| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Turn my world upside down |
| Posted by: | John Grinder |
| Date/Time: | 02/05/2003 18:49:40 |
|
Lewis I'm surprised by your statement, "I would be really impressed if an NLP practitioner produced a series of 100 cases of cancer treated with NLP interventions followed up over five years....with information on histological tissue diagnosis (rather than relying on what the patient says they have)...confirmation of cure...and a follow up long enough to ensure that they really did remain well." I am in full agreement that it would be useful to have an extended follow-up including finer investigations than simply what the patient says (personally, I have insisted on a statement of findings by the physician involved (in those cases where there is one involved)). What is surprising to me is the 100 cases, it seems to me (and this was what Carmen and I pushed so hard is Whispering) is that the number of cases is irrelevant - the point is to do the work and investigate the process that worked, converting that tacit (behavioral) knowledge into an explicit representation that others could use (and thereby confirm or disconfirm). My personal experience is that the variations I do make the various cases I have had incomparable except at such a high level of abstraction that all the patterning that was essential is lost - you can appreciate this from other remarks about the futility of averaging geniuses to discover in what specifically their genius consists, Have I missed or misinterpreted some aspect of what you are proposing here? John |