I am posting this as a file for your reading entertainment. There might be
someone who reads the sghawke posts and becomes uncomfortable with the whole
PSI deal or has questions. I urge you to think about your reactions and
decide for yourself what is true for you.
First off, Trolls. Trolls are people that enter into groups of people and
say offensive things to get a reaction from those in the group. Like if a
, logged into alt.FireFighters.tactics and posted that
all fires were started by fireman wanting to keep their jobs, that would be
trolling. Obviously a false statement, but many in the group will respond to
the troll. The troll doesn't care if the statement is true or false, just
wants to get people riled up. The term Troll is a fishing term, trolling is
moving along slowly trying to hook a fish. A Troll posts offensive messages
to get a reaction from the fish. The best way to stop a Troll is to do what
Cynthia did, make it a member's only group.
Secondly, it's kind of funny, I've seen all that stuff before. My friend
Jessica sent me a bunch of similar links as her response to me asking her to
go to a basic graduation and then the basic.
An argument or debate is a series of statements that when strung together make
up a story or conclusion. The validity of the story can be challanged by
looking at the individual statements or if the statements will support the
conclusion. Trolls, like sghawke, can make statements of how PSI or other
LGAT (Large Group Awareness Training) seminars are not working for some
people. Unless the statements are examined clearly, usually with much more
explanation than the original statement, then the conclusions may be accepted
as true when they are not.
Below is an example of how a simple statement requires a long explanation.
1) PSI is an LGAT.
2) LGATs are bad.
conclusion) PSI is bad.
1) Is PSI an LGAT? Probably, but so what if it is. It would be difficult to
prove it isn't as what exactly an LGAT is, is vague. Under some definitions,
the Christian Church and other religions are LGATs.
2) Are LGATs bad? Nobody knows. The effects of attending an LGAT are
unknown, as no definitive study has been performed by independent
researchers. To really "know" the effects you would possibly need over 4000
test subjects, 2000 to go through all PSI seminars and 2000 to not have any
PSI or similar seminars. Then you would have to devise a scheme to measure
the quality of a persons life. Then you would have to devise a scheme to
compare one person's life to another and make conclusions based on the
findings. Then you would have to check on the people annualy for 20 years
or more to see what the "effects" are if any.
Conclusion) PSI is bad. That is a false conclusion as the second
statement "LGATs are bad" is unproveable.
Further, a classification of "good, bad, right or wrong" is subjective,
meanting that each individual has a different set of paramaters they use to
determine how good or bad something is. Therefore any classification of good
or bad is the personal opinion of the person making the statement.
1) My wife went to PSI
2) She isn't the same as before she went to PSI
3) PSI caused the changes
4) I don't like how she is now
5) That is bad.
Conclusion) PSI is bad.
1) Did his wife go to PSI? That is probably a true statement.
2) Is she different now than before she went to PSI? How much different? How
do you measure different? Did she lose 1 lb of weight? Does she stick up for
herself more than she did before? Does she not always let you make decisions
for both of you now? See where I'm going with this? Difference, like art, can
only be good, bad, right or wrong in the eye of the beholder. People
become "different" every moment. As every moment passes they are that much
older than before. It is an unanswerable question, and therefore an invalid
3) Did PSI cause the changes? Now we're back to the first series of
statements. It is difficult to show if the PSI seminars can "change" someone
who doesn't want to be changed. What if she was a smoker and went to a stop
smoking seminar and decided to stop smoking. Did the seminar make her stop
smoking or did she stop smoking? It is an unanswerable question and therefore
an invalid statement.
4) Does he not like how she is now? That is probably a true statement. But
why doesn't he like her? That is the real question I had when reading his
5) Is a wife acting differently bad? That is open to debate and has no factual
answer. You would have to clearly define how a wife should act that everyone
could agree on. Then you would have to measure how closely, or not, the
wife's actions fit the agreed upon set of "allowable wife actions." Of course
there isn't such a set of actions and therefore no way to measure those
actions. It is an unanswerable question and therefore an invalid statement.
Conclusion) Is PSI is bad? Well of course not, statements 2, 3, and 5 are
unanswerabe, therefore there can be no valid conclusion. The series of posts
fails to prove PSI is bad (again).
Yet Another Example
1) I went to PSI
2) I acted how I thought I was supposed to act following the principles layed
out in the seminars, book, and team members.
3) My actions caused me to fail
4) I regret going to PSI
conclusion) PSI is bad
1) Did she go to PSI? Maybe she did, lets assume she did.
2) Did she act according to the principles laid out in all the information
presented at the seminar? NO. duh! Don't over risk was a big lesson, she
bought items she knew she could't afford. That sounds like over-risking it to
me. She made big life changes within the 30 day "don't make big life changes"
time frame. In some ways she did use the seminar material correctly. She put
out to the universe that she would divorce her husband if he didn't go to the
seminars. The universe saw "divorce" and gave her one. Hmmm. She did not
act according to the principles layed out in the seminars. #2 is a false
3) Did her actions cause her to fail? Yes, this is a true statement.
4) Does she regret going to PSI? Yes she does. This is a true statement
conclusion) Is PSI bad? No, statement 2 is false, therefore the conclusion is
And just to show how I'm not making this all up I'll apply the same technique
to my responses to the first item
1) PSI is an LGAT, 2) LGATs are bad, Conclusion) PSI is bad.
1) Is PSI an LGAT?
a) LGAT definitions are vague <- This is a true statement, check out wikipedia.
b) One definition classifies PSI as an LGAT <- This is a true statement (but
so is PSI 7 is 7 days long)
conclusion) "PSI is an LGAT" is a true statement
2) Are LGATs are bad?
a) No study has been performed that shows attending an LGAT is good or bad. <-
This is a true statement.
b) Good and bad are subjective terms (meaning there is not a universal good or
bad) <- This is also a true statement
conclusion) The effects of attending an LGAT are unknown, therefore this
statement is invalid (doesn't make any sense) <-- This is a valid conclusion
given statement a and b are true.
Conclusion) Is PSI bad?
a) statement 2 is invalid <- this is a true statement
b) a logical sequence with an invalid statement renders the conclusion invalid
<- this is a true statement
conclusion) The conclusion doesn't make any sense. <-- This is a valid
conclusion based on a and b.
Now, is it the case that one person could go through PSI and have a bad
experience? Sure. But I believe it is an invalid argument to suggest that one
person having a bad experience, for whatever reason, indicates that all of PSI
is bad. I believe you have to experience it for yourself and make your own
The other side of the coin is that it is difficult to prove that PSI is good
for all of the same reasons it is difficult to prove that PSI is bad. PSI is
what it is. If it helps you, great, if it doesn't help you (and I'm trying
really hard to be open to the possiblity that you could go through all of PSI
seminars and not improve your life at all) then you have learned one more
thing that doesn't work for you. Rejoice! and move on, but please don't 'take'
from the rest of us.
I am posting this as a file for your reading entertainment. There might be
some of you who read the sghawke posts and become uncomfortable with the whole
PSI deal. I urge you to think about your reactions and decide for yourself
what is true for you.
Also, please e-mail me to correct any logical fallacies I have committed in