Really, The Father Of NLP Is Erick’s Son…
One of the questions that has puzzled me the most since I seriously started studying NLP touches the definition of NLP itself.
I mean, who in the NLP community — generally beginning students — hasn’t asked herself “what is NLP?”
What the heck does that mean?
What is that?
Bandler defines it one way. Grinder defines it another. Dilts yet another. Michael Hall yet another.
Bandler once said he made up the term to go around the taboo the law, as Bridget points to us in her comment below, which existed around hypnosis in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s. But essentially, it was hypnosis.
I think he was on to something. Really, Neuro-Linguistic Programming consists of a refinement or a more precise application of hypnosis. The terms used reflect that.
Giving suggestions, which is essentially the praxis of hypnosis, is the “programming” part.
“Neuro-Linguistic” points to the more precise use of language to effect the nervous system. Representational systems, submodalities, eye accessing cues, etc.
Essentially, NLP seems to spring up from hypnosis. More specifically, Ericksonian hypnosis.
What do you think of this?