by the way, the Stever Robbins connection to Byron Katie cannot be overstated.
Anyone trained in NLP instantly sees what Byron Katie is doing on a metalevel to people, with language and images and stories.

(its NOT about the BK worksheets, which are really just a distraction, that is lesson one. She just put that stuff in there to occupy people's conscious minds, that is a very common technique. Its shocking how some people seem to be so literal minded and refuse to look up from their worksheet at the elephant dancing on their head. The first lesson is that its not what they are SAYING they are doing, its what they are DOING to you, which they are NOT saying. Very basic stuff, to those in the field. Its not always used for evil, it can be used in a helpful way, if done ethically).

Its all the meta-level programming and processing that Byron Katie is doing, people trained in that see it right away.
But those in the New Agey type field, appear to have no experience in that meta-level processing, so it them its invisible at first, so they need to do some homework, and do some research, and crack open a few books.

Stever Robbins has been around the NLP field for a very long time, 30 years. He does not appear to have originated anything, just one of the salesmen type guys on the fringes, but he does know everyone in the field, and he does know a lot about NLP. He teaches NLP for money.
[www.steverrobbins.com]

Stever Robbins - NLP Trainer
[www.nlp-center.net]

So guess who Byron Katie learned a lot of her NLP patterns from?

Below is a taste from Stever Robbins himself. Remember, everyone one of these guys goes beyond the words on the page, or what is being said. These are very intelligent and quick-minded people at the top end of this field.

(for example, this article is based on old-school NLP, but its real purpose is to confuse you and make you think Stever Robbins is a real brainiac so that is why he costs so much to hire for private NLP consulting).
But now instead of trying to show people how intelligent they are to impress them, people like Byron Katie do the opposite, and pretend to be Idiot Savants who learned advanced NLP and Erickonsian hypnosis, and about 50 other things from a cockroach.

_________________________________
[www.steverrobbins.com]
NLP: Model, modeling tool, or both?
When Bandler, Grinder, Dilts, etc. first formalized NLP, they certainly did it using the terminology of mathematical models, particularly calculus.(1).

The early NLP literature (Structure of Magic, NLP Vol I) talks about “4-tuples” (or 5-tuples, if you go back far enough), and “operations” that can be done to 4-tuples.

This was an early attempt to make NLP a calculus. Math-phobics, suspend that phobia. We aren’t talking mathematical calculus, but a general calculus. That just means they defined distinctions to pay attention to, operations on those distinctions, and rules telling how they all went together and what produced what results.

In Math, distinctions called “numbers” include 4, 5, and 9. Our operators include something called “addition.” The rules of math say when you combine 4 and 5 using addition, you get 9.

In NLP, we have distinctions called “4-tuples” with a specific set of internal/external sight, sound, small, taste, etc. We have an operators, “set anchor” and “fire archor.” Given two different 4-tuples, we can anchor both. When we combine them using the operator “fire off anchors,” we get a new 4-tuple with elements of the original two.

So NLP, itself, is a model. It has distinctions like 4-tuples, physiological state, internal images, auditory voices, submodalities, the unconscious mind, etc. It has operators like anchoring, shifting submodalities, etc. It also has rules for how those combine: if someone has Friends coded in one set of submodalities and Acquaintances in another, they can make an Acquaintance a friend by shifting the set of submodalities....
(cont'd on website)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/24/2008 02:19PM by The Anticult.

For the record, we have had the following as trolls in relation to BK:

Daphne, Anticultist, ralpher, Randomstu, prsp (or something like that)
and..Ex Scientology Kid.

Six and I may well have missed the ones who showed up earlier.

So, just to assist in sorting out persons genuinely interested in an adult discussion from those only willing to discuss BK from within her own system,
here are some tools from professor Steve Dutch:

This is a test to see whether a logical discussion is even possible between two parties. It is from Professor Steve Dutch's website.

[www.uwgb.edu]

"A Note to Visitors:

I will respond to questions and comments as time permits, but if you want to take issue with any position expressed here, you first have to answer this question:

What evidence would it take to prove your beliefs wrong?

I simply will not reply to challenges that do not address this question.

Refutability is one of the classic determinants of whether a theory can be called scientific. Moreover, I have found it to be a great general-purpose cut-through-the-crap question to determine whether somebody is interested in serious intellectual inquiry or just playing mind games."

And…

Another gentle reminder from Professor Dutch:

[www.uwgb.edu]

Freedom of Speech

'The Constitution gives you the right to free speech. It gives your critics the right to rebut your claims or ignore you.

'As the late Hubert Humphrey once observed during the Sixties: "The right to free speech does not imply the right to be taken seriously. That depends on what is said."

'Nowhere in the Constitution is anyone guaranteed a right to freedom from criticism.'

Following up what The Anticult has written, if you wanna help people as a BK facilitator you had better add a Fifth Question to BK's Four Questions:

Here is the Fifth Question--which contains two sub questions:

If I am sued as a result of being a Work facilitator, will The Work Foundation, and by extension BK, reciprocate my loyalty by supporting ME in my hour of need?

Or to put it another way:

'If I, as a The Work facilitator am sued for damages by someone who
claims he or she has incurred harm, will The Work Foundation assist me in the following:

1) Finding a competant attorney to represent me

2) Paying for that attorney and all court costs in the event that the case goes to trial and I lose?

If the answer to all these questions is no, you risk being hung out to dry in the event that something goes wrong during your facilitation work.

In which case, factor in the costs of hiring an attorney.

Meta Question--Do I Want to be a Legal Test Case?

Additional Questions--Six, Seven and Eight

If you think we play rough on Rick Ross's message board, it is actually worse, much worse in court. Reading our stuff might perhaps save you from that fate.

I served twice as a juror in civil suits and it hurt me like hell watching people put through the wringer on the witness stand.

The information here could actually spare you that experience.

As I said above, if you dont have clear assurance in writing (and once you have it in writing, have it reviewed by a non BK/TW attorney to see if what you have in writing is actually a binding contract)..

if you dont have a binding contract that the foundation will assist you to find and hire a lawyer (and you should have your choice of several lawyers and all be experts in thier field), court costs and damages, then you had better factor in the costs of an attorney along with the other things you itemized above.

(That's why even professionals carry malpractice insurance btw.)

Professionals also must keep records and they have to meet legal standards for completeness.

Question Six

Do TW facilitators keep records of sessions---and of outcomes, both short term and long term?

Do TW facilitators discuss confidentiality with clients and sign copies of confidentiality agreements and give them to clients?

If something goes wrong despite a facilitator's sincere intention 'not to hurt someone' and he or she cannot produce paperwork...that can lead to a legal pitfall. The lawyer will jump on that--and on you.

Two...how can TW be tested unless records are kept?

That leads to Question Seven

Do I, as a TW facilitator want to risk becoming a legal test case of whether TW meets legal standards for therapy?

'Many New Age therapists have protested that because their brand of New Age therapy is spiritual, religious or 'other wordly wisdom', New Age therapies should be judged by different standards, namely those based on their own belief systems.

'These protests have generally failed.

'The law maintains a firm foundation for its jurisdiction based on the principle that when an individual or group holds itself out as providing services that affect the health or safety of the individual, the state government or courts are a proper place to decide issues of accountability and quality of services provided.

'Therefore, the specific claims for effective care made by many of the New Age therapies have been tested in courtrooms.'

(From 'New Age Therapies' pp 189, Margaret Singer Ph.D and Abraham Nievod MD JD, in Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology, Lilienfeld, Lynn and Lohr, Guilford 2003)

(Note: the initials mean that Neivod is both a psychiatrist and has a legal degree, and so comment on the current case law)

Another question--Question Eight--do you know what a courtroom trial looks like?

So far, Ive served on two juries in civil cases.

You have the misery of going through deposition examinations, where under oath, attorneys can ask you ANYTHING.

Then in court, you have to give that same information again--under oath. (What you say in court has to meet the rules of evidence with further input from the judge on whether it is admissible in court.)

But, boys and girls, the tiniest discrepancy between what you say during deposition and later on the witness stand is hammered on, and you're there in front of a sea of eyes.

Two, in both trials I saw how the attorneys on both sides were ruthless when quizzing expert witnesses--people with academic degrees. I saw a professor at a major medical school bullied and baited by one attorney.

In a lawsuit, the attorneys are not confined by the Four Questions or by the Turnaround. They can ask any question so long as the judge approves and it meets the rules of evidence--which give a much wider arena for exploration than what is permitted by TW's Four Questions.

I will give you an example of how the attorney dealt with one expert witness.

He asked the witness how much he charged per hour as an architect.

'$275" the witness replied.

Then attorney asked, sweetly, how much the man charged when he served as an expert witness.

Under oath the witness replied, '$350'

'No further questions' the attorney purred.

He was trying to prejudice us on the jury, see? Make the guy look bad. Tried to make him look like a whore because he charged EXTRA for his expert witness work.

The truth was this man was losing income by being in court--and by having to drive to and from his office, 100 miles away to the damn courthouse. Gas prices had already gone up to over $4 in our area, so factor in the transportation costs--plus parking in our town being expensive as hell.

Plus undergo the misery factor of of being interrogated. So charging an extra $75 an hour was actually pretty reasonable.

I can assure you that the attorneys and judge will not permit you to do a Turn Around on them.

The judge on the second trial was hearty and courteous but he became very, very irate when when people wasted time waffling and had incomplete paper work.

If you really want to help people, get into a clinical program, preferably one based on the scientist practitioner model. Among other things, you will get courses in the law relevant to your profession.

It is a riddle that so very many human potential entrepreneurs have endless energy to market themselves but dont use a particle of that energy to get themselves into clinical programs.



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 07/24/2008 10:00PM by corboy.

Bravo, Corboy! And Anticult!

I am so appreciative of this forum. :-)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/24/2008 10:02PM by helpme2times.

And Byron Katies own blog, which says it is posted by "Byron Katie", just made a post last week that The Work is...the best type of cognitive therapy...as claimed by David Wise PhD and posted by Byron Katie on her own blog.
(of course, The Work not listed anywhere as cognitive therapy).

But, Byron Katie's own blog is now on record saying that The Work is a type of "therapy".
So people who are doing The Work, according to Byron Katie's own blog, are doing therapy.

Notice how they say they are NOT doing therapy? They were told to say that, so they don't have to be held accountable.
But now they can't say that.
According to Katie herself in her blog, they are doing a type of Therapy.
and thus can and will be held personally accountable for their behaviors.

So like any licensed therapist, they better go out and buy practice insurance, which is extremely expensive, but is part of the cost of being a therapist.
Katie doesn't have to worry too much, she has plenty of protection, as she forces everyone she deals with to sign those disclaimers.
But the Facilitators have no such luxury.

And its not about "victims". (notice how they are trained to blame people for the damage they may cause to them?)
Therapists who are unlicensed and untrained do cause damage, sometimes very serious damages.
And if they are doing a Turnaround on someone with suicidal-homicidal impulses, as they have no training to deal with that, if the person gets pushed over the edge by the Byron Katie Turnarounds, those Facilitators could be held responsible in various ways for their therapy they were doing, like any therapist is.
You do therapy with people, YOU are responsible for your actions.
And death from suicide from people with depression, sadly is not uncommon. And the Byron Katie "therapy" targets people with depression, and even claims to Eliminate Depression, which is totally outrageous.

Katie also says The Work can be used PTSD.
Do people have any idea of how dangerous that is? Triggering PTSD trauma flashbacks in people?
That can only be handled by highly trained professionals. Most licensed therapists won't touch it.
Doing The Work on people with PTSD is extremely dangerous, and could easily lead to suicide or worse. Can you imagine, all these Byron Katie Facilitators running around thinking they can do The Work therapy with PTSD, and depression, and other serious disorders?

So even though The Work is certainly not a form of recognized cognitive therapy, Byron Katie's own blog has stated it is a type of "therapy". There are hundreds of types of "therapy".
So those who are registered with Byron Katie as a Facilitator, and are doing the Byron Katie The Work "therapy" on people, and charging money for this service, can be held accountable for their mistakes, clinincal errors, and the harm they do to people, even just by their own lack of training and knowledge.

But the arrogance of some of The Work Facilitators is unbelievable, that can be seen online in many places.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/24/2008 10:07PM by The Anticult.

I'm just telling you what I saw as a result of showing up and doing jury duty on two civil suits.

Too many people dont do their jury duty, BTW.

They miss one of the greatest educational opportunities available.

A suggestion for those who have to stay in town this summer and save gas money: go watch a trial, and sit through the whole thing including jury selection, and all the time the jury spends delibarating.

Trials are not like TV. You will get a fantastic education. You can find a trial or two that wont take more than a week.

Quote
The Anticult
But the arrogance of some of The Work Facilitators is unbelievable, that can be seen online in many places.

Agreed.

by the way, Byron Katie very very clearly disclaims all liability from her Facilitators.
She will not support any Facilitator under any condition. Its all there right on the website.
So you are 100% on your own out there.

Now on top of everything else, Byron Katie is posting that The Work is some type of "therapy".
So you can't say you are not doing therapy with people.
It certainly is a type of therapy, a bad type of therapy that is harmful, but it is a type of therapy.

So if it harms people, then you are going to take the fall, even if its the Turnaround that causes the problem, and not the Facilitators lack of knowledge.

Notice how everyone else always has to take all the blame, never Byron Katie.

Anticult wrote this about PTSD:

"Katie also says The Work can be used PTSD.
Do people have any idea of how dangerous that is? Triggering PTSD trauma flashbacks in people?"

Years ago, I met a veteran who had been a Recon Marine in Vietnam. Recons are Marines who have been further trained to function as commandos.

This man had a veteran's love for his comrades and yet he gave me this warning:

'If you ever get involved with a combat veteran, he will be the finest man you can ever have.'

Then the Recon gave me this grave warning:

'But...if your veteran ever starts getting into alcohol or drugs, run like hell and get out of there and run like hell, no matter how much you love each other.'

'Because', my informant said 'if he is a combat veteran, and gets loosened up from drugs or alcohol, he could have a flashback with you in bed with him and think you're Charlie (slang for North Vietnamese foe)--and you'll be in a world of shit. You can risk being killed.'

And this was not the only such account I heard of PTSD going out of control.

Around the same time I was a volunteer chaplain at our county hospital. I visited a young woman who had been horrendously battered to within an inch of life by her woman partner. Her partner had been in a PTSD flashback.

The battered woman was, thank God, not permanently harmed. And she was deeply concerned about her partner's welfare in a healthy way. She then told me what had happened.

It seemed her partner had been raped and impregnated as a result of the rape and made the heroic decision to carry the baby to term and care for her. Apparently she'd not had counseling.

Then, recently this woman had begun to do two things: She began writing about her trauma, and smoking large quantities of marijuana.

The upshot was, one night when in bed with her lover, the lady, whose unconscious had been loosed up by the combination of journaling and the disinhibiting effects of the marijuana, went into a massive flashback, experienced her lover as her brutal rapist, the hideous trauma of the past
erupted into the present---and she experienced her lover as her rapist and began catastrophically beating her.

PTSD and trauma are not for amateurs.