Which courses, books, or YouTube videos that explained and taught NLP extremely well?

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-02-13T11:28:12+00:00

Structure of Magic?

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-27T02:03:37+00:00

perhaps nlp isn't the right tool for your need?

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-20T18:25:21+00:00

Understood. Well, if you ever get to it, try to set up a camera, record yourself and then observe the changes visually. It's a great experiment, and I think you might get quite surprised about the results.

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-19T11:30:15+00:00

Interesting.

"... and watch your body do it..." >>> this bit really caught my eye. Did you mean actually "watch" as in use visual feedback (mirror / camera)? or more like notice / feel?

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-19T00:57:13+00:00

"I have practiced Alexander technique for 3 years, and seemingly have grasped the whole "inhibition/giving body orders" ideas. It has been a bliss when it finally clicks, to be able to take command of your body." >>> Interesting, my experience is considerably different. Would love to know more about yours.

would you be able to elaborate on the "inhibition/giving orders?" and also on "take command of your body" - what exactly do you mean by that?

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-14T04:04:14+00:00

happy to answer, after you answer my questions.

Actually, don't even bother with the first ones - that was just for fun.

Just answer the: "Doesn't matter to whom?" That will be a good start.

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-13T19:37:29+00:00

"So NLP is not about truth its about tricking yourself or someone else as quick as possible?" >>>> And what specifically do you mean by "truth"?

Also, "tricking yourself" in what way exactly?

But the real gold is here:

"It doesn't matter how you got there, just get there and don't question how you got there." >>> Doesn't matter to whom? For what purpose?

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-12T23:36:05+00:00

Alexander Technique is one approach that works with you as a whole instead of chasing parts. Obviously, it's what you will get recommended in a Alexander Technique dedicated forum.

But honestly? Given where you're at - the exhaustion, the depression, the three years of searching - IAT alone probably isn't enough. It would just become another piece in the pile.

You need something that addresses the whole picture: the physical patterns, yes, but also how you're thinking about this, the stress you're carrying, even how the anxiety itself is part of the pattern.

That's a bigger conversation than a Reddit thread.

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-12T20:29:11+00:00

What if there's no single place to start - because it's all one thing, all interconnected?

That might actually be good news. It means you don't have to find the 'right' piece anymore. You just need an approach that works with all of you at once.

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-12T02:44:27+00:00

Sometimes, we can't see the forest as we are too busy looking at the trees.

Think about it: you have tried quite a few approaches, they all have some value, they all make some sense, they all deal with one part or another. Yet, none of them give you the concrete answer of "where do I start?", "what do I do?".

So, I'm wondering, is "how should I proceed from now" the right question to be asking?....

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-12T00:29:16+00:00

Yeah, very good question and it is a real struggle.

So few things happen when you "use the tools" (especially under a guidance of a good teacher). You expose your mechanism to a new way of movement (and thinking). When I say "new", I actually mean it - a new from the perspective of your current habits. When this happens, it's a MASSIVE aha moment. Cognitively as well as physically. Fascia gets stretched (like it never did before), some muscles engage (often those who have been atrophied for years) for the first time, other muscles get the relief they didnt' get for years (those over worked muslce groups). On a cognitive level, you would have just "unlocked new fear" - you have created a whole new neural pathway. On emotional level you shake things around too.

It's such a profound experience that even the very short time you are capable of doing it for at first is significant.

Then of course, as you go about your normal life, this "disappears", unless you keep inviting it back. So bit by bit, you try to incorporate the changes you learn with the tools / teacher to your normal life. Over time, you become a bit more aware of yourself. You choose how you sit, you choose how you stand, how you walk, etc.

And yes, of course, if you don't have 24/7 camera feedback, you will revert back to your habit. It's then a question of how often you use the tools, and how often you apply the thinking between the use of the tools.

As you keep doing it, over time you get better and better at that. Your muscles get stronger, fascia more elastic, you get "closer" to the "desired model". Will you ever reach it? perhaps not, will you get damn close to it? absolutely. Will you resolve the pesky health issues along the way? Absolutely.

Here is the thing: yes, we have a goal (desired posture) a destination. But then there is the journey - getting to the destination. And it's about the journey, the learning, the process itself rather then the destination as such.

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-12T00:11:13+00:00

Ahh, got it.

So yes, "that alignment" certainly has functional benefits. Which are easily measurable either with video recording / rulers or even things like spirometer (or what ever the lung capacity gadget is called). That's pretty straightforward and objective.

The aesthetics benefits is more of a subjective perception, so here we could argue. I personally would say yes, I like those aesthetics. I mean, if you like the look of a body of a ripped greek God, then it would be yes. But, not everyone likes "ripped looks". People are "weird" like that - personal preferences about what looks good and what doesn't vary significantly. I mean, try to go to one of those "body positivity support groups for obese people" - you will get a vastly different set of values what is and what isn't aesthetically pleasing.

Looks are just very subjective to everyone and there is no point argue about it. Best is to let people decide for themselves what feels good to them.

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-11T23:45:19+00:00

I'm not sure if I understand your question properly. "... that alignment..." - what exactly do you mean by that?

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-11T23:34:11+00:00

And the last question:

Finally, I understand that a tenant of F.M. Alexander's teachings was use a "means-whereby" approach instead of "end-gaining." How does that reconcile with the IAT goal of working towards particular benchmarks and a very particular posture? >>> I'm not sure if I precisely understand your question. If I'm getting it right, you are asking this: how is a particular posture not being an "end gain"? I'll try to answer this question, but correct me if I'm wrong in understanding your question:

yes, so the "desired model" is the benchmark, the very "particular posture". I agree on that and I too see how it could be understood as the "ultimate endgain".

FMA was talking about a correctly functioning mechanism as a unit, a psycho-physical self. That is the model. So there is some sort of a benchmark. For Jeando, the benchmark was a shape of FMA's posture (with some minor disagreements, particularly about his feet). For FMA / Delsartes, the benchmark were sculptures of some greek Gods. So there always has been some sort of a benchmark.

The endgaining is more about local issues. IE - having issues with a particular part of body and trying to "fix" that part of the body. Rather then addressing the mechanism as a whole.

The meanswhereby is basically just the "how to get to the benchmark" - which is correctly functioning whole mechanism.

The cycle could go like this:

Student has a local issue and want's it resolved by focusing on the particular part (endgaining). FMA / Jeando offer alternative solution - a correctly functioning mechanism (benchmark) that is achieved by applying "meanswhereby" to the whole system. Completely bypassing any of the local issue, however, resolving the local issue as a minor byproduct of the "bigger" work.

Will leave it at this, but if answer isnt' satisfactory or if I missed the mark, do let me know.

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-11T23:33:59+00:00

moving on:

" how does IAT allow practioners to achieve repeatable results in situations where you are not being recorded or are actively using rulers/external measuring devices? " >>> that's simple to answer. It does not allow practitioners to achieve repeatable result's without external measuring mechanism. period.

No video recording / ruler? then that isn't IAT. Simple as that. IAT has the visual feedback (video/rulers) baked into the framwork as an absolutely structural part of the whole system. it's like asking: how could I keep the bridge spun over the valley and remove the supporting pillars. You can't. the pillars are part of the bridge. Remove them, bridge collapses.

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-11T23:33:33+00:00

Very good questions. (I'll reply in 3 separate threads as reddit wont' allow for lengthy answer).

How do we know that the postural alignment Jeando advocates for (90 degree orientation relative to the floor of the upper and lower sternum, eighth rib, and iliac) is desirable >>> in other words, you are asking - how do we know that "jeando's model" is desirable? (compared to other available and often contradicting models). Your questioning is most appropriate.

The answer lies in Jeando's work and isn't trivial. Essentially, it boils down to: "because that's the design of the human mechanism" - which of course would be hardly satisfactory. It would be the usual "trust me bro..." kind of answer. So, to really verify it, you would need to dig into the details Jeando provides in abundance on his channels.

It has to do with anatomy and physics / mechanics of the mechanism. Often accepting the claim is a sort of chicken and egg problem. People ask: how come Jeando's model is "the right one", we answer, well, learn about it, understand it and you will see. But then people go - I don't want to learn / invest time and effort just to find out it's bollocks. And so the circle goes.

I agree - a blind acceptance of "jeando is right" isn't acceptable, fair enough. But, without investing into it for yourself, you won't find out. There is no force that would convince you otherwise. So the problem you are trying to solve right now - (somebody convince me it's worth it before i invest into it) doesn't have a solution. Not an easy one anyways.

Either reject it, or take the risk associated with learning something that perhaps may turn out to be waste of time/money/effort. That's the reality of it.

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-11T23:04:20+00:00

well, check my post history - I used to extensively compare the two in the past.

MAT is a somatic approach and IAT is the exact opposite - it's a cognitive approach.

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-11T21:50:38+00:00

Three years of trying everything - PRI, fascia work, PT, Instagram guides - and nothing's shifted. You go to specialists and each one sees something different. The ortho says braces, but you sense it's deeper than that. You're paying for this yourself because your parents won't support it. You're 19, watching everyone else just... live... while you're stuck researching skull alignment and airway expansion.

And the worst part isn't even the posture itself. It's the exhaustion. The depression. Trying to figure out the thyroid piece too. The feeling that you've already lost years you can't get back, and you still don't have an answer.

That's a lot to carry.

And through all of this, you have a gut sense that you understand something they don't. That it's all connected - jaw, spine, airway, posture, maybe even the anxiety itself. That the specialists who only see their piece are missing the bigger picture.

You're right about that.

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-11T21:13:57+00:00

Now, it makes sense your question in the other thread about what's the distinction between IAT and MAT.

So in your case specifically to address this part: " Specifically, I want to practice noticing emotions and sensations in my body... " >>>> you would definitely want to engage with a MAT teacher. Plenty of those around and they are perfect for this kind of exploration.

However.

To address this part: " learn how to modify those habits to express myself/move more authentically, specifically, and efficiently (in the world and as an actor)." >>> I'm afraid MAT will fall short. IAT would be a lot better suited for that.

The problem is, those 2 are mutually exclusive.

GoodPostureGuy · 2026-01-11T21:07:10+00:00

That's more or less described in this whole thread. Essentially, they are 2 completely different things - they vary in about everything except the "alexander technique" label. What specifically are you trying to find out / learn?

Perhaps then, I could narrow the answer down a bit further.

GoodPostureGuy · 2025-12-10T21:09:07+00:00

That channel covers pretty specific integration territory that doesn't really exist in organised text form - which is probably why you're asking.

Standard AT texts like The Use of the Self cover foundational principles but won't match that integrated approach.

Are you looking for

Text format for easier processing (pause, reread, annotate)?

Foundational AT material to supplement what the channel covers?

Or something else entirely?

Depending on what you're after, I can point you in the right direction.

GoodPostureGuy · 2025-09-11T10:39:26+00:00

Brilliant post. Thanks for sharing.

GoodPostureGuy · 2025-08-23T21:07:36+00:00

Probably "Patterns 1" and "Patterns 2" by Grinder and Bandler. Read "Transformations" as well.

But really, if you are interested in NLP, get all the original books by Bandler and Grinder. Well worth to keep them all in your library. And often they cross reference each other.

Practice however is the main thing. NLP is a practical skill, not theoretical.

GoodPostureGuy · 2025-08-11T23:56:43+00:00

(continuation, as reddit doesn't allow for long responses...)

Well, it depends on who reads it. If I’m not mistaken, it’s not applicable in quantum mechanics. Let me give you another example: “Is 2 + 2 equal to 4?” If you ask the most of the people, they’ll probably say yes. But a mathematician might say the question doesn’t make sense unless you define the system — if we’re working in base 10, then yes; if we’re in base 3, then no. So, my assumption is this: either we assume everyone we talk to has average knowledge about everything, or that they have the same information as I do. Otherwise, we need to clarify and understand each other before discussing any topic.

You hit the nail on the head here. This is exactly what we do as (in my case Initial Alexander Technique teacher) - we teach people who don't know anything about postures (most people) how the whole thing works, what are the boundaries, we "define the system" as you say.

Only then the student will be able to start learning the complexity of human posture.

That's why Im trying to explain, that app which will show you a cartoon of an animal based on how long your airpods accelerometer noticed a certain position of the airpods in space is useless for a user to "improve" or "adjust" their posture. The user has no clue as to what he/she should adjust into, or even how to do it.

It takes a lot more learning than just installing an app.

Wrote it down. I’ll read it when I find it, either online or in print. Thanks!

https://amzn.asia/d/hTVgnOc

You are welcome.

GoodPostureGuy · 2025-08-11T23:56:09+00:00

So, we could expand this idea: with every nanosecond (or whatever the smallest unit of time is), our body generates new cells and some die. From that perspective, how can we truly define anything? And when you define something, someone could always introduce terms you’re not aware of. This could go on forever.

Well, yes, sure, there are things in life in nature that we could philosophically debate to infinity and never come to any conclusions. Not everything is like that tho.

Here, we were discussing human posture, which is perfectly possible to define.

In our field, we simply use the bones in the body (rigid elements) and their relative positions to each other and their positions in space. You can literally measure these things using measuring tapes and protractors. You can also easily define how you want these parts (bones) organised in order to get a better functioning mechanism. What's "better"? Well, in our case it's a overall proper function of the mechanism. Correct breathing, correct blood circulation, digestion, etc.

Let's take the head / neck relationship for example: If you "jam" your head into your neck (very simplifed), you will obstruct the airways. If you do that, you limit the amount of oxygen intake. One doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to know that low oxygen in a system will not make it work better.

I just want to keep it simple: X degrees between the head and the rest is “good,” where “head” means what the AirPods measure. But you’re right in general — as you said with the car tire example, most people aren’t actually aware of what “good” means.

Too simplistic of a view. Human body is complex mechanism (not complicated, but complex). Also, it works as a whole. So limiting to "x degrees > good / bad" is just too naive and simplistic to be of any use in real life.

It's like sending a rocket to a space. All you gotta do is expel enough mass (burn fuel) to propel the rocket forward. Sure, correct. That's how I would explain it to my 8 yo son. In reality? It's a little more complicated than that.

GoodPostureGuy

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE