Any hypothesis that comes to existence in this world has had to face its share of criticisms. It happened with Archimedes and Newton when their tangible theories came first to existence. But over a period of time, people acceptable these theories with both their hands. The same kind of reaction had been given to neuro linguistic programming (NLP), and while the technique in itself is not so bad, neuro linguistic programming has generated quite a some badly press throughout the last some years.
One of the first claims of NLP to be disputed was that it is a scientifically goodish method. This claim of neuro linguistic programming did not have any scientific financial backing at all. It does have a rather weighty bibliography with terms like neurological levels, accessing cues, but that in no way means it can compete with legitimise disciplines like neurolinguistics or neuroscience.
NLP claims a lot, and while it claims, the deficiency of scientific validation to back these claims makes people look down on this technique suspiciously. NLP, as the technique explains, has set the groundwork for a slew of practices that could have dead revolutionized the field of cognitive science and neuropsychology.
Well, one thing is for sure ? Consecutive journals and periodicals published in these domains have weakness to even remark the credits of neuro linguistic programming.
All things considered NLP is across-the-board believed to be a technique that helps a deal in management training, life coaching job and reasonableness behavioural patterns of human beings. Since these concepts are nearly related to to the corporate sector, you would still find a lot of claim for neuro linguistic programming (NLP) amongst corporate companies.
That being said, the fact still remains that by and large, neurolinguistic programming is still an unproved science for many. There are many questions in time unanswered about this science, and until the time they are answered, the people would find it difficult to admit to this science.
As a subject of course you would consider in the credibleness of any scientific theory when it is backed up up with sufficient validation or research. In the absence of both, neuro linguistic programming (NLP) suffers from an identity crisis. Though, a heap of practitioners still go about their line of work of practicing this technique, one can uninfected say that any action related to to this domain is unregulated, at best.
At the end of the day the problem with NLP though is ? the indication of this science is too simple for anyone to even think of challenging or proving the science. People just get down to implementing the techniques, which may not be the right way ahead.
Check out the eBook "NLP Introduction" or subsrcibe to the "NLP Newsletter" for FREE.