Current Page: 3 of 5
Re: Landmark, good or bad?
Posted by: character ()
Date: August 25, 2010 07:41PM

I have noticed that Land marks are getting famous in some classes but still they are not even known in some areas but i will not go for land marking because of so many reasons.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Landmark, good or bad?
Posted by: Eugene268 ()
Date: November 02, 2011 11:14AM

My first post here probably shouldnt be this one because you will probably peg me a certain way without giving me a change.

However, I also took the Landmark Forum and Advanced Course...and I see both sides in this conversation. For the benefit of those who have not taken the course there is a awakening that happens in each person where you get what a lie you have been living your whole life. How you believed things about yourself based on your childhood and how you tried to fix these things your who life. Like becoming a perfectionist because you had a parent that always criticized you. And you see how you build on that and build on that your whole life...until getting out of bed each day is a struggle and you caculate how many times you can hit the snooze button. When you see this in yourself it is like suddenly getting your childhood emthusiasm back and you want to fly out of bed in the morning. Stepping out of the lie one is now free to connect deeply and profoundly. So, I can see the guys excitement in coming clean.

He shouldnt have gone about it the way he did. Landmark didnt make him leave her. He left her. Lets keep that clean here. However, I can see where he went wrong...and I can see the blurred lines where one can place the blame on Landmark. I can also see where people who have only read negative stuff about Landmark could walk away from a info night with a lot of misgivings. I feel for the woman who was so hurt by her husband and I can see how he was riding a high and oblivious to it. However, I took Landmark and I am NOT oblivious to it.

In the end what I walked away with was that Landmark returns you to you. And lets face it, in all our lives we add on to ourselves. Like when someone critcizes us for something trivial, like a color we wore...we stop wearing it as much. Eventually all these changes build up and we end up are far from who we are inside. Just watching people in social media discussing politics...arguing things just because the media said so and because they identify with a party...and never even stopping to think about what they are saying...this is because we as a culture have gotten very removed from who we are. Landmark returns you back to yourself. Now, what you do with that...that is up to the individual. I appreciate what I got. It made my relationship closer...and especially with my mom. It helped us heal.

The dude should have stayed around to work through it...however, thats him. No one made him leave. Landmark doesnt counsil people to leave. They counsil on how to repair the damage you have caused others. It starts with coming clean (which he did), however, it goes on to include the possibility that youd like for the relationship. Like, up until now I have been lying to you...but I would like us to become closer, how can we do that?

And, do I blame anyone for what happened...yes, the man. I see no reason to pass the buck off onto an outside source as though the man is a victim...and I doubt hed characterize himself as a victim either. I am sorry that the woman had to go through that, I am. Is she a victim, you bet...of the man...of the lies he told all those years. No one made him tell her those one made him walk away from her...Landmark encouraged him to come clean about lying to her. I hope on some level and in time she can find peace in no longer living a lie with him (although I suspect that she might rather still have the illusion). She had no support to help her through the bursting of the bubble and that was really crappy. I dont think she would have found that support at Landmark (despite what he said to her). I agree that Landmark is to blame for the way they prematurely encourage people to tell he told his wife. I am more skeptical and waited until I had the whole picture. The method, however, did work for me.

Years later, I dont know very many graduates of Landmark. My relationships are deeper and real. I dont believe I am stuck in their language or terms or that others have trouble understanding me. I have never encouraged anyone to take the course.

Please dont hate me for writing this or prematurely judge me. If you feel I had said anything wrong please let me know what that is. Thanks

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Landmark, good or bad?
Posted by: rrmoderator ()
Date: November 02, 2011 07:54PM


"Counsel people"?

Are Landmark counselors licensed?


There are not licensed counselors.

They simply repeat a philosophy constructed by Werner Erhard (aka Jack Rosenberg), which is a composite copied from Scientology, Heidegger and whatever.

See []

It didn't work that well for Erhard. Divorces, estranged children, angry employees, etc.

Attempting to blame people victimized by Landmark and its trainers for the injuries inflicted upon them by the company isn't a meaningful response.

Landmark has a long troubled history of complaints, litigation, labor violations and bad press.

See []

Now the company is run by Werner Erhard's brother, sister and old lawyer.

To better understand what's wrong with such mass marathon training see []

To better understand the coercive persuasion techniques often used by such groups see []

Despite decades of doing business and collecting millions of dollars est/Landmark has never commissioned a study to examine and scientifically measure its results.

The company claims to fix people and make them better, but they have never proven that claim.

It would be a simple matter to measure such things as a lower divorce rate, less counseling needed, higher grades achieved at school, increase in income, decreased need for anxiety or depression medication etc. Of course an outside control group could be used to measure against the studied group of Landmark graduates. Such a study could then be peer-reviewed and published in a credible journal.

Despite being around since the 1970s, est/Landmark has never done this.

Instead, Landmark relies upon anecdotal stories from enthusiastic customers claiming good results.

However, such anecdotal evidence is based upon subjective feelings not objective measurable results.

After years of receiving complaints about est, Landmark, the Forum etc. I would not recommend the company's courses to anyone for anything.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Landmark, good or bad?
Posted by: Eugene268 ()
Date: November 03, 2011 05:45AM

Thank you, I understand all that. I do not believe that I was blaming the victim. However, perhaps we have different ideas on who the victim is. I believe that the victim(s) are the woman and children (the family of the man who took Landmark). To be clear here, it was the woman (not the man) who posted here feeling as if she had been an unwitting victim of Landmark. If you read my post you will see that I also have not recommended the course to anyone. Nor am I defending Landmark. Nor did I post to enter into any debate with you.

You will find that I am a real stickler for facts and truth over any subjective consclusions and do a fair amount of consideration (examination and inquirey) before drawing any conclusions myself...never so sure of them that I cease to question them. I was merely presenting a graduates point of view.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Landmark, good or bad?
Posted by: rrmoderator ()
Date: November 03, 2011 06:38AM


Agreed then.

We agree that Landmark is not a company we would recommend for anything to anyone.

It is a for-profit privately held company run by the Rosenberg family.

Landmark sells training.

Training, which reportedly has hurt many people.

The victims would be the people that Landmark has hurt.

That is the historical record as established by continuing complaints, bad press and litigation.

Landmark is bad company selling a bad product in my opinion.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/03/2011 06:41AM by rrmoderator.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Landmark, good or bad?
Posted by: btherl ()
Date: October 21, 2014 01:43PM

Wow.. this thread was actually started by a good friend of mine, back when I first did the Landmark Forum in 2003. She was worried for me and I can understand why.

Now that it's 11 years on I can confidently say that the benefits from the Landmark Forum for me are both positive and permanent, as Landmark claims. I have yet to notice any negative side-effects on myself. I have also seen considerable positive effects on others who have taken the course.

The Landmark view of life is both beautiful and empowering. And I am forever grateful for having this view of life opened up for me. I've gone from being stuck in my bedroom fearful to go outside, to being able to talk to anyone. From being scared to being at peace. From emotionally frozen to being alive and passionate!

I understand that others had a different experience, and I hope that Landmark has taken those experiences into account and adjusted their training in order to avoid that happening again. In fact they have an obligation to do so - it's part of who they are as an enterprise.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Landmark, good or bad?
Posted by: rrmoderator ()
Date: October 21, 2014 10:48PM

btherl :

Apparently you don't read much.

See []

As anyone can see that does serious research Landmark Worldwide, aka Landmark Education, has a long history of controversy, complaints, labor violations, personal injury claims, litigation and bad press.

There is no objective scientific study that demonstrates any positive lasting effect from Landmark, such as higher grades in school, increased income, lower divorce rate, less need for medication.

Landmark graduates offer anecdotal and subjective results based upon their experience and nothing more. This only serves to prove that Landmark is good at persuading people that it is beneficial.

No one disputes that Landmark training utilizes powerful persuasion and infleunce techniques.

See []

Also see []

A psychologist attended a mass marathon training weekend similar to Landmark called Lifespring. He observed its liabilities and cited potential dangers.

He noted the characteristics of potentially unsafe training sessions:

They lack adequate participant-selection criteria.

They lack reliable norms, supervision, and adequate training for leaders.

They lack clearly defined responsibility.

They sometimes foster pseudoauthenticity and pseudoreality.

They sometimes foster inappropriate patterns of relationships.

They sometimes ignore the necessity and utility of ego defenses.

They sometimes teach the covert value of total exposure instead of valuing personal differences.

They sometimes foster impulsive personality styles and behavioral strategies.

They sometimes devalue critical thinking in favor of "experiencing" without self-analysis or reflection.

They sometimes ignore stated goals, misrepresent their actual techniques, and obfuscate their real agenda.

They sometimes focus too much on structural self-awareness techniques and misplace the goal of democratic education; as a result participants may learn more about themselves and less about group process.

They pay inadequate attention to decisions regarding time limitations. This may lead to increased pressure on some participants to unconsciously "fabricate" a cure.

They fail to adequately consider the "psychonoxious" or deleterious effects of group participation (or] adverse countertransference reactions.

The same psychologist also noted groups were determined to be dangerous when:

Leaders had rigid, unbending beliefs about what participants should experience and believe, how they should behave in the group. and when they should change.

Leaders had no sense of differential diagnosis and assessment skills, valued cathartic emotional breakthroughs as the ultimate therapeutic experience, and sadistically pressed to create or force a breakthrough in every participant.

Leaders had an evangelical system of belief that was the one single pathway to salvation.

Leaders were true believers and sealed their doctrine off from discomforting data or disquieting results and tended to discount a poor result by, "blaming the victim."

I would not recommend Landmark to anyone under any circumstances for anything.

There are much safer more valuable and viable alternatives that are a better investment, such as continuing education at an accreditted institution, counseling from a licensed mental health professional, support groups in local communities sponsored by social services and churches, talking about problems with trusted old friends and family.

Landmark is a private for-profit comapny not an accredited educational institution, charity, or licensed counseling center. What Landmark essentially does is download the idiosyncratic philosophy of its founder Werner Erhard.

Landmark was formerly known as est (Erhard Seminar Training) and still offers the Forum, which the brainchild of Erhard. The comapny was sold in the early 1990s and Erhard supposedly doesn't run it now. The company is now run by his brother and sister.

Erhard repotedly cobbled together his philosophy based upon Scientology, mind dynamics, Esalen and Heidegger.

See []

Also see []

What Erhard proposed through the Forum is that by embracing his composite philosophy people somehow could resolve virtully anything.

But Landmark is a belief system. That is, its true believers embrace in part or whole, Erhard's various philosophical propostions about life and how to live it.

However, what anyone considering Landmark should know is that the creator of Landmark's philosophy didn't do too well regarding his own life. Divorce, estranged children, disgruntled former employeees. lawsuits, etc. All of this after he had his personal revelationor epiphany, which forms the basis for the Landamrk philosophy. This is not a very compelling argument that the philosophy actually works. That is, if it didn't work for its creator why should anyone believe it would work for them?

Again, given the cotroversy surrounding Landmark and its negative history there is no compelling reason to pay for its training, especially considering that there are so many much more credible and safer alternatives are readily available.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Landmark, good or bad?
Posted by: btherl ()
Date: November 06, 2014 08:34AM

Hi Rick,

I'd like to start by acknowledging you for having a discussion with me. I wasn't sure if you would but you have, so thankyou for that.

Your post is rather long and I have limited time, so I will make a few statements of my own as dot points.

- Lifespring is not Landmark
- The personal experiences of a psychologist who attended Lifespring is anecdotal
- Landmark has changed considerably since EST. It has also changed considerably as Landmark and continues to do so. I'll cite personal experience here as well as the documentation you have collected here, which demonstrates clearly that Landmark has changed since EST.
- Landmark had a large, positive and permanent impact on my life
- Landmark had a large, positive and permanent impact on the lives of many people I know, including family and friends
- Landmark encourages healing of relationships, repairing of integrity, and satisfaction and fulfillment in all areas of life
- Landmark does not require anyone to accept any dogma, and does not require anyone to attend their courses. Everything is voluntary.
- Landmark does not have a negative history, and controversy does not surround it.
- There are compelling reasons to pay for its training, which are the benefits it can have for your life and the people in your life.
- There are other alternatives. Whether or not they are more credible and safer is a matter of personal opinion.

None of these statements are true, these are my personal beliefs. As are yours. I don't ask you to accept them as your own beliefs, but I do ask you to accept these as being my beliefs, and to accept and respect them. Will you consider doing that?


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Landmark, good or bad?
Posted by: rrmoderator ()
Date: November 06, 2014 10:41PM


Your response illustrates a primary point about Landmark graduates, they respond to criticism about Landmark with blind devotion, much like the members of destructive cults. No meaningful critical analysis, little evidence of critical thinking and denial concerning the historical facts.

Werner Erhard, est, Landmark Education, the Forum and the latest name Landmark Worldwide (whatever name the operation chooses) has a long history of scandal, bad press, personal injury lawsuits, labor violations etc.

For you to deny that is ridiculous and demonstrates you unwillingness or inability to think critically about Landmark.

See []

See []

Also see []

This is just the latest scandal concerning Landmark training in Canada. Anyone interested can read many other news reports regarding Landmark that reflect its bad behavior, controversial training methods and philosophy.

See []

This is the archive within the Cult Education Institute, which includes news reports over the years about Landmark and its history of bad prss, scandal and controversy.

You may wish to pretend that doesn't exist, but the proof is online and we live at a time when people can simply find such proof and read it easily almost anywhere through a smart phone or other device with access to the Web.

Landmark's long history of litigation is interesting. They have been sued repeatedly and have attempted to silence critics through lawsuits. Landmark once attempted to silence me and purge information from this message board. That lawsuit utterly collapsed and in the end Landmark was publicly humiliated by having to dismiss its own lawsuit. Needless to say Landmark's attorney tried to spin the defeat as best he could, but Landmark failed in its effort to remove anything from this message board or database.

See []

My lawyers constructed a partial review of Landmark's history of litigation.

I have received serious complaints from the spouses of Landmark devotees that the the training has strained marriages. Likewise, other family members feel that Landmark has damaged and at times destroyed family relationships.

Werner Erhard, the creator of the Forum and Erhard Seminar Training (est) has a deeply troubled of history of divorce and family problems. Moreover, former employees and close associates describe him as apparently a deeply troubled man given to disturbing behavior.

See []

Reportedly Erhard once said at staff meetings, "I am God." Sounds a bit like a cult leader.

The history of EST and the Forum is deeply troubled and mired in controversy.

See []

Also see []

Here is just a sampling of complaints that I have received about Landmark and its LGAT (large group awareness training).

See []

Some examples as follows:

"As a survivor of the destructive E.S.T. and Forum, I applaud you for showing the world what a horrible and deceptive bunch of creeps these people are. I am going to post my story about the damage Warner Erhard did to my life. In short, he ruined it. I was abused as a child at home by my parents who attended this training. They forced me to raise myself, and they told me that I created all the bad things that happened to me. They in essence were programmed to believe that they didn't have to raise me because I was already a grown human being who was responsible for all my actions and tragedies. E.S.T. destroyed my life in so many ways. If I could save one person from these people, I would. I wish they would be put out of business. The children are the saddest victims because they don't get a choice in the matter. I hope these people rot in hell. I know those are strong words, but it is the nicest thing I can say about them. The world needs to know the truth about this cult."

"I attended the Landmark Forum last weekend and tonight was the evening that I was suppose to bring a guest to join. As the day went on, I could not help replaying a couple of scenes in my head that would be described as abuse in any other situation. Needless to say, as the day wore on, I decided to end my forum and not go to the last session tonight. When I attended the Forum, I sat in my chair and was appalled at the Leader who called this 37-year-old woman a 'brat' and to 'grow up' in front of 109 people as she stood there at the microphone talking about her dead father, and her mothers new boyfriend. As the leader reamed her from every direction, she took it and completely fell apart crying. He later told her that she had no hope and that he could not coach her. She courageously responded, 'Then I want another coach.' He continuously shamed her for almost 40 minutes. It was ridiculous. What was even more ridiculous was that I sat and watched it. I told my girlfriend (who introduced me to the Forum and is still going on her third seminar) that in any other situation, we would consider his name calling, shaming, and demeaning behavior ABUSIVE. He told another man, 'You are a loser, just like your father,' who happened to be an alcoholic and had obviously done much to create pain for this young man. He told this young man that he was a JERK and to call his father on his next break and take responsibility for being a jerk. While I understand that we need to 'take responsibility' for our lives, the measures that this organization uses are no less than mean, demeaning, and without meaning. If you are wondering if the Landmark Forum is for you. Consider that 'you are not you, you are just a machine,' and 'the meaning of life is meaningless.' 'Then you die and they throw dirt over your face.' I am glad that I had a gut feeling to not continue this nonsense anymore. Now that I have read your page, I know I can expect some harassing phone calls probably tomorrow. When they ask me why I am not continuing the Landmark Forum, I will use their answer. I am not continuing the Landmark Forum because I am not continuing the Landmark Forum. So in Landmark Lingo, they will only get a choice' answer from me. Not a 'decision' answer, which always gives a reason for why we are not doing something. When they start to give me feedback, I will tell them, those are your 'rackets' talking. Why can they have an opinion, if we can't? It goes both ways."

"I attended a Landmark session and it led me to contact an abusive brother who despises me. I endured one and a half hours of devastating abuse from him as I apologised thanks to my Landmark brainwashing. Afterwards I was disoriented, but was lucky enough to have a boyfriend who came and collected me, where I stood lost on the street in a very familiar city. I wanted to walk out under a bus. When he got me back to the hotel I broke. All I wanted was to kill myself, though out of moral duty was willing to go to a mental hospital for the rest of my life instead. I had signed up for the advanced course, but in fairness Landmark agreed to refund my deposit for that, though I haven't seen the money yet. Thanks to wonderful friends and your website I'm OK now (I think). It's a total scam, and potentially life-threatening."

Thank you for admitting that Landmark is "beliefs" and not education. The LGAT is simply a means of persuading participants to embrace Erhard's composite philosophy, which he copied from of a number of sources.

Again, Landmark produces no objective results just anecdotal evidence like your personal subjective experience. There is no scientific peer reviewed and published study that demonstrates otherwise.

The detailed report by a psychologist that attended Lifespring is an analysis based upon research and first hand observation. Lifespring and Landmark are both LGATs and Werner Erhard and the founder of Lifespring John Hanley Sr. were once involved in Mind Dynmics. They both based their subsequent LGATs in part on that experience.

See []

It is not a matter of opinion that accredited institutions of higher learning, licensed counselors accountable to state boards and social services likewise accountable to public regulation are safer and more credible than a private for-profit company like Landmark, mired in controversy and scandal.

This is called history and those are the facts.

To say otherwise puts you in the category of a "true believer' unable to think rationally and reflect upon the facts.

You say, "I Don't ask you to accept them as your own beliefs, but I do ask you to accept these as being my beliefs, and to accept and respect them."

Again, this statement puts Landmark in the category of a belief system not education. However, it is a for-profit privately owned company selling beliefs, rather than a nonprofit church.

BTW--In my opinion Werner Erhard still runs Landmark, through his ownership of "intellectual" property rights and licensing. His brother, sister and former lawyer apparently take care of the day-to-day business. It is not a publicly held company so no one knows exactly how the company profits are disbursed or the terms of the sale of est now known as Landmark.

If you want to post here--post something meaningful rather than a sing-song about Landmark without substance. Your testimonials and opinions are in no way really responsive to my last post. You offer little more than your anecdotal experience. And unlike the psychologist's careful research and analysis, you offer nothing objective to back it up.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/06/2014 10:57PM by rrmoderator.

Options: ReplyQuote
Things to read
Posted by: corboy ()
Date: November 06, 2014 11:31PM

Written by 'Guy'


"Landmark Education
Posted by: Guy ()
Date: October 19, 2003 02:54AM


I've heard it called Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

Don't get sucked into nonsense monologues delivered by
LEC grads or plants. You'll notice that their spewage is
redirection or misdirection.

The fact is you and others are hypnotized without your
knowledge or permission. Anchors were planted and levers
used on you.

You will notice some of them in their rants.

You may want to report that ND to his governing board. He may
not know what he is doing, in regards to LEC, but, none the less,
his behaviour is unethical.(Unquote)


Landmark Dropout -- mixed emotions
Posted by: Guy ()
Date: November 17, 2003 09:11AM

We targeted many VIPs for special treatment. Anyone having a voice of authority might get a private audience with the FL. We used their authority bring in new recruits.
I'd report your doctor to the AMA board.
His behaviour is unethical.

, "Guy" arrived on the message board,
predecessor to this message board.

Go to page One and read through from "Guy's" earliest



Landmark Education and my friend.. HELP!
Posted by: Guy ()
Date: October 17, 2003 10:56AM

I really love Wolfy's posts.

So clean, so clear. Well crafted.

I wonder if he was one of my mine?

He 's the perfect LEC grad.

What do you think Elena?
Is it safe?

Landmark Refund
Posted by: Guy ()
Date: October 15, 2003 09:38AM

Go to the center when they are having an "Introduction to the Forum"
and be very loud and demanding about getting your money back. If the
Center Manager is there (usually), they will get wind of the ruckus
and look for a way to quiet you. If they are smart, they will find the
finance manager and get a check issued to you.
If they are not so smart, and they try to "handle" you, say in a very loud voice " do not use your mind control techniques on me, I want my money back and I want it now."
Make sure it's loud enough that "guests" can hear you. Do not let them usher you into another room until you get the finance manager running like crazy to get a check or cash. They will give you all kinds of run around, but they can pay you off pretty quick if it looks like you will impact their recruitment.

Another topic

Manipulation of the Room Environment

First page


Third page


Recent discussion -last page


Options: ReplyQuote
Current Page: 3 of 5

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
This forum powered by Phorum.