Quote
pragmatist

Quote
Rswinters
That you ignore the people who have gone to these LGAT's and have had these philosphies destroy their lives as they tried to apply it in life.

How did the Landmark Forum 'LGAT' destroy your life then? Mind telling us? If you're just going to throw everything and the kitchen sink, then obviously, this forum is useful for nothing but ranting.

So let's cut the b.s. - tell the story of your destruction by the Landmark Forum... I, for one, am interested in hearing the real deal about you. I _do_ care, in spite of what you may think of me.

Okay Pragmatist. You asked to cut the b.s. Okay. click on my name and pull up all my posts. I have many in the short time I have been on.

I did not go through Landmark. I went through Klemmer & Associates seminars. But its the same crap.

I have read all these links on LGAT's and its the same bs. The same Mechanisms, and even much of the same seminar structure.

You called the wrong member out. I have put it out there already.

So look it up and read.

I will refrain from losing my cool with your antaganism. So, read what I have already posted.

Enough said.

Quote
pragmatist

Quote
rrmoderator
Please attempt to understand that your "experience" is subjective and not objective proof of anything.

What would you have me offer as objective proof? Or better yet, what would constitute objective proof as the Forum's success? I can only qualify my experience in words - I don't know of any other more objective way to define insights and distinctions that one gets from the Forum.

I'd like to address this point in particular. Any sort of self-reporting is going to be subject to a variety of biases. For example, if we think that we've benefited from the Forum, we're going to tend to also interpret events in ways that attribute successes in our lives to Landmark. This is known as confirmation bias: the tendency to select evidence that supports our views and ignore evidence that doesn't. For example, friends of mine have said things like "if it weren't for Landmark, I wouldn't have done X," where X denotes some successful endeavor. Yet, they don't attribute their *failures* to Landmark in the same way. This is a perfect example of confirmation bias.

That's only one of a number of ways in which our view of reality will be skewed. Another is the same effect that makes painful initiation rituals so powerful: the more suffering/pain we endure to achieve something, the more we tend to value it. The financial outlay, the commitment to arbitrary ground rules, the three day ordeal, and the psychological stress all combine to create this effect. (I recommend reading Robert Cialdini's "Influence: the Psychology of Persuasion" to get a feel for other influence techniques used by Landmark (which uses all of them.))

Now, a truly objective view of the effects of Landmark would be a long term study of a group of participants by trained social psychologists. I believe such a study has been done of LGATs generally, and the results were largely that while those who'd done the training reported self-improvement, outside observers did not, or at least, not to the same extent. In other words, a there was a lot of self delusion going on. Furthermore, initial (real) positive effects tended to wear off fairly quickly.

Unfortunately, I don't currently have the link to this study (I ran across it a while ago). Does anyone know what I'm referring to?

Quote
pragmatist
So let's cut the b.s. - tell the story of your destruction by the Landmark Forum... I, for one, am interested in hearing the real deal about you. I _do_ care, in spite of what you may think of me.

Oh my, you expect to be trusted? You've learned your Landmark lessons well - employing the same tact: 'come on, share yourself so I can tell you wants wrong with you.' Shame on you, Prag!

My personal involvement with Landmark is fairly varied, but from firsthand experience the whole affair was suspicious, to say the least. All those volunteer, smiling faces in crisp suits turning grim when the conversation turned from 'where do I sign' to 'what role does Rosenberg have in all of this'. Worse than that, questions were always addressed in private (my experience) and, to be fair, I shouldn't have expected much because the person involved was just another volunteer.

How many volunteers does it take to run a multinational company?

Prag, if you're really interested, like me, then there is a wealth of information right here at this site. Before I even knew what Landmark was I read dozens of 'genuine' testimonies by ex-graduates. I read articles written by journalists, psychologists and the curious. For me, it is all about balance and, according to my limited research (if you like), the scales weigh heavily in favour of questioning Landmark and its practices. There are just too many cases of harm and, as rswinters has stated, even a small percentage warrants concern. Stop to think about that for just a few moments.

As you can see from the number of posts I have made, I assure you that if you're really interested you'll find what you need to hear from what I've already written. I don't see the point in repeating myself too much. And I think this applies to many others posting here.

BTW, our use of language gives away the game. Re-reading your posts is very revealling. It might be useful for you to do the same. B.S., indeed.

Do_you_really_care_?

Quote
msluyter


Now, a truly objective view of the effects of Landmark would be a long term study of a group of participants by trained social psychologists. I believe such a study has been done of LGATs generally, and the results were largely that while those who'd done the training reported self-improvement, outside observers did not, or at least, not to the same extent. In other words, a there was a lot of self delusion going on. Furthermore, initial (real) positive effects tended to wear off fairly quickly.

Unfortunately, I don't currently have the link to this study (I ran across it a while ago). Does anyone know what I'm referring to?

You're probably referring to this one:

Evaluating a Large Group Awareness Training: A Longitudinal Study of Psychosocial Effects, J.D. Fisher, R. C. Silver, J. M. Chinsky, B. Goff and Y. Klar, , Published by Springer-Verlag, October 1990, ISBN 0-387-97320-6.

[www.answers.com]


Ellen

[quote="elena
Evaluating a Large Group Awareness Training: A Longitudinal Study of Psychosocial Effects, J.D. Fisher, R. C. Silver, J. M. Chinsky, B. Goff and Y. Klar, , Published by Springer-Verlag, October 1990, ISBN 0-387-97320-6.

[url]http://www.answers.com/topic/large-group-awareness-training[/url]


Ellen[/quote]

I briefly looked at site. very good information. I will read in detail later.

Thanks elena. You provide good, and helpful information for us to look at.

Much appreciation.

Quote
pragmatist

Quote
Rswinters
That you ignore the people who have gone to these LGAT's and have had these philosphies destroy their lives as they tried to apply it in life.

How did the Landmark Forum 'LGAT' destroy your life then? Mind telling us? If you're just going to throw everything and the kitchen sink, then obviously, this forum is useful for nothing but ranting.

So let's cut the b.s. - tell the story of your destruction by the Landmark Forum... I, for one, am interested in hearing the real deal about you. I _do_ care, in spite of what you may think of me.

Hi pragmatist, can't you see how arrogant you are? Everybody who is not interested in Landmark is stupid?, well some people, like me, just hate Landmark. That's why people think Landmark produces all these "clones", arrogant "know-it-alls". They all talk the same bs and they do not accept any criticism.

Here's what I was thinking of, I believe:

[en.wikipedia.org]

Quote

The researchers found that subjects had some minor short-term positive effects perceived from the Large Group Awareness Training, but no noticeable longer term effects, stating: "In fact, with the exception of the short-term multivariate results for Perceived Control, there was no appreciable effect on any dimension which could reflect positive change."[1]

Quote
pragmatist
Rick - I have no particular purpose here other than to see what you have to say about anything and everything. I like talking about things...

In the entire post where you outline the 'relevant issues' on LE, you listed three things that you were authentic about, with regards to yourself. And I didn't need a peer review study to detect what you are yearning for, and what it is that you don't have.

Could you please stop analyzing other people's intentions with this LE bs framework ... The human mind and life is a bit more complex than those three or so concepts they have taught you there

Quote
MartinH
[ The human mind and life is a bit more complex than those three or so concepts they have taught you there

LOL, well said. Too true, too true. That was about it. Three or so concepts to explain all of life and to live by. Simple solutions for simple & lazy minds.

pragmatist:

Other than reminding people how empty Landmark learned rhetoric is, it doesn't seem like you are contributing much here.

Repeating the same Landmark-speak over and over again is not a meaingful contribution.

Can't you come up with an original thought?

Pretty said testimonial to the group's influence and training.