the people with whom you are arguing.
Secondly there are attack strategies that you won't understand when you read a transcript.
Richard Bandler installed in someone I know on a first name basis an inability to pee in one of his lectures because the person refused to close their eyes when Bandler asked them directly to do so. After he asked Bandler to remove it, he could pee again.
There where plenty of people in the audience includign the person being attacked who knew quite a bit about language but who didn't saw how the attack happened.
If you are the kind of person who can't come up with interesting strategies on their own, I don't think that you would be convinced by reading a transcript of covert hypnosis.
How did the attack happen? I'm skeptical.
I don't have a recording of the event to break it down to a level where I can explain that in a step by step fashion. Even if I would think it would take some background in hypnosis or NLP to follow a detailed explanation. Human minds often don't do what we would intuitively assume they would do and unlearning to trust all those learned ideas about what's supposed to happen isn't easy.
If you think that attacks generally happen in a way that you can easily understand by reading an explanation, then you ignore most of the powerful attacks.
I share Blueberry's skepticism, and it's not based on what's intuitive. It's based on the lack of scientific evidence for the claims made by NLPers, and the fact that most serious psychologists consider NLP discredited.
I think that a lot of what serious psychologists these days call mimikry is basically what Bandler and Grindler described as rapport building through pacing and leading. Bandler wrote 30 years before Chartrand et al wrote "The chameleon effect: The perception–behavior link and social interaction."
Being 30 years ahead of the time for a pretty simple effect isn't bad.
There no evidence that the original NLP Fast Phobia cure is much better than existing CBT techniques but there is evidence that it has an effect. I also wouldn't use the NLP Fast Phobia cure these days in the original version but in an improved version.
Certain claims made about eye accessing cues don't seem to be true in the form they were made in the past. You can sometimes still find them in online articles written by people who read but and reiterate wisdom but they aren't really taught that way anymore by good NLP trainers. Memorizing the eye accessing charts instead of calibrating yourself to the person in front of yourself isn't what NLP is about these days.
A lot of what happens in NLP is also not in a form that can be easily tested in scientific experiments. Getting something to work is much easier than having scientific proof that it works. CFARs training is also largely unproven.
What pragmatist said. Even if you can't break it down step by step, can you explain what the mechanism was or how the attack was delivered? Was it communicated with words? If it was hidden how did your friend understand it?
The basic framework is using nested loops and metaphors.
If a AGI for example wanted to get someone to get them out of the cage it could tell a highly story about some animal named Fred and part of the story is that it's very important that a human released that animal from the cage.
If the AGI then later speaks about Fred it brings up the positively feeling concept of releasing things from cages. That increases the chances of listener then releasing the AGI.
Alone this won't be enough, but over time it's possible to build up a lot of emotionally charged metaphors and then chain them together in an instance to work together. In practice getting it to work isn't easy.
Can you give me an example of a NLP "program" that influences someone, or link me to a source that discusses this more specifically? I'm interested but, as I said, skeptical, and looking for more specifics.
In this case, I doubt that there writing that get's to the heart of the issue that accessible to people without an NLP or hypnosis background. I'm also from Germany so a lot of the sources from which I actually learned are German.
As far as programming and complexity there a nice chart of what taught in a 3 day workshop with nested loops: http://nlpportal.org/nlpedia/images/a/a8/Salesloop.pdf
If you generally want to get an introduction into hypnosis I recommend "Monsters and Magical Sticks: There is No Such Thing as Hypnosis" by Steven Heller.
Understanding the fact that one can't pee is pretty straightforward.