midonov123

That fact the i have studied in various areas of psychology and also philosophy i believe allows me to do this. As previously stated ive attended both forum and teh advanced course. Yes i have had a look at you website and teh arguments that have been gathered and i don't dispute them, i believe each argument both pro and con is valid.

However i base my opinions on my experience having gone through the course. Not on other peoples views.

Like all forms of learning, people will agree and disagree but as ive mentioned before, this course, i feel isn't for people who may need "professional" help, or suffer form a mental condition and are seeking a course to "fix" their lives, if they go into it as a "be all and end all" then this is the wrong approach.

People need a broad base of experiences from which to draw judgement :lol:

YZFRI:

What are you really here for?

Seems like your purpose is to promote and/or defend Landmark.

That "my experience" response is a standard sing-song mantra and typical Landmark coached rhetoric.

For a person who studies you are not studying.

See [www.culteducation.com]

The research and press reports (often based upon first hand experiences) illustrate the obvious problems with Landmark's programs and explain how people are hurt by them. Note the reports by psychologists and psychiatrists.

Study them.

Attempting to blame Landmark's victims rather than admit the obvious, which is that the programs are problematic, is not a meaningful response.

Based on your response, I could say, "Smoking is not bad for your health, I smoke and it's fine for me." Or, "Driving after a few drinks is not bad, that's my experience."

You cannot make such statements after seriously studying the consequences of smoking and driving under the influence.

Your responses on this board ring just as false and frankly come across as ridiculous.

Do your homework.

Quote
YZFR1
However i base my opinions on my experience having gone through the course. Not on other peoples views.

This only confirms my first post:

- a switch from exaltation of “reason” to an appreciation of “feeling, emotion and experience” (this is why Landmarkian will insist you MUST “experience” the Forum for example and that you cannot understand by “reason” only)

This is typically a New Age belief. Isn't it time for the Next Age? The Age of Reason!

[board.culteducation.com]

Human minds are housed in hardware--that is, physical bodies.

A speculation:

Computers often crash when their physical components overheat.

The adult level of mind that supports tolerance for ambiguity, humor, empathy and critical thinking can be disrupted if one is subjected to disruption of daily routine, runs short on sleep, ridiculed or sees others ridiculed in public, encounters confusing material & a hectic schedule with no time for privacy and reflection.

Continuing this hunch, perhaps a in a stressful, hectic room environment, the adult portion of the mind can be made to 'crash'.

We may experience this 'crash' as a blissful paradigm shift, when in fact we've lost access to our adult selves and have regressed.

In such a state we are vulnerable and must never be pushed to make important decisions about love, career or money.

Quote
YZFR1
midonov123

That fact the i have studied in various areas of psychology and also philosophy i believe allows me to do this. As previously stated ive attended both forum and teh advanced course. Yes i have had a look at you website and teh arguments that have been gathered and i don't dispute them, i believe each argument both pro and con is valid.

However i base my opinions on my experience having gone through the course. Not on other peoples views.

Like all forms of learning, people will agree and disagree but as ive mentioned before, this course, i feel isn't for people who may need "professional" help, or suffer form a mental condition and are seeking a course to "fix" their lives, if they go into it as a "be all and end all" then this is the wrong approach.

People need a broad base of experiences from which to draw judgement :lol:

Again, Landmark reveals itself in the quality of the thinking and writing of its followers. This is sad.



Ellen

Quote
YZFR1
This course i feel isn't for people who may need "professional" help, or suffer form a mental condition and are seeking a course to "fix" their lives, my view is that this is designed for educated people with broad life experiences that are willing to look at their past, be open to evaluating it and able to look at their future.

Like any course some people have positives and negatives, but unless you actually complete the course you really cannot comment.

I've completed the Forum and half completed the advanced, so I feel I can comment.

Landmark is fantastic at solving the problems it informs you that you have. To solve a problem that isn't real is actually quite easy. I really invite you to look at your life before the forum and ask yourself, was it really as tragic and small as people at the forum made it out to be?

That quote at the end of your post I found extremely ironic, seeing as you have been overcome by the Landmark tribe, and what you have sacrificed in that room in order to belong.

Quote
Dynamix
I've completed the Forum and half completed the advanced, so I feel I can comment.

Landmark is fantastic at solving the problems it informs you that you have.

The problem most people have is that they are easily manipulated and deceived.

I have two big problems with the Landmark "philosophy". One is about "authenticity", the other one is about "responsibility". I just don't share those deceptive concepts put forward by Landmark.

First, searching for "authenticity" by conforming to a group or a leader is a deviant form of authenticity. If you don't get out of this group now, your life will be more and more under the Landmark influence - and this is not being authentic. This is one facet of their deceptive speach.

The other problem I have with Landmark is about the "responsibility" or the concept of "blaming the victim". I don't agree with that vision. Again, this concept is deceptive and is used to control people by making them feel guilty. If something goes wrong in your life, it's not always because of you. There are so many examples I could come up with, but the one I prefer is the book of Job which illustrates that Landmark's teaching goes against the Bible.

The concepts being put forward by Landmark to gain control over people are New Age concepts. For example, their ultimate objective to achieve world peace by year 2020 by enrolling everybody to do the Landmark Forum looks very much like their proprietary vision of the "Age of Aquarius" to me. If you buy into this, you will work very hard to enroll everybody because you see this as a mission in your life. But this looks pretty much like a "cult" vision to me. Why not propose a trip to Sirius?

So now, tell me Landmark is not a deceptive cult. You will have to work very hard to convince me.

Good luck with your "authentic" life ... the Landmark way!?

Michael D

Michael D -- I think you missed the note of irony in Dynamix's post. I don't think he's promoting Landmark, just the opposite.

Quote
Savernake
Michael D -- I think you missed the note of irony in Dynamix's post. I don't think he's promoting Landmark, just the opposite.

I agree with you. I guess my message was addressed to YZFR1. I was not targeting anyone in particular but all Landmarkians.

Quote
midonov123
If something goes wrong in your life, it's not always because of you. There are so many examples I could come up with, but the one I prefer is the book of Job which illustrates that Landmark's teaching goes against the Bible.

I'm not really that familiar with the Bible -- what happens in the book of Job?

I've actually been thinking about this whole issue of "personal responsibility" a lot lately. As I've indicated elsewhere, I was brought up with the EST/Landmarkian-type philosophy, and I always rebelled against it (for many reasons, but I think primarily that even as a child I found it extremely manipulative. By the time I was 11 or 12, I was already saying that I would never tell my parents anything personal about myself, because they would only use it against me at some point in the future).

I recently surprised myself though, because I came across a book that I later learned was intended to promote SGI (it's a novel, but written to illustrate the practise of Buddhism a la SGI) and I immediately liked it (I'm a bit more wary now that I've had time to think about it, and also since this site seems to have given SGI a semi-cult status).

The interesting thing to me was that I later realised that all the concepts that I liked in the book were ones that had upset me and that I'd rebelled against as a child. And then I also realised that the most significantly positive things that have happened in my life have come about by me learning how NOT to take responsibility for things, for understanding that not everything is down to me, and not every hardship is due to something bad I've done.

In other words, sometimes concepts can sound good, but not work at all in practise (although LGATs I suppose would say that if they don't work it's because you haven't applied them properly)

I think what makes such philosophies positive or negative is the intent to manipulate. So, if you tell someone that they are in control of their destiny, that can be positive. But if you hark back to someone's failures when you are angry with them, or when they fail to conform to your wishes, that is manipulation. Landmark and EST I believe do a lot of the latter.