Re: Byron Katie (the Work) and Eckhart Tolle Legit??
Posted by:
rrmoderator
()
Date: February 27, 2015 09:49PM
b.f.m.:
Speaking as someone who has appeared on Oprah twice, back in early days 1989 and 1992, before she got into all the mumbo jumbo and self-help gurus, the fact that Katie appeared on the show means nothing.
Oprah has featured and promoted Dr. Oz, who appeared before congress and was berated for his quackery and false health claims.
Also, Oprah featured James Arthur Ray on her "Secret" shows. Ray was later criminally convicted for killing three people through one of his self-help seminars.
Katie and Tolle may have benefited from the so-called "Oprah effect," but it really means nothing whatsoever given Oprah's association with fringe groups and nuts as of late.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/27/2015 09:53PM by rrmoderator.
Speaking as someone who has appeared on Oprah twice, back in early days 1989 and 1992, before she got into all the mumbo jumbo and self-help gurus, the fact that Katie appeared on the show means nothing.
Oprah has featured and promoted Dr. Oz, who appeared before congress and was berated for his quackery and false health claims.
Also, Oprah featured James Arthur Ray on her "Secret" shows. Ray was later criminally convicted for killing three people through one of his self-help seminars.
Katie and Tolle may have benefited from the so-called "Oprah effect," but it really means nothing whatsoever given Oprah's association with fringe groups and nuts as of late.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/27/2015 09:53PM by rrmoderator.
Oprah, Mehmet Oz
Posted by:
corboy
()
Date: February 28, 2015 12:43AM
rrmoderator wrote:
Google citations for dr. mehemet oz congress
[www.google.com]
Reports on Dr. Oz in Forbes magazine
[www.google.com]
6/18/2014 @ 5:50AM 94,514 views
*Dr. Oz's 10 Most Controversial Weight Loss Supplements
Yesterday Dr. Mehmet Oz basically admitted before a Senate subcommittee hearing that many of the claims he makes about weight loss supplements are not based in fact.
[www.forbes.com]
Dr. Oz Has Found 16 Weight Loss 'Miracles.' So Why Is There Still an Obesity Epidemic?
[www.forbes.com]
January 1, 2009 Dr. Oz And Mr. Hyde: What Medicine Should Learn From Mehmet
[www.forbes.com]
"In the current issue of The New Yorker, Michael Specter, journalism’s great chronicler of how we know what we know, profiles Mehmet Oz, the surgeon and TV star who Oprah herself sainted as “America’s doctor.” (Go read it now, then come back.)
[www.newyorker.com]
"In the piece, Specter finds Oz both saving lives and promoting bunkum. Here are seven people, products, and ideas Specter catches Oz promoting that are absolutely, positively, wrong
(for more, read here"
[www.forbes.com]
Quote
Speaking as someone who has appeared on Oprah twice, back in early days 1989 and 1992, before she got into all the mumbo jumbo and self-help gurus, the fact that Katie appeared on the show means nothing.
Oprah has featured and promoted Dr. Oz, who appeared before congress and was berated for his quackery and false health claims.
Google citations for dr. mehemet oz congress
[www.google.com]
Reports on Dr. Oz in Forbes magazine
[www.google.com]
6/18/2014 @ 5:50AM 94,514 views
*Dr. Oz's 10 Most Controversial Weight Loss Supplements
Yesterday Dr. Mehmet Oz basically admitted before a Senate subcommittee hearing that many of the claims he makes about weight loss supplements are not based in fact.
[www.forbes.com]
Dr. Oz Has Found 16 Weight Loss 'Miracles.' So Why Is There Still an Obesity Epidemic?
[www.forbes.com]
January 1, 2009 Dr. Oz And Mr. Hyde: What Medicine Should Learn From Mehmet
[www.forbes.com]
"In the current issue of The New Yorker, Michael Specter, journalism’s great chronicler of how we know what we know, profiles Mehmet Oz, the surgeon and TV star who Oprah herself sainted as “America’s doctor.” (Go read it now, then come back.)
[www.newyorker.com]
"In the piece, Specter finds Oz both saving lives and promoting bunkum. Here are seven people, products, and ideas Specter catches Oz promoting that are absolutely, positively, wrong
(for more, read here"
[www.forbes.com]
Re: Byron Katie (the Work) and Eckhart Tolle Legit??
Posted by:
YeleneJbean
()
Date: March 03, 2015 08:46AM
ultraspring Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I also don't subscribe to the idea that just
> because you think something, it makes it true. Or
> that not thinking it makes your suffering go away.
> That just sounds to me like more positive thinking
> hype veiled under another cloak.
I agree. I've tried that stuff for the last couple of years and it's offered me little help. They always tell you that you can manifest what you want with your thoughs but then they spend all this time and energy tying to make money to buy what they want. If you could really do that with your mind why write all the books and do all the business deals. Why not just sit at home and manifest what you want :)
-------------------------------------------------------
> I also don't subscribe to the idea that just
> because you think something, it makes it true. Or
> that not thinking it makes your suffering go away.
> That just sounds to me like more positive thinking
> hype veiled under another cloak.
I agree. I've tried that stuff for the last couple of years and it's offered me little help. They always tell you that you can manifest what you want with your thoughs but then they spend all this time and energy tying to make money to buy what they want. If you could really do that with your mind why write all the books and do all the business deals. Why not just sit at home and manifest what you want :)
Re: Byron Katie (the Work) and Eckhart Tolle Legit??
Posted by:
ultraspring
()
Date: March 06, 2015 08:41AM
YeleneJBean
"If you could really do that with your mind why write all the books and do all the business deals. Why not just sit at home and manifest what you want :)"
I guess under the guise of helping others. But if they can't actually do it themselves, it is hypocritical. To give them the benefit of the doubt, perhaps they do want to help people, but then it turns into a huge money-making thing, where they charge amounts only rich people can afford - so their compassion only extends to the rich so they can make money? Sounds more like greed to me. And maybe I'm being too soft on them?
"If you could really do that with your mind why write all the books and do all the business deals. Why not just sit at home and manifest what you want :)"
I guess under the guise of helping others. But if they can't actually do it themselves, it is hypocritical. To give them the benefit of the doubt, perhaps they do want to help people, but then it turns into a huge money-making thing, where they charge amounts only rich people can afford - so their compassion only extends to the rich so they can make money? Sounds more like greed to me. And maybe I'm being too soft on them?
Re: Byron Katie (the Work) and Eckhart Tolle Legit??
Posted by:
YeleneJbean
()
Date: March 12, 2015 06:32AM
Yeah. Sounds pretty hypocritical to me if they are charging that much money but you do have a point that if someone could do that they would want to share it. It's just all the evidence I've seen is against it working.
For Byron Katie to "manifest what she wants"
Posted by:
corboy
()
Date: March 12, 2015 10:42PM
Here is an analogy.
Imagine the Four Questions as a daisy flower.
Put a daisy in a gold and diamond studded vase, with expert lighting.
Photographs of that daisy, enhanced by all the props, will
make that flower seem special.
Photograph at that same flower at noon blooming among thousands like it
in some vacant lot, with a few crumpled beer cans alongside.
Photos of a daisy in that setting, in natural light will make that
flower look quite different.
For Byron Katie to manifest what she wants, she has much more, very much
more than the Four Questions.
Her target audience is led to trust and believe that using the Four Questions'
will give them what Byron Katie claims to possess, and the success that
BK demonstrates.
But...Byron Katie controls a multitude of techniques and resources that
her target audience do not see.
* She has been in this line of work for a very long time, long
before the Cockroach Story.
Earlier books by Byron Katie - Cry in the Desert
[forum.culteducation.com]
Losing the Moon
[forum.culteducation.com]
* Photographs of BK.
Go to this thread and read about 'sparkly eyes' technique.
[forum.culteducation.com]
(Note: Another thing to do: See if you can match BK's expression
and posture as depicted in her portrait photos. Use a mirror
and duplicate BK's posture and expression and the way she curls her
fingers underneath her chin. Is this easy for you to do? How long
can you hold this position?
Wardrobe consultants, make up artists and superb hair stylists.
* Dedicated volunteers who donate labor for free.
[www.google.com]
For more, read here:
[forum.culteducation.com]
* Years of practice in public speaking. BK's delivery seems down to earth,
spontaneous, demotic and democratic. But the truth is, she has spent'
years learning rhetoric and public speaking skills. This takes time and money
and practice.
[forum.culteducation.com]
[forum.culteducation.com]
* The skills needed to locate good settings for retreats, the knowledge
needed to manage people, both the unpaid volunteers and the paying subjects,
scheduling, what to do to keep them busy. One does not get this skill by being
'enlightened' -- one learns this as a businessperson.
* How to hire people to manage one's investments.
All this makes the Four Questions seem magical.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/12/2015 10:50PM by corboy.
Imagine the Four Questions as a daisy flower.
Put a daisy in a gold and diamond studded vase, with expert lighting.
Photographs of that daisy, enhanced by all the props, will
make that flower seem special.
Photograph at that same flower at noon blooming among thousands like it
in some vacant lot, with a few crumpled beer cans alongside.
Photos of a daisy in that setting, in natural light will make that
flower look quite different.
For Byron Katie to manifest what she wants, she has much more, very much
more than the Four Questions.
Her target audience is led to trust and believe that using the Four Questions'
will give them what Byron Katie claims to possess, and the success that
BK demonstrates.
But...Byron Katie controls a multitude of techniques and resources that
her target audience do not see.
* She has been in this line of work for a very long time, long
before the Cockroach Story.
Earlier books by Byron Katie - Cry in the Desert
[forum.culteducation.com]
Losing the Moon
[forum.culteducation.com]
* Photographs of BK.
Go to this thread and read about 'sparkly eyes' technique.
[forum.culteducation.com]
(Note: Another thing to do: See if you can match BK's expression
and posture as depicted in her portrait photos. Use a mirror
and duplicate BK's posture and expression and the way she curls her
fingers underneath her chin. Is this easy for you to do? How long
can you hold this position?
Wardrobe consultants, make up artists and superb hair stylists.
* Dedicated volunteers who donate labor for free.
[www.google.com]
For more, read here:
[forum.culteducation.com]
* Years of practice in public speaking. BK's delivery seems down to earth,
spontaneous, demotic and democratic. But the truth is, she has spent'
years learning rhetoric and public speaking skills. This takes time and money
and practice.
[forum.culteducation.com]
[forum.culteducation.com]
* The skills needed to locate good settings for retreats, the knowledge
needed to manage people, both the unpaid volunteers and the paying subjects,
scheduling, what to do to keep them busy. One does not get this skill by being
'enlightened' -- one learns this as a businessperson.
* How to hire people to manage one's investments.
All this makes the Four Questions seem magical.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/12/2015 10:50PM by corboy.
Re: Byron Katie (the Work) and Eckhart Tolle Legit??
Posted by:
ultraspring
()
Date: March 21, 2015 07:23AM
Good analogy, Corboy, the daisy. She certainly does cast herself in the best possible light.
But all of "the work" is still based on your being honest with yourself--continually (not easy). Figuring out what the truth of your situation is, wanting to make the right decisions,knowing what those are. There are so many personal variables.
So it seems like she's made a win-win situation for herself. If it doesn't work for people, it's not her fault; they're just not doing "the work" properly. And she gets richer. As you say, by having many other skills and resources to back her up.
I wonder if she really believes in it and uses it herself?
But all of "the work" is still based on your being honest with yourself--continually (not easy). Figuring out what the truth of your situation is, wanting to make the right decisions,knowing what those are. There are so many personal variables.
So it seems like she's made a win-win situation for herself. If it doesn't work for people, it's not her fault; they're just not doing "the work" properly. And she gets richer. As you say, by having many other skills and resources to back her up.
I wonder if she really believes in it and uses it herself?
Monological vs Dialogical Communication
Posted by:
corboy
()
Date: January 24, 2016 11:24PM
This was a discussion of terminology. Corboy chose to apply it to this topic within Cult Education Institute's message board.
Quote
[answers.yahoo.com]
What is the difference between monologic and dialogic communication?
Relate a situation when you or someone you know has engaged in monologue. How did this effect the relationship between the parties involved?
MT (Corboy replaced contributor's full name by initials for privacy)
In basic terms, monologic communication involves manipulation and control just as one would treat a physical object. It is the embodiment of an I-It relationship and obviously takes a one-way, transmission model approach to communication. Johannesen (1996) summarizes the characteristics of monologic communication in vivid terms:
A person employing monologue seeks to command, coerce, manipulate, conquer, dazzle, deceive, or exploit. Other persons are viewed as "things" to be exploited solely for the communicator's self-serving purpose: they are not taken seriously as persons.
Choices are narrowed and consequences are obscured.
Focus is on the communicator's message, not on the audience's real needs.
The core values, goals, and policies espoused by the communicator are impervious to influence exerted by receivers.
Audience feedback is used only to further the communicator's purpose.
An honest response from a receiver is not wanted or is precluded.
Monological communicators persistently strive to impose their truth or program on others; they have the superior attitude that they must coerce people to yield to what they believe others ought to know.
A dialogic view of public relations differs from a technician approach by being more humanistic, communication-centered, relationship-focused, and ethical. This perspective focuses on communicative relationships rather than on technical skills. Traditional approaches to public relations relegate publics to a secondary role, making them an instrument for meeting organizational policy or marketing needs; whereas, dialogue elevates publics to the status of communication equal with the organization.
Tanya
Monologic communication is discourse in which the source is not particularly interested in feedback or the point of view of the receiver, but only in expressing his or her story. Dialogic communication on the other hand, requires constant sensitivity between both sides, to insure that what is being understood is actually what was meant.
Michael
Monologic communication is a one-sided type of relating where the seemly previleged assume the position of the all knowing . It does not provide space for democratic environment and could be limiting. Other the other hand dialogic communication is a two-way type of relating where ideas are shared and encouraged. As a result democratic environment is encouraged and growth is fostered.
Our stories cannot be clipped off and discarded like toenails
Posted by:
corboy
()
Date: May 04, 2016 01:07AM
We are our stories.
We change not by clipping off our stories as we would a hangnail.
[forward.com]
Memory, however, cannot be erased. A major transition, furthermore, demands not a severing from the past but a greater reckoning with it.
“A rupture creates a fragmented self,” the psychologist and author Dr. Eva Fogelman told me. “There’s the period before, the rupture itself, and the period after.”
Fogelman has written extensively on the effects of collective and individual memory, and, in particular, has worked closely with Holocaust survivors and their descendants. “A person needs to have an integrated self in order to function fully in the present,” she told me. Attempting to repudiate your past, individual or national, is therefore a denial of identity, a refutation of your potentially integrated self, an act of violence to your own consciousness.
and
This self fragmentation also occurs when we split off and deny painful emotions, hiding behind a bright smile.
If we use some method (a bright smile, a song, a toy) to distract a sad or angry child from experiencing those difficult emotions, this risk the child lacking any
name for his or her feelings, and will carry the message that anger or sadness brings rejection from care providers.
Persons who deal with painful emotions by cutting themselves often have such an upbringing.
We change not by clipping off our stories as we would a hangnail.
[forward.com]
Memory, however, cannot be erased. A major transition, furthermore, demands not a severing from the past but a greater reckoning with it.
“A rupture creates a fragmented self,” the psychologist and author Dr. Eva Fogelman told me. “There’s the period before, the rupture itself, and the period after.”
Fogelman has written extensively on the effects of collective and individual memory, and, in particular, has worked closely with Holocaust survivors and their descendants. “A person needs to have an integrated self in order to function fully in the present,” she told me. Attempting to repudiate your past, individual or national, is therefore a denial of identity, a refutation of your potentially integrated self, an act of violence to your own consciousness.
and
Quote
"...integrated selves are created by facing our pasts, never by denying them. Memory, I would come to realize, is not only our history. It might be of the past, but it is in the present. Held up, examined, confronted rather than suppressed, it can sometimes be painful, but it can also illuminate our paths to a more wholesome future.
This self fragmentation also occurs when we split off and deny painful emotions, hiding behind a bright smile.
If we use some method (a bright smile, a song, a toy) to distract a sad or angry child from experiencing those difficult emotions, this risk the child lacking any
name for his or her feelings, and will carry the message that anger or sadness brings rejection from care providers.
Persons who deal with painful emotions by cutting themselves often have such an upbringing.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.