NLP and science

NLP is not a science, but a pseudo-science. What is the difference?

A pseudo-science is a claim or practice which sounds like a science (terminology...etc...) but doesn't follow a rigorous scientific methodology. If you look for pseudo-science on wikipedia, you can learn how to identify a pseudo-science:
"use of vague, exaggerated or untestable claims, over-reliance on confirmation rather than refutation, lack of openness to testing by other experts, absence of progress, personalization of issues, use of misleading language, absence of citation databases."

Sharpley's work

A crucial hypothesis of NLP is that everyone has a preferred representational system (PRS). It can be one of the following senses : visual, auditory, kinaesthetic, olfactory, gustatory (VAKOG). Sharpley, who publishes in the Journal of Counseling Psychology, studied the effectiveness of this hypothesis and according to him, there is little evidence to confirm if. Einspruch and Forman contested Sharpley's work (even though they agreed with his thesis) by pointing out some methodological erros. Later on, Sharpley will respond to that by publishing more precise studies.

However, did you know that NLP is a recognised mode of psychotherapy in the UK? The next post will show you some magic powers of this practice...just keep reading...