This is a very interesting question! I'm moving this thread to the PUA Lounge

"... NLP developed something called the ‘Meta Model’, which identifies ‘all or nothing’ or distorted, generalized thinking patterns and questions them in a similar way to CBT. It asks ‘Are things always like this, or just some of the time?’ and aims to reframe thoughts in the positive, such as ‘I find maths challenging, and I could learn to do it better if I chose to’. NLP also uses a technique whereby you imagine yourself stepping into another person’s shoes (almost like empathy) and take on their own model of the world and borrow their resources such as feelings or beliefs that you might want to adopt for yourself; or to learn a way of doing something, such as to be more confident doing presentations. You can also use this technique to go back into your own past and utilise feelings/behaviours that you have and imagine yourself stepping back into that time and bringing those into the present or future time where they can be used again."

"Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy, a branch of CBT, shows the link between events, beliefs and feelings through the ABC model:"

Emphasizing the meanings you attach to events

Example of All-or-nothing thinking:

A – Actual Event - Fail at maths test
B – Belief - I’m stupid/ I’m no good at maths
C – Consequences - Feel depressed, a failure

In CBT, All-or-nothing thinking makes you decide that the whole endeavor is pointless. Either you get the course totally right or it’s just a write-off.

Alternative view:

A – Actual Event - Fail at maths test
B – Belief - If I work at it, I’ll do better next time
C – Consequences - Feel motivated to achieve a goal

Develop ‘both–and’ reasoning skills. An alternative to all-or-nothing thinking is both–and reasoning. You need to mentally allow two seeming opposites to exist together. You can both succeed in your overall educational goals and fail a test or two. Life is not a case of being either a success or a failure. You can both assume that you’re an OK person as you are and strive to change in specific ways.

NLP Reframing can be broken down into two types – content and context.

For the puposes of comparitive techniques I'll use Content Reframing as an example:

The content of a situation is the meaning that is given to it. The content of what the person is saying has a cause and effect structure.

1 - Actual Event - Fail at maths test
2 - Belief - I’m stupid/ I’m no good at maths Making a mess of that test means I am useless at maths.
3 - Consequences - Feel depressed, a failure

Alternative view applying NLP Content Reframing:

1 - Actual Event - Fail at maths test

2a – Belief - I’m stupid/ I’m no good at maths

This statement is also a generalization, because taken in isolation the statement implies that from one single math test a judgment can be made. Using the NLP META MODEL it may be helpful to ask questions like:

2b – Belief - According to whom? What might be useful about this experience?
How else could you describe your behavior in this situation?
What can you learn from this experience?
How would you advise someone who had just taken the test?
What did you do well?

3 – Consequences - Feel motivated to achieve a goal


The CBT ABC model could be compared to NLP Content Reframing with regards to helping the person consider the positive aspects of their own behaviour, to look at the situation from a whole range of different perspectives that may change the way they view the meaning they have given to it.

I found NLP more helpful than CBT, because NLP works as well for inner game as it does outer game; NLP has in-field applications, as well as being helpful for adjusting your own inner game.

_________________
The HypnoSeduction Reddit: A website with articles and journals related to hypnotic seduction. Free registration; no email validation.
Use PATTERN INTERRUPTS to break your AA!
[NSFW links]

I don't know wether this warrants a post by itself or not, but NLP has been scientifically found wanting and a total pseudo-science. There is no rational reason the community should be anywhere near it. In fact it worries me that supposed coaches are still teaching using this pile of bullshit. Don't believe me? Read these, or ill give you a few snippets:
on NLP and other similar methods: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals. ... w=abstract
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 610.d04t01
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 802.d03t03
http://psycnet.apa.org/?&fa=main.doiLan ... 7.34.1.103
http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/ppb.201 ... 0008-0.xml
http://anp.sagepub.com/content/39/6/437
http://top.sagepub.com/content/28/3/182
http://www.healthpolicyjrnl.com/article ... 5/abstract

NLP does not work, nor do any of it's core methods have much grounding in any serious science. Can we as community move on and realise NLP is about as useful as reading your horoscope and the girls, or using tarot cards to predict a flake.

How extensive your knowledge of CBT? I've found NLP is effective as a complimentary skill set.

Many of the early Seduction Strategies were based on NLP techniques & methods. A recent presentation was held sometime last year suggesting the potential benefits of PUA rapport techniques incorporated within the Medical Health Industry.


GOOGLE VIDEO:

Health Innovation - Seduction Artists, Cult Leaders, and Con Men - How They Can Save Healthcare

To a biologist virtually all of psychology is a pseudo science. It's always quite dangerous when people make definitive statements about things they don't fully understand.

Also you may want to consider your sources and their motivations and biases. For example your sources which claim NLP to be a pseudo science, all directly stand to lose money/market share/revenue if NLP is accepted as a viable alternative means of therapy. How likely would you be to call something good, if you knew by doing so you would be taking food off your table?

Also in PUA we aren't talking psychiatry we are talking about psychology and more specifically positive psychology which really as a branch of psychological study is an even more recent development then NLP.

Also NLP is really just psychological and communication skills, filtered by Pareto's law for a specific application. The most important aspect of NLP is modelling. Are you really trying to say that implementing the best practices from the people who are the most successful at achieving a given outcome, is as effective in achieving that outcome as ready tarot cards? I'm guessing that's not how you meant for it to come across, but so you know, to someone who knows a bit about NLP, that's exactly what it came across like.

Well firstly
This is nonsense. Where do you get this from? In fact my brother is a biologist so I happen to know quite a few, and like any intellectual they may say that psychology has its limits because its in its infancy as a science, but they would not say its a pseudo science. You can methodically test the claims that psychology make in real life. That's why people pay billions of dollars to see shrinks, because they work. And it's also why as a doctor you can specialise in psychiatry, because parts of psychology coupled with clinical knowledge and neuroscience can help people.

Then you talk about study bias, this just seems like your looking for an answer you want. There are numerous articles there from different places, the idea they are all subject to some bias against NLP is clutching at straws. These articles are peer reviewed and held to a high standard when published, this isn't Dr. Wakefield's practice in the 90's.

Lastly No I am not, I'm calling bullshit on NLP, what you described is not NLP, its a concept you've attributed to describing NLP that I don't agree is a consistent one with the reality of NLP.