Large Group Awareness Traing (Finkelstein, Wenegrat & Yalom, 1982).

The 1982 article entitled "Large Group Awareness Training" by the authors above, from Stanford University's department of psychiatry, was the among the first peer-reviewed articles on LGATs. I make numerous references to this review article in my PhD and have wondered why, in spite of their insistence that further research on LGATs be conducted, that none of these authors did any further research.

The following website (http://www.upstartlogic.com/Peter-finkelstein-MD) explains what these doctors (psychiatrists) have been up to since being exposed to the LGAT industry. Since I'm apparently mentally ill, I'll allow you to draw your own conclusions about this:

"Although trained as a physician and psychiatrist, Peter (Finkelstein) has worked for the past fifteen years helping organizations achieve higher performance by examining and changing their internal dynamics, leadership and team practices, and culture. What connects his work as a business consultant with his training as a physician is the universal element of discovery and diagnosis—not at the individual level, as in the practice of medicine, but at the organizational or team level that is so closely connected with business performance."

"From 2000 to 2002, Peter was head of corporate development for Critical Point Software, a natural language software company that he cofounded with Jeff Davitz, Ph.D., and Brant Wenegrat, M.D."

I'd appreciate it if someone "sane" would look into this and let me (all of us) know if this seems a little bit suspicious.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/22/2020 08:35PM by John Hunter PhD.

From Upstart Logic's (Peter Finkelstein's) company's website (http://www.upstartlogic.com/):

"Upstart Logic helps entrepreneurs and executive teams develop the tools to maximize their performance and transform their organizations."

Sound familiar?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/22/2020 08:42PM by John Hunter PhD.

CBS has just had one of the videos I posted on YouTube (the 60 minutes episode on Erhard) blocked "for copyright reasons".

JUST TO BE CLEAR... IT WASN'T BECAUSE OF "FACTUAL DISCREPANCIES" LOL

I'm GLAD THAT MANY PEOPLE WATCHED IT AND DOWNLOADED IT - these corrupt organisations can't hide behind their attorneys any longer. Just to remind you of why CBS doesn't want that video, and my commentary on it, out there here is the evidence of CBS being paid off by Erhard:

60 Minutes (and others)

• On March 3 1992, Werner Erhard sued CBS and 60 Minutes producers David Gelber, Douglas Hamilton, and Donald Hewitt, alleging defamation of character, interference with prospective economic advantage, invasion of privacy, and conspiracy. The lawsuit was later withdrawn, with the right to reinstate it if a settlement was not reached (Self, 1992). The lawsuit was not reinstated but, according to Snider (2003), the 60 Minutes segment was made unavailable by CBS for “legal or copyright reasons”.

• “On March 3, 1992, Attorney Walter Maksym filed a multimillion dollar lawsuit in Chicago on behalf of Werner Erhard against CBS, 60 Minutes producers David Gelber, Douglas Hamilton, and Donald Hewitt (…) alleging defamation of character, interference with prospective economic advantage, invasion of privacy, and conspiracy. In an effort to provide an opportunity for the defendants to settle with Erhard, Maksym non-suited the case on May 29, 1992. ‘A non-suit allows the plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss a case and maintain the right to reinstate it within one year,’ explained Maksym. ‘If they choose to not work out a settlement, we will reinstate the suit’” (Self, 1992, p. 149).

• “Werner Erhard sued CBS News over the 60 Minutes broadcast, in a lawsuit filed in 1992. Werner Erhard later filed to dismiss his own lawsuit, and paid $100 checks to each of the defendants to cover their filing fees in the case” (IMDb, 2020).

• Suzanne Snider's article in The Believer in its May 2003 issue wrote: "The 60 Minutes segment was filled with so many factual discrepancies that the transcript was made unavailable with this disclaimer: 'This segment has been deleted at the request of CBS News for legal or copyright reasons'" (Snider, 2003).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/24/2020 05:03AM by John Hunter PhD.

In this video I focus specifically on NEWSPEAK ("Loading the Language") in LGATs like the Landmark Forum:

[www.youtube.com]

Hi everyone

I've just put a video together in which I shamelessly plug my (free) book, and provide a link to it:

[youtu.be]

Obviously, the primary goal of the book is to alert the public of what goes on in LGATs, and so I'm asking that you watch it and - if you do like it - then like it. Additionally, if you've read the book (or my PhD) and can comment on them, then that would really help as well.

Thanks

The public has a right to understand the risks of participating in LGATs and YOU HAVE THE POWER TO LET THE PUBLIC KNOW WHAT THESE RISKS ARE.

If you're tired of hiding from these bullies, then make a video and upload it below this video:

[www.youtube.com]

Share what you have been through... and let's end this cycle of abuse.

Re: I'm just a soul whose intentions are good... new
Posted by: John Hunter PhD
Date: July 23, 2020 01:02PM

[forum.culteducation.com]

Quote

• “On March 3, 1992, Attorney Walter Maksym filed a multimillion dollar lawsuit in Chicago on behalf of Werner Erhard against CBS, 60 Minutes producers David Gelber, Douglas Hamilton, and Donald Hewitt (…) alleging defamation of character, interference with prospective economic advantage, invasion of privacy, and conspiracy. In an effort to provide an opportunity for the defendants to settle with Erhard, Maksym non-suited the case on May 29, 1992. ‘A non-suit allows the plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss a case and maintain the right to reinstate it within one year,’ explained Maksym. ‘If they choose to not work out a settlement, we will reinstate the suit’” (Self, 1992, p. 149).

Here's a search of references to Walter Makysm in earlier discussions on CEI

[forum.culteducation.com]

Have a look at these:

[forum.culteducation.com]

and

[www.google.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/28/2020 09:40PM by corboy.

I'm sure he would argue that "everyone deserves a fair legal defence"... but it takes a special kind of person to climb into bed with the devil.

So, I understand if everyone is frightened to make a video clip, explaining what they've been through...

... but what is the alternative?

If we don't speak out, we'll be in the same position ten years from now, twenty years from now, thirty years from now... complaining about how Landmark Galaxywide (I'm pretty sure they will have changed their name again...) has destroyed the lives of our children and grandchildren?

Oh well...

John,

I appreciate your contributions here. I have always posted on the Impact Trainings section. On March 18, 2020, at the very beginning of the U.S. Covid-19 shutdown, I posted wondering what the impact on Impact Trainings would be if they could no longer mass/in-person "train." They have shifted to offering virtual training. Could it be that economic laws during the pandemic will do more to eliminate LGAT's than the laws of our legal system? Isn't this at least one positive outcome of the pandemic?