NLP, Erickson, and the Intelligence Myth
✦ On Shiny Things & Structure ✦ A skeptical reflection on hypnosis trends. It dismantles the allure of NLP and redefines the true requirements for profound trance. Consider this a philosophical fragment for practitioners.
✦ ᚺ ᚢ ᚲ ᚺ ✦
Then comes NLP. Something modern. Something shiny.
Yes—thought and language matter. Yes—meaning shapes experience.
But if Neuro-Linguistic Programming were the holy grail, the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, wouldn’t it be far more consistent and effective?
Perhaps someone read the word programming and thought: brain = computer.
Sure. A pre–Windows 95 computer, complete with blue screens.
You use what works. Not what promises miracles.
And finally, the part that actually annoyed me:
The idea that Ericksonian hypnosis is only for intelligent minds.
Milton Erickson was a genius. Many of us study him for years and still fall short.
What he worked with was not intelligence. It was:
metaphor
ambiguity
flexible language
Ericksonian work is for creative minds, for rich inner worlds, for symbolic thinkers.
People like those who read and write on Tumblr.
The world is full of idiots who are highly hypnotizable. And full of creative people who make excellent subjects.
Intelligence is not the requirement.
Structure is.
✦ᛉJuliusᛇ✦
