I'm fascinated by Guy's posts about hypnosis and trance techniques used in Landmark programs. I would love to hear more specifics about this and more general manipulations. I've noticed a fair number myself.
A: [i:23584428b9]When a forum leader says "this is just ONE WAY ONLY of looking at things, it is NOT THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH" he is using a disarming technique so that you will drop your critical thinking. It works. -- Guy quoting gc4062[/i:23584428b9]
B: Not only does it disarm, with that emphasis it's also a classic embedded suggestion pattern. The subconscious does not hear negatives, so what the subconscious hears is, "ONE WAY ONLY...THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH." Most NLP courses teach this technique in their basic practitioner course.
C: Even though the Forum leader warns participants not to believe anything they hear, most come out, sure enough, believing Landmark constructs, like SELF and IDENTITY, as though they were absolute truths or "unmessable-with abstractions" as one leader put it.
From my training in hypnosis I can offer the following opinions/observations for the points above that I've designated A, B and C:
A: Not only is it simultaneously a disarming technique; but it also masquerades as the very politically correct new age mantra that all genuine paths are equal and lead to the same goal.
It may very well be correct, but it could be manipulated by an unscrupulous group that is only masquerading as an "alternative" path to whatever.
Quite an ingenius line in this context, for a controversial group could use that very attitude paradoxically for the very purpose of selling people exclusively on their technologies and ideologies. I.E: Using "tolerance" to engender "intolerance." I find that quite ironic indeed.
In my experience you have to be careful how you criticize LEC and similar to some new age philosophy types. They may be more likely to view the criticizer as "being negative" and "intolerant" and have a knee jerk reaction of resistance rather than risk themselves appearing to be "negative" too.
B: Only hearing positives is to my mind more of an NLP theory. My study was hypnosis, although the old adage of trying NOT to see pink elephants after someone tells you not to may be analogous.
However once something is in the subconscious mind it's quite willing to accept it and behave therefrom. The classic adage in classical hypnosis is that once you have their imagination their will will follow.
Thus creating a sense of security along with techniques that ellicit simultaneously a sense of physical relaxation with mental imagery could OH SO VERY EASILY be subverted into covert mental manipulation, waking hypnosis and even classic hypnosis like good ol' L. Ron was alleged to have inflicted on people like I read in "Bald-Faced Messiah." It may have been "Bare" rather than "Bald." It has been a few years since I read it.
Combine with this congitive dissonance and the communal desire to fit in and be liked and you have quite an ordeal.
Werner clearly realized that the trick is, after all is said and done, to make the customer think that it was their idea all along. Then they might be less likely to blame LEC when the sxxx hits the fan.
And thoughts are not tangible enough to prosecute all too often.
I suspect LEC has not only mastered this but has recruited a legion of volunteers who not only replicate this type of meme but do so without realization of just exactly what they are doing. Truly evil genius. A supply that creates its own demand without overhead or downline expenses. All the money goes straight to the top of the pyramid, yet the dowline people still feel highly compensated. Genius.
However like any computer, if you have the right (knowledge) software, its antivirus setting are high enough and your hard drive's resources aren't overtaxed (you aren't mentally, emotionally and physicall tired/taxed) then you stand a better chance than most of having an effective firewall I would think.
Hopefully we all, collectively, will be able to ascertain just exactly what comprises the anti LEC virus software.
C: The suggestion to "not believe anything you hear," to my mind, insinuates that the speaker covertly wishes to portray him/herself as THE ONLY ONE present who is qualified to be able to discern truth from non. Otherwise why even bother to say such a thing?
Like I said this is from the perspective of a former hypnotist. Others may have alternate views.