Persuasion uses of NLP

Neuro-linguistic programming provides some powerful models of persuasion through language use, trance, artfully vague verbal patterns, therapeutic metaphor, anchoring, reframing and the like.

These have been used for both beneficial (therapeutic) and manipulative purposes (sales or personal gain). NLP makes no bones that its techniques are claimed to be potent ones, the question then is, how have they been used in practice?

This article is under development (Oct. 31 2005)

NLP's view on influencing
Words such as "persuade", "manipulate" and "influence" have in common that each conveys (with differing degrees of positive and negative feeling) the sense that one person is affecting another person, either openly or covertly. Most forms of intervention have the potential to influence; it is inherent in any method by which people interact and influence each other. In this sense, communication is amoral - it provides tools which some can use well, and others less well, and some will use benevolently and carefully whilst others will use them for gain and abuse, or recklessly.

NLP, a field perhaps centered around how people communicate and can influence each other for good or ill, sums this situation up as follows:
 * "It has been said that 'one cannot not influence.' Therefore, all communications is manipulation. Thus, we should [do so] effectively, relevantly and constructively."
 * "Spoken language cannot not influence the listener. The same is true for non-verbal or ‘physiological language’ and the language of metaphor. [Therefore] learn to understand the power to influence positively and ecologically [and] learn the skills to present your ideas in a way that the audience (be they few or many) can observe and respond to [them] appropriately."

Ethical concerns
Ethical concerns regarding NLP and persuasion tend to fall into two diametrically opposite camps:
 * NLP is ineffective pseudoscience without foundation, and sells methods and products by hype which are worthless to the purchaser.
 * NLP (done well) is extremely powerful, and there is no apparent way to control how these skills are used by individuals.

Both of these views can be found regularly expressed.

NLP users claim to be able to help clients or themselves to replace false or negative perceptions, with positive, life affirming beliefs. NLP processes have also been applied to replace false beliefs, though the same process could be used to create false beliefs. NLP tends to categorize goals as useful and beneficial, or non-useful, and develops an approach whereby the client is the informed arbiter ultimately of what they feel useful goals would be, with the practitioner facilitating them in doing so carefully and ensuring awareness of ecology (ie consideration of goals whose potential broad impact is also seen as appropriate by the client).

This explicit emphasis on utility and benefit rather than truth, deeply concerns some people due to the great potential it opens for ill-chosen goals or deliberate manipulation at the discretion of the practitioner. An opposing point of view as stated above, is that most forms of intervention have this potential; it is inherent in any method by which people interact and influence each other.

Areas where NLP is explicitly used to persuade
NLP has been applied to therapy, coaching, self development, hypnotherapy, sports performance, business, and the New Age. NLP has also been applied to LGATs or large awareness training seminars (taught by NLP users such as Anthony Robbins), and more controversially, seduction workshops, and other more fringe practices such as shamanism, political campaigning, and psychic development.

Cults
In his book 'Recovery from Cults' Michael Langone states "We know that NLP is also used by some very aggressive cults because the NLP method can be used by such groups to instill a reliance upon the cult, and provides a conditioning method to further induce compliance." He describes NLP as "a tool for generating change for change's sake".

Political campaigns
Example 1 - 3 are taken from "Don’t Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate" (book) and "How Democrats and Progressives Can Win" (DVD) by George Lakoff, professor of Cognitive Science and Linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley and one of America's foremost linguists:

Example 1 - Anchoring (non-verbal):
 * During the 1988 presidential campaign, Republican partisans began employing an unusually skillful use of language and advertising technique. The Willie Horton ads, for example, used an old NeuroLinguistic Programming (NLP) technique of "Anchoring via Submodalities," linking Dukakis, at an unconscious level in the viewer’s mind, to Willie Horton by the use of color versus black-and-white footage, and background sound. After a few exposures to these psy-ops ads, people would "feel" Willie Horton when they "saw" Dukakis.
 * It was no accident. Toward the end of that campaign, I was presenting at an NLP conference in New York, and a colleague mentioned to me how the GOP had hired one of our mutual acquaintances to advise them on the tools of persuasion.

Example 2 - Post-hypnotic suggestion:
 * [I]t's no coincidence that the most psychologically effective ad that the Bush campaign used in 2004 wasn't the wolf ad (that was #2) but one that had two specific NLP-based posthypnotic suggestions embedded into it, telling people that "in the quiet" and "when you're alone in the voting booth" that they "can't take the risk" of voting for Kerry. It looked like a simple check-list ad, but was saved for the last minute and played so heavily because it was so psychologically sophisticated and potent.

Example 3 - Anchoring (verbal):
 * Newt Gingrich was working with Republican leaders and conservatives in the media to frame the word "liberal" as something akin to "traitor," an effort that ultimately led to his infamous "secret" memo to GOP leaders titled "Language: A Key Mechanism of Control"
 * Often we search hard for words to help us define our opponents. Apply these [words] to the opponent, their record, proposals and their party:
 * "Decay... failure (fail)... collapse(ing)... deeper... crisis... urgent(cy)... destructive... destroy... sick... pathetic... lie... liberal... they/them... unionized bureaucracy... ‘compassion’ is not enough... betray... consequences... limit(s)... shallow... traitors... sensationalists...endanger... coercion... hypocrisy... radical... threaten... devour... waste... corruption... incompetent... permissive attitudes... destructive... impose... self-serving... greed... ideological... insecure... anti-(issue): flag, family, child, jobs... pessimistic... excuses... intolerant... stagnation... welfare... corrupt... selfish... insensitive... status quo... mandate(s)... taxes... spend(ing)... shame... disgrace... punish (poor...)... bizarre... cynicism... cheat... steal... abuse of power... machine... bosses... obsolete... criminal rights... red tape... patronage."
 * On the other hand, Newt suggested that Republicans should also "memorize as many as possible" of the following "Positive Governing Words" to apply to any reference to Republicans or GOP efforts:
 * "Share... change... opportunity... legacy... challenge... control... truth... moral... courage... reform... prosperity... crusade... movement... children... family... debate... compete... active(ly)... we/us/our... candid(ly)... humane... pristine... provide... liberty... commitment... principle(d)... unique... duty... precious... premise... care(ing)... tough... listen... learn... help... lead... vision... success... empower(ment)... citizen... activist... mobilize... conflict... light... dream... freedom... peace... rights... pioneer... proud/pride... building... preserve... pro-(issue): flag, children, environment... reform... workfare... eliminate good-time in prison... strength... choice/choose... fair... protect... confident... incentive... hard work... initiative... common sense... passionate."
 * The result a decade of politicians and talk show hosts memorizing and parroting Newt’s word list is that, in much of the public’s mind, morality and patriotism are associated with conservatives while liberals are thought of in the terms described above.