3,209
edits
Changes
MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Wednesday May 01, 2024
Jump to navigationJump to searchDirectory:The Wikipedia Point of View/Hong Kong University Skeptics (view source)
Revision as of 08:04, 26 July 2008
, 08:04, 26 July 2008→The 'Clean up'
* An edit by Doc Pato [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&offset=20060631&limit=200&action=history] described as a 'copyedit' removes this whole heavily referenced section:
* An edit by Doc Pato [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&offset=20060631&limit=200&action=history] described as a 'copyedit' removes this whole heavily referenced section:
** "Due in part to its open-ended philosophy, NLP is criticised by some as pseudoscientific and for its manner of promotion, with some promoters using exaggerated claims. Professors Sharpley, Druckman, and the National Research Council have criticised NLP in research reviews which conclude that its claims are unsupported and that it has failed to show its claimed efficacy in controlled studies [11][12][13]. Several reviews have characterized NLP as pseudoscientific and mass-marketed psychobabble[6][14]. NLP is identified by many scientists as charlatanry and fraudulent [15][16][17] as a dubious therapy and a cult [18][19] described by Winkin [20] and is promoted in the same mold as Dianetics and Scientology[11][13][14]. Beyerstein [21], Lilienfeld [13], and Eisner [19] express concern over the verification of certain aspects of NLP. On the other hand many credible bodies worldwide report both use and support of the field."
** "Due in part to its open-ended philosophy, NLP is criticised by some as pseudoscientific and for its manner of promotion, with some promoters using exaggerated claims. Professors Sharpley, Druckman, and the National Research Council have criticised NLP in research reviews which conclude that its claims are unsupported and that it has failed to show its claimed efficacy in controlled studies [11][12][13]. Several reviews have characterized NLP as pseudoscientific and mass-marketed psychobabble[6][14]. NLP is identified by many scientists as charlatanry and fraudulent [15][16][17] as a dubious therapy and a cult [18][19] described by Winkin [20] and is promoted in the same mold as Dianetics and Scientology[11][13][14]. Beyerstein [21], Lilienfeld [13], and Eisner [19] express concern over the verification of certain aspects of NLP. On the other hand many credible bodies worldwide report both use and support of the field."
** On the 9 June this part of the article [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuro-linguistic_programming&oldid=57666114] now reads "Due in part to its open-ended philosophy, NLP is controversial. It is often criticized in the scientific estabishment as unproven or pseudoscientific[citation needed], and amongst those who watch for fraud, for exaggerated claims and unethical approaches by a number of practitioners.[citation needed] There is also some dispute amongst its developers and proponents as to what exactly NLP is and what is not.[citation needed] On the other hand, a wide range of credible bodies worldwide, including law enforcement, clinicians, government bodies, professional psychological bodies, educators and business coaches, have given strongly worded support for its use, if taught by a skilled and competent trainer and used appropriately."
