A discussion topic:

That the teachings of groups like Landmark Education and Scientology are in fact useful learning tools, and that personal study of these techniques may well be beneficial to the individual. It is not the study matter that is problematic but the study environment and the extremes to which the groups apply the techniques.

One can be an at-home, quiet, moderate, personal Scientologist? An armchair Landmarkian?

from what I know about these 2 groups, the technology does not allow for one to be physically and psychologically 'alone'.

If this were to occur, the mileu would be broken; not good for the purveyors of the tech; not good for the bank account.

Thank you for your reply. I am not intending to be an "enflamer" of the issues. I am genuinely fascinated by the ideas.

Landmark and Scientology both seem to breakdown into a core, sociopathic view that nothing in reality is knowable but ourselves.

Do the cult-like aspects of these groups lie in the physical grouping of participants, or is the subject matter of the technique inherently cult-like?

Is one only a Scientologist by sitting among other Scientologists? Can you be a Landmarkian without attending the forum?

Not an enflamer. Just fascinated.

That's okay. I don't mind even if someone is flaming.
I read a couple of articles on Ayn Rand and narcissism. Quite interesting.
Some similarities with LGAT/scientology ways.

UpsideDown:

I find the teachings fascinating as well. THey are often well-ntentioned and seem to have a certian validity.

Yet in practice, they essentially attack your ability to pervcieve reality, instead substituting an intensely subjective reality in it's place. And since you all agree on that reality, it becomes the Group Reality.

A natural offshoot of this is that you simply aren't comfortable around people who don't share your reality. And that means that you join up with others that DO share that reality.

I've learned to be very skeptical about groups like this. They may not be a cult yet, but they seem on the way to becoming one.

Rand

randomfactor;

Quote

Yet in practice, they essentially attack your ability to perceive reality, instead substituting an intensely subjective reality in it's place. And since you all agree on that reality, it becomes the Group Reality.

This is what I have found true about all cults and "thought reform programs" I have encountered. (See the thread on Alcoholics Anonymous in particular). These organizations used a variety of means to achieve this replacement of perception, such as applying new meanings to language, stop-think techniques, psychological ploys like inducing shame and guilt, and appeals to see "with the heart rather than the mind".

This is also the core tool at the disposal of the disfunctional family.[b:3a93c55763] The thoughts, feelings, and perceptions of the family members are invalidated in order to preserve an internal and external image that is more to the liking of the leading family members[/b:3a93c55763], (iow. usually one or both parents).
In the family, "reality replacement" is often used to hide secrets the family does not want revealed.

I have not done that much research on the subject, but, if I'm not mistaken, implanting a different or false reality is what brainwashing is all about.

[b:3a93c55763]In the disfunctional family this technique is especially damaging because it causes the children to doubt their own senses, and leaves them vulnerable to many kinds of abuses in adult life[/b:3a93c55763]. It takes a very strong ego to break away from this pre-conditioning and regain faith that their own version of reality is valid.

Those children who are labeled "rebellious" might actually have the strongest defense against mind control.[b:3a93c55763] Accusing prospective cult members of "rebelliousness" is something I encountered within all of the thought reform organizations I have been involved with.[/b:3a93c55763] This accusation is intended to make the prospective member more compliant, and break down their stubborn resistance to accepting a new view of reality.

A friend of mine, (who had been a battered woman), put it like this; "[b:3a93c55763]I think the only time people run into real problems [psychological] is when they doubt themselves.[/b:3a93c55763]"
I though about what she meant for a long time, and realize that in my own life this has been the case. Whenever I tried to accept a version of reality other than my own I became emotionally distressed. [b:3a93c55763]The level of distress I experienced was directly proportional to group pressure to accept the new version of reality presented.
[/b:3a93c55763]
In some groups, compliance with "group think" is not as much of a requirement as it is in other groups.[b:3a93c55763] I found that I experienced the most distress when I had a strong motive for wanting acceptance within the group, and when agreement with the group concensus of reality was most highly stressed.[/b:3a93c55763]

Recovery from mental stress, for me at least, has always come from recovering faith in my own perceptions.

I would think that an ability to calmly accept another view of reality would predispose someone towards involvement in cult thinking. I don't know whether or not this has been researched.

Please forgive my digressions. I doubt that the "group concensus" would have the same power for an isolated individual. Physical proximity to the group would seem to be a necessary factor for implanting a new reality, because pressure to conform would not be as intense for the loner.

upsidedownnewspaper

I started out doing a personal study of Scientology. If you believe what you are reading about Scientology, it is likely that you will be sucked in. Why? Because you cannot attain the promised fantastic levels and abilities without the "secret" processes. You are told you will die if you attempt these yourself. Don't laugh, if you are believing what you are studying, you will likely believe this as well. Play with fire, you'll get burned and scammed as well.

When you get to the top, there is nothing there but self delusion and poverty.


Escaped.

Thanks, Escaped.

I find myself horribly compelled. It is like a car crash. The religious section of the local library beckons and I find myself flipping through all the dianetic texts and the ones about the Moonies and I suppose what fascinates me is that there might be some point that I'll actually forget to question this stuff.

Fortunately, there are also books by the escapees, and posts by people like yourself.

Anyway, I've come to believe you can't even self study these "techniques". That actually, they are just hokey rehashes of more substantial, more worthy, philosophical works.

[b:3f1a9159bf]To study Landmark is like reading the blurb of a philosophy text and walking away convinced you know something.[/b:3f1a9159bf]

Quote
barabara
randomfactor;

Quote

Yet in practice, they essentially attack your ability to perceive reality, instead substituting an intensely subjective reality in it's place. And since you all agree on that reality, it becomes the Group Reality.

This is what I have found true about all cults and "thought reform programs" I have encountered. (See the thread on Alcoholics Anonymous in particular). These organizations used a variety of means to achieve this replacement of perception, such as applying new meanings to language, stop-think techniques, psychological ploys like inducing shame and guilt, and appeals to see "with the heart rather than the mind".

This is also the core tool at the disposal of the disfunctional family.[b:5ff4677a9b] The thoughts, feelings, and perceptions of the family members are invalidated in order to preserve an internal and external image that is more to the liking of the leading family members[/b:5ff4677a9b], (iow. usually one or both parents).
In the family, "reality replacement" is often used to hide secrets the family does not want revealed.

I have not done that much research on the subject, but, if I'm not mistaken, implanting a different or false reality is what brainwashing is all about.

[b:5ff4677a9b]In the disfunctional family this technique is especially damaging because it causes the children to doubt their own senses, and leaves them vulnerable to many kinds of abuses in adult life[/b:5ff4677a9b]. It takes a very strong ego to break away from this pre-conditioning and regain faith that their own version of reality is valid.

Those children who are labeled "rebellious" might actually have the strongest defense against mind control.[b:5ff4677a9b] Accusing prospective cult members of "rebelliousness" is something I encountered within all of the thought reform organizations I have been involved with.[/b:5ff4677a9b] This accusation is intended to make the prospective member more compliant, and break down their stubborn resistance to accepting a new view of reality.

A friend of mine, (who had been a battered woman), put it like this; "[b:5ff4677a9b]I think the only time people run into real problems [psychological] is when they doubt themselves.[/b:5ff4677a9b]"
I though about what she meant for a long time, and realize that in my own life this has been the case. Whenever I tried to accept a version of reality other than my own I became emotionally distressed. [b:5ff4677a9b]The level of distress I experienced was directly proportional to group pressure to accept the new version of reality presented.
[/b:5ff4677a9b]
In some groups, compliance with "group think" is not as much of a requirement as it is in other groups.[b:5ff4677a9b] I found that I experienced the most distress when I had a strong motive for wanting acceptance within the group, and when agreement with the group concensus of reality was most highly stressed.[/b:5ff4677a9b]

Recovery from mental stress, for me at least, has always come from recovering faith in my own perceptions.

I would think that an ability to calmly accept another view of reality would predispose someone towards involvement in cult thinking. I don't know whether or not this has been researched.

Please forgive my digressions. I doubt that the "group concensus" would have the same power for an isolated individual. Physical proximity to the group would seem to be a necessary factor for implanting a new reality, because pressure to conform would not be as intense for the loner.

Not a digression at all. Very clear.

In part it is fascinating because a new reality necessarily brings into question the old one. Why do/did I think the way I do? Where did my fundamental beliefs come from?

I find myself wondering if my interest in the subject indicates a shakiness of my own reality, rather than looking to shake the realities of the various groups I have encountered.

But I suppose the best advice is to work at such questions slowly as an individual, with support from others that are trustworthy and well-meaning and those who aren't as equally interested in scaling/rating your progress.