Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels |
Posted by: | kate |
Date/Time: | 21/12/2003 13:39:06 |
Oh, that help, grinder. Now I know why Dilt's is unable to truly understand NLP. Look, he already dominates; just imagine what he'd be able to do if he actually knew what NLP was. Maybe what he is doing is better than NLP. Oh, we don't say better. How does grinder talk about NLP's relationship to former models of the psyche; I think he refers to it as much more useful. So maybe Dilt's work is just much more useful than grinders. it doesn't matter. By the way, ten years ago, dilt's was doing work like the alphabet game as an example of generative NLP. I don't think he copyrighted any of that, so it's up for graps. But he was making the same points. I have the audiotapes. The thing is, Dilts has so many more tools in his bag that i think he didn't get overly excited about that sort of thing. He also recognises that it is contexual and therefore not always the most useful choice. Shouldn't I be getting a warning from the webmaster by now. You know, the guy that always only steps in on the conversations that get off track having to do with problems with grinder. Kate |