Are Narcissists especially attracted to learn NLP?

I am new here. I was in a relationship with someone, whom I consider as some combination of narcissistic, ADD and Asperger. Since breaking up a few weeks ago, I am attempting to figure out, what was the matter with him. Posting here is a part of this.

According to the Skeptics' dictionary (http://skepdic.com/neurolin.html), NLP (neurolinguistic programming) is pseudoscience, lacking scientific evidence for its claims.
In my own words, it seems that NLP is related to scientific psychology and psychotherapy as is writing and using a cooking book to nutrisional science.

There is a fundamental difference in the approach: Scientific psychotherapie is based on a partnership between the therapist and the client, the methods are agreed upon and open, and the therapist has ethical standards to adhere to, so he does not do damage to the client. If he is not qualified enough, he has the ethical obligation not to do any quackery but abstain from practice.

NLP is a collection of methods how to manipulate people, and manipulation works the best, when the target does not even know, what he is subjected to. Therefore the NLP practitioner has power, while the target has none. In the best case, the target is a client, who expects treatment from the practitioner. In the worst case, the person is taken advantage of without knowing it, without consent. That is very unethical. In addition anybody, who has passed a few courses or read a few books on NLP, feels capable to use it, with not much conscience or responsibility of what they might be doing to their victims. It could be called quackery.


My Ex has a long life history of getting narcissistic supply in various groups. After having been a buddhist, he seems to have taken to NLP as to a cult. For him, NLP was something great, some big help in his life, and when I pointed out the possibility, that it could be doubtful pseudoscience, he got very angry and denied any rational discussion. He could not bear it to let someone jeopardize a source of narcissistic supply.

He has no formal training anyway near to what would ethically justify his attempting to have therapeutical influence over people. But after reading a bunch of NLP books, he started to ruthlessly apply the techniques on people. In NLP forum discussions he bragged about how he had successfully used NLP tricks on fellow members of 12step groups. He actually used words like therapy and treating. In his subjective perception, he gets a lot of narcissistic supply out of it, no matter, how much or how little his intervention was beneficial, or if he in fact has disturbed or irritated that person.

An example: He was very pleased with 'Sleight of Mouth techniques', which has the aim of getting the own benefit by tricking people to do things in spite of their objection, by momentarily deactivating those objections as a means of manipulation. No decent people would want to do something like that, but for a narcissist, this was a perfect skill to learn.

Question: Have you, as a narcissist, ever attempted to learn and use NLP methods. Have you ever known any narcissist, who did this?
Do you know any source to the connection between naricissism and NLP? I googled but found nothing.

Thanks
at_the_crossroads

at_the_crossroads wrote:In addition anybody, who has passed a few courses or read a few books on NLP, feels capable to use it, with not much conscience or responsibility of what they might be doing to their victims. It could be called quackery.

You are confusing ethics with effectiveness. One has nothing to do with the another.

In fact the ethical question is entirely unrelated to science or the scientific method. Science doesn't define good or bad, it only attempts to accurately describe reality.

at_the_crossroads wrote:But after reading a bunch of NLP books, he started to ruthlessly apply the techniques on people.

Well did it work?

at_the_crossroads wrote:Question: Have you, as a narcissist, ever attempted to learn and use NLP methods.

No, because as you say there is little scientific basis to it. I may as well try to learn Wiccan Magic. (although someone on this board had some nice things to say about Wiccan women...)

It seems like a waste of time because of the lack of evidence of its effectiveness, it has nothing to do with ethics. Whether it is good or bad is entirely a matter of opinion and there is no absolute answer.

Manipulation techniques that work interest me. Mostly for academic purposes, there aren't all that many people I actually want to manipulate.

In fact the ethical question is entirely unrelated to science or the scientific method. Science doesn't define good or bad, it only attempts to accurately describe reality.

Absolutely correct.

But there are ethics involved. Any quack treatment, no matter if for physical or psychological ailments, can have consequences. Snake oil might not cure the headache, for which it is taken, but it can have noxious ingredients, that might cause stomach pain, and the belief in it might impede getting proper treatment for a serious ailment.
Therefore, what people do upon themselves is their own business, but applying quack methods on others is a very serious ethical matter. Or more generally speaking, attempting to heal others without proper qualifications is unethical.


My ex firmly believed in NLP, it was so bad, that any rational discussion about it being a pseudoscience ended in anger from him. He believed, that he had learned something, that gave him the capacity, the power to influence other people. NLP had for him subjectively become a powerfull tool for a big dose of narcissistic supply. Why he considered himself so successfull with his NLP endavours is beyond me, as I was not present, I only read his bragging on some NLP forum.
To me, ruthlessly using the NLP-techniques on people, while believing to have an impact upon them, is unethical.

I am wondering, how many of all those new age healers and gurus do it ruthlessly not only for the money, but also for narcissistic supply. But there is a difference between obvious quackery and less obvious pseudoscience. NLP has incorporated so much stuff from real science, that from a superficial point of view it appeals to gullible people, who have a wish to learn manipulation tools.
NLP has so many believers, so many adherents, it is so widespread, that I was just wondering, who they are, if not maybe NLP attracts gullible narcissists in search of improving their supply acquiring performance.

at_the_crossroads wrote: Snake oil might not cure the headache, for which it is taken, but it can have noxious ingredients, that might cause stomach pain, and the belief in it might impede getting proper treatment for a serious ailment.
Therefore, what people do upon themselves is their own business, but applying quack methods on others is a very serious ethical matter. Or more generally speaking, attempting to heal others without proper qualifications is unethical.

Two thoughts:
1) NLP is just chit-chat with a focus. You can't possibly compare dangerous chemicals with conversation.
2) You say "attempting to heal others without proper qualifications is unethical". If that is true then it's a good thing he wasn't trying to heal anybody.
(or was he? it seems pointless. manipulation is for gaining one's own advantage, although it can be done in a mutually beneficial way)

at_the_crossroads wrote: Why he considered himself so successfull with his NLP endavours is beyond me, as I was not present, I only read his bragging on some NLP forum.

I see. You have no examples? How much do you know about NLP?

at_the_crossroads wrote:To me, ruthlessly using the NLP-techniques on people, while believing to have an impact upon them, is unethical.

Every action you take has consequences. If you aren't living 100% altruistically, for other people, then your actions are going to conflict with others. If you want to win a game, someone else has to lose. If you take an object, someone else doesn't have it anymore. It's the price of existing in a society consisting of more than 1 person.

They say if you play poker and you don't know who the patsy is, then it's you. Learning about manipulation is about making sure you're not the patsy in life.

I apologize, if I am not very good at explaining, what I mean to say. English is not my native language.

My ex had read some NLP books. Subjectively, he believed to have become a kind of a therapist and could heal people. Considering the true quackery of NLP and that he only read some books, it was clearly an act of unrealistic narcissistic grandiosity. He either could do no good or irritate and confuse people, who already suffered enough to frequent 12step groups.
He used those techniques, and he did not even consider any ethical restrictions. He had found a source for narcissistic supply, and he attempted to get as much out of it as possible.

As the claim of NLP, to enable people to influence and manipulate others, seems to meet the narcissistic needs so perfectly, I was wondering, how many of the believers in NLP are gullible narcissists, like my ex seems to be.

What sfguy means is that life IS a game; he just wants to win for once

PS - NLP is a "pick-up artist" strategy. The whole concept of anchoring, though, predicates cold calling the truth, IE good intuition. Narcissists, despite whatever grandiosity you might perceive, have in general excellent intuition about things. So it comes naturally.

Narcissists, despite whatever grandiosity you might perceive, have in general excellent intuition about things. So it comes naturally.

That is an important point. My Ex had also some ADD traits, and his wish to influence people for a maximum dose of narcissistic supply was bigger than his performance. For him subjectively, NLP was heaven's gift to his needs.
But if manipulation comes naturally to most narcissists, then of course they do not need any better methods and are not so prone to get attracted to NLP as my Ex. That makes sense. That makes me wonder, who then are the gullible people, who fall for NLP like flies for jam? But that is not a question for this forum.

I don't know if manipulation comes naturally to anyone...

I use a method for determining whether I take an action or not, didn't know it had a name until a few months ago but its called the Hedonic Calculus. Basically, I can see all the outcomes of an action prior to taking it. So I will assign value, and multiply... yes, haha... and if the positives outweigh negatives (IE if I decide to tell person A that person B is cheating on her, the negative of him and his friends knowing this must be less than the positives of either me getting laid or me saving her, appeasing all of her friends etc.) then I will take the action.

Critical to this is my ability to anticipate reactive outcome. That's intuition

My Ex was too much driven by his ADD impulsivity to take a deep breath and do a conscious Hedonic Calculus. And this impulsivity, that makes him blurting out the truth before deciding to lie, is also the reason, why it seems to me, that manipulating was not his natural talent.

I was puzzled, why and how someone with a master's degree, claiming to be an atheist, reading the skeptics newsletter with interest, can in spite of all this fall so blindly to the belief in NLP. When I pointed out, that NLP lacks scientific evidence, when I suggested to him to read the link to the Skeptic's dictionary, he got very angry and defensive.
Therefore I was wondering, if the belief in NLP could fulfill a very dire need of his, the need to get more narcissistic supply by improving his manipulation skills.

So the question remains, if he is a rare exception, or if other narcissistic people with lacking natural manipulation skills would also fall for NLP?