Quote

The way I interpreted that the "World is meaningless" routine, is that I have to make everything mean something.

Although the word is actually filled with "meaning" or "intention" if you want to use the words interchangably. Landmark takes the extreme position that all meaning is the meaning you create, back in the good old days of [i:59a28daf97] est [/i:59a28daf97] when the Erhardians took this directive too literally for anyone's use, there were hilarious, and often socially weird moments where the [i:59a28daf97] esthole [/i:59a28daf97] in question would be insisting that he/she was being responsible for the totality of the meaning state of that monent...

Something a whole lot more intelligent has arisen to fill the gap between social intention and internally generated meaning attribution, and that is known as [b:59a28daf97] intersubjectivity theory [/b:59a28daf97] which posits a dual source of meaning... stuff that is, really, actually, externally intended as meaning (try running red lights on a regular basis and you'll know what I'm referring to) and internal meaning, meaning as an interpretive or evaluative act.

Landmark badly oversimplifies the dynamics of how these two sources of meaning interact to generate a [b:59a28daf97] field of potential truth [/b:59a28daf97] which is constantly open to a degree of reinterpretation and reevaluation.

For example, colors only exist in your mind. Colors are an artifact of an extremely complex labelling system deep in the brain. In that sense, you create colors from wavelengths of light. Light itself has no color in it. None. Visible light is a colorless bunch of photons at different energy potentials that the brain sorts out and adds color to. Color ONLY exists in the brain and nowhere else. There is case number one. Hoever, because this is true of raw color perception, it doesn't make it true of social perception. That's where the Erhardians fucked up. Bigtime.

Because, knowing that the brain has a consistent response to photon energy, color has become an essential social signalling device that is absolutely indifferent to the mechanism of color perception. Stop signs will always be red and always be octagonal because we have deep social agreements as to the meaning of that symbol. However I subjectively experience that sign, I am obligated to react to it in a predicatable way, even if I have red-green color blindness.

It gets more complex in social spaces where on has to read social intentionality from facial expression, voice tone, body posture, and a wide range of shared messenging systems that indicate expectation, intention, attitude, interest, etc... and you cannot for a second say that those "meanings" are exclusively created by the receiver or the perceiver... they are often clearly intended and understood by those who know how to read social nuances. High functioning autistics are often socially handicapped because they cannot decode social intention and have damaged lives [b:59a28daf97] because [/b:59a28daf97] , in their case, there is little or no intersubjectivity, they are a perfect example of what happens when all meaning originates in the mind of the receiver.

Landmark is promoting something akin to an autistic value system because it cannot intellectually raise itself to the level of a full intersubjective model... becaue to do so would mean jettisoning the core idea that one is "source" or that one reaches an enlightened state of being the full generator of meaning... [b:59a28daf97] it simply isn't so, and it cannot be so in a social universe. [/b:59a28daf97]

Quote
Myles

Quote
skeptic
And that's the power and the danger of LGATs. Ya just can't think straight after being run through one.

There's a lot of vocabulary being used here that I am not familiar with. Can you please define "LGATs"?

I figured you might know, since this place where you posted is called "Large Group Awareness Training"

Quote
rrmoderator
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."

.

Some well known Landmark leaders are uneducated, psychopaths and even KILLERS! DARREN ROY MACK is the perfect example. His lovely wife CHARLA MACK was also a Landmark leader in the Philippines. He murdered her in cold blood. See:

[www.cultnews.com]

But hey, she is no VICTIM according to Landmark since she is the only one responsible for creating her own murder, isn't it true! Wow, WHAT A BREAKTHROUGH!!!

I wonder what you have to say about that Myles? Perhaps you should ask your nearest landmark Center manager about it. BTW, ask them why all references to the Mack family have disappeared from the Landmark's website? What do they have to hide?

I continue to marvel at the same stupid, illogical "concepts" and the same stupid jargon and cliches that CONtext used that Landmark uses. UGH!!!!!!!!! What an uncreative, unoriginal bunch these LGAT leaders are.

Quote
rrmoderator
See [www.culteducation.com]

Philip Cushman attended an LGAT and found the following things to warn potential participants about.

<snip>

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.

WHEW! I remember an Assistants' meeting which was led by someone in the Graduate Seminar Leaders' Program. She just couldn't wait to try out her new skills. She was hell bent on forcing a breakthrough on everyone in the room. Wherever anyone was, it wasn't good enough, she had to force them to ~the next space~. When people quit raising their hands to share, she started calling on people. Several people tried to tell her what she was doing, which just started the ~you're a victim~ routine.

By that time, I'd developed a survival technique. I'd found that, if you sat there and looked "supportive", they wouldn't call on you.

The whole things was devastating. There were *huge upsets* all over the Center the next day.

estie

Quote
Myles
I can see that volunteering too much time to an organization could cause a person to forsake their families or their "day job". Spending too much time at the race tracks, bar or at work could have the same consequences though too.

I will look more closely at the volunteering aspect of Landmark from now on.

Myles,

It's the Department of Labor's (DOL) opinion that Landmark is violating the Fair Labor Standards Act by using volunteer labor. They are, after all, a for-profit corporation.

Landmark disagreed, and it will take an Assistant filing a complaint or initiating a class-action lawsuit to decide the matter. (Two year statute of limitation, three years if the violation was deliberate.)

DOL also ruled that AOL couldn't use volunteers.

estie

Quote
Myles

Quote

I've experienced being humiliated in front of 200 people by the leader in the advanced course for even hinting on that Landmark might be a scam.

Thank you for your post! I signed up for the Advanced Course for September 2006. Can you expand on this for me?

What do you mean by "hinting that it might be a scam"?
How do you define "scam" and what did you say?

Myles, I really hope you're still here listening to all this, and telling others to listen too. Remember, ALWAYS get both sides of a story before making up your mind on it. Otherwise you're just swallowing propaganda. Don't just believe Landmark, and don't just believe us. LOOK, READ, TALK and LISTEN and arrive at a conclusion that you can really own.

Landmark education is [i:b3d057798c]based[/i:b3d057798c] on communication. It's based on Authenticity. Don't you ever let the fear that you'll be put down or made to feel bad stop you from talking, ever. If you have a problem with anything on course you get your ass up and tell someone about it. It's just NOT authentic to sit down because it's easier than going up against the forum leader. I took them at their word and asked questions, and kept asking, and I was so surprised at what I saw! I got "complete" with Landmark, I was done, I left and got some R E A L freedom! :mrgreen: I don't have to worry about my rackets anymore, I DON'T CARE about my rackets! I can think a thought and not have to worry about my already always listening.

Another thing I want to say is that I love every one of my old Lekkie friends, they're great, pro-active people who often do get results, but to see the level of paranoia that's in their lives and relationships, the amount of time and energy they spend on analysing everything around and within them to the nth degree, it just saddens me, I remember what it was like to be stuck in that mode of thinking, it's not fun, it gives you a sense of control and perhaps even enlightenment, but it's very stressful to maintain. Furthermore to know that if I try to even just talk to them about it, the blinkers will just come down and they won't even listen to me. That's not having any degree of control over your already always listening, that's just replacing one filter with another!

Anyway, with that in mind, I'll answer your questions now, and I'm sorry for taking so long. I actually had a much longer post in mind, detailing pretty much my whole forum experience, but I'll leave that for another time.

On the Saturday morning of the advanced course (3rd day) I got up to get clear on that I hadn't done all of the homework and was a little late. That sort of stuff was not required in the forum, or at least it wasn't in mine. I found the forum to be a much more relaxed kind of environment, more carrot, less stick. I did have a different forum leader for the advanced course who was a little less experienced so that could have something to do with it also.

The advanced course was all about the group getting it. I heard it said a lot before and during the course "if you don't get it, nobody gets it." Being late even a few minutes or not completing homework assignments are a big deal, and forum leaders will flat out refuse to continue teaching the course if the group is out of integrity. And standing up and saying "I'm sorry" for infractions isn't enough. There has to be some kind of visible revelation of authenticity, a breakthrough. Which to me, basically meant, make big grand speeches that impress the leader and get a good response from the audience. I tried that, but the forum leader was not impressed in the slightest in what I had to say. She asked everyone "would you bet your house and your car that he won't just be late again tomorrow?" Not a single hand went up. Then the grilling started. She was trying to get out of me what she called 'my act.' The outer shell that protects me and prevents me from having to confront being authentic.

We started to talk about my mother, how she had behaved during my parents divorce, and how I said to myself when I saw her crying "I'm never going to be weak like her." "You're entire life is all about 'you're not going to get me!'" she declared. "Your act is going to let you escape from this room! It's going to save you from having to deal with this stuff! It's what your act does!" I wasn't convinced. I don't exactly remember how we got to me saying I thought that she and my forum leader from the forum had "been tricked into believing this stuff", but I said it, and she replied "You think that I and xxxxxx are so weak to be sucked into a scam? What a joke! You think that xxxxx, who was a well respected scientist before she gave up her career for Landmark was scammed! Hahahahaha!" *audience laughter*. She was sitting in her directors chair looking at me incredulously. I felt really stupid.

What I didn't understand then, was that intelligence has absolutely nothing to do with a person's vulnerability to these groups. Even had I known I probably would have been unable to say it, I was so embaressed. Then she said, "So you have a choice now. Let your act get you and leave, or stay and be in the game. I'm giving you a chance to leave with a full refund. Right now." I was terrified. I didn't want to leave the group. "No no! I don't want to leave." I told her. She smiled. "Now how do you feel?" She asked me. "I feel better!" "And how do I look to you now?" No joke, this is what I said: "Much more attractive!" Then there was warm fuzziness, blah blah blah and I was back in the group.

It was a very inauthentic experience for me. I had very little resistance at the other side of it. I had tried and failed to stand up to the extreme peer pressure. But still I had come off like I had had this great big breakthrough, and at least 20 or 30 people came up to me during the next break and congratulated me personally on my win. And now that I had a taste of the love bombing, I wanted to get up and experience it more and more. I would stand up and say "I'm being a stand for everyone getting it" and "I'm committed to the group having breakthroughs together." I was a big time player in that course room that Saturday. My performance was so good that I had the entire course room clapping and cheering for me and people kept coming up to me on breaks to congratulate me on my "transformation." I said how dedicated I was to them "getting it too." But the truth was, the whole time I felt myself getting smaller and smaller until that night, I was out of there!

I was fed up, I refused to do the homework at the last session, which was inviting at least 2 more people to the graduation night (I was never big on enrollment and registration, I didn't like it) and my buddy ratted on me, I was confronted by the course supervisor, some assistants and then finally by the leader herself. She told me that based on something I had confessed to that evening on course that she was fearful for my mental state and that if I left the course and didn't fix this problem, that I would be committed to an insane asylum. When I look back on these things I'm forced to laugh at how gullible I was. I really believed her! And I was terrified of this little lady! I was head and shoulders taller than her and I was shaking and stuttering talking to her! Bottom line, if she was REALLY concerned for my mental state, she would have taken me aside and told me so at the very next break, she would have kicked me off the course straight away. But oh no, she waited until I was leaving to draw her wild card. And it totally worked. I left there feeling that I was totally wrong, and totally not right for Landmark's courses. I was damaged goods before I even walked in the door.

The advanced course is touted as being the "meat and potatoes of Landmark." I'm here to tell you it's not. They show a few videos, there's a bit more jargon, otherwise it's just the same stuff, only this time the pressure on the group to coagulate and perform is far more intense. That's it. You may indeed have bigger wins on it, and I sincerely hope it proves to be a better experience for you than it was for me.

I just want you to know, it's important, if you feel that Landmark is wrong, don't ever be bullied into silence. Silence in that course room is what they strive to maintain. When you're standing up there disagreeing with the forum leader, and there is a sea of silent faces out there, you will see what I mean by "silence is as good as assent." And to all those people who confronted the forum leader and dropped out from a "headache" or "lack of sleep" the next day, GOD I'm sorry I didn't stand up for you and give you my support! I'm so sorry that I sat silently and just accepted your being flushed away like it was a problem with you.

Myles, if you hear about anyone dropping out during your advanced course, really think about it, okay?

Quote
Dynamix
I don't exactly remember how we got to me saying I thought that she and my forum leader from the forum had "been tricked into believing this stuff", but I said it, and she replied "You think that I and xxxxxx are so weak to be sucked into a scam? What a joke! You think that xxxxx, who was a well respected scientist before she gave up her career for Landmark was scammed! Hahahahaha!" *audience laughter*. She was sitting in her directors chair looking at me incredulously. I felt really stupid.

What I didn't understand then, was that intelligence has absolutely nothing to do with a person's vulnerability to these groups. Even had I known I probably would have been unable to say it, I was so embaressed. Then she said, "So you have a choice now. Let your act get you and leave, or stay and be in the game. I'm giving you a chance to leave with a full refund. Right now." I was terrified. I didn't want to leave the group.
...

She told me that based on something I had confessed to that evening on course that she was fearful for my mental state and that if I left the course and didn't fix this problem, that I would be committed to an insane asylum. When I look back on these things I'm forced to laugh at how gullible I was. I really believed her! And I was terrified of this little lady!

This is how cults operate. This is very similar to Scientology. Just try passing one of Scientology's "free" personality test! I doubt even a Landmark graduate would pass their test. How could they? No matter what you do or say, you're sick and if you leave the group, you're a failure. It's just another big SCAM like Landmark is. Hahahahaha! And YES, I do believe that well respected scientists can become victim of a deceptive scam. This is Emotions vs Reason, and sometimes, emotions make people weak and vulnerable. This has NOTHING to do with the level of education. Just ask yourself how come so many well educated people believe in weird stuff?

Hmmmm.... were did everybody go ? Wasn't Alex Rush so glad that "at last we meet " ? Where did good old Durham, defender of Scientology vanish off to ? And Myles... whither Myles ? I promise you this, they come on so big and confident, they last until they run out of gas, and in the final analysis [b:f15425d4cf] they have nothing to say [/b:f15425d4cf] because.... [b:f15425d4cf] they have nothing to say [/b:f15425d4cf] .... it must be a terrible realization that active thought isn't the same thing as playing tapes.

Well, well, well. Now, what will be the next thing these Landmark advocates will come up with to make us feel bad about our meaningless opinions (LOL!)? Chances are that Myles is preparing something in a concerted effort with some Landmark coaches or other officials to try and break us. After all, they are in the business of transforming people's mind, aren't they. Anything Myles say or do must be taken cautiously keeping that in mind. I'm curious to read about their next racket if they have anything left to say. But I doubt there will be anything new except the same old record: "It's like riding a bike ...". And above all, we're not coachable! Does this mean our life is a failure? Ohhhh! I feel so miserable (LOL!)!!!