Thank you for your comment that allows me to have more options. Seriously I always welcome different opinions. Actually, I learnt this opinion many years ago too from Wikipedia, which claims NLP is pseudopsychology that blocked me to learn what NLP is.
I would like to share a story you might hear about. A professor went to a Zen master and asked what on earth Zen is. The Zen practicer just picked up a tea pot and keep pouring the tea into a cup. The professor exclaimed, "Please stop, the tea is overflowing". The Zen master said, "If you don't empty your teacup, how shall I tell you what Zen is."
I assume in my life, in your life, there are many people including authorities, professionals, experts who told us what are true or false. They might be correct, and they might be wrong until we found them ourselves.
Here Dalai Lama is virtually politically demonised, but I've decided to empty my teacup to learn who he is on my own via reading at least a book of his in the future.
I have been indoctrinated with atheism, and thought I was atheist. But now, I would just claim myself an agnotic before I am able to find and identify evidences or scientists present more potent evidences to claim what they found.
Go back to NLP, I would like to learn what specifical pseudopsychology is about NL is, instead of anyone defines or labels it. On the contratry, the tools of NLP are on the basis of the theotires of many well-acclaimed international psychologists, psychotherapists, linguists from Gregory Bateson, Friz Pearl, Virginia Satir, Noam Chomsky, Milton Ericson, etc.. I will be all ear if anyone can specifically point them out.