Quote
SaneAgain
Maxui.... in the context of the convesation then... I also have a number for a VERY expensive specialist in non-physical domination... just dial 555-Sha-dow... :lol:

*waits to be woo-hoo'ed* :)

WOOHOO :)

I think I have had my fill of battering from The-Shadow tho :)

Quote
SaneAgain
Okay Maxui, sorry, no more bad infantile humour from me, I promise.

No Need :) Humour is the spice of Life

Quote
SaneAgain
May I ask, who recruited you into Insight? Was it a friend or family member? Also, did you ever assist / staff?

My Ex girlfriend did the workshops - I saw a massive change in her and at the time my therapy was going no where. I felt I was throwing away a bucket of money for nothing.

So I went to a presentation evening at her request. The thing that got me interested was the concept of cellular memory. I have mentioned before that I am a practitioner of Chinese Gong Fu and the idea that I could "absorb" knowledge into my very cells was extremely interesting to me.

So I signed up.

I do not have the ability to suck up info like a sponge but the ability to focus for long periods has improved vastly and as a consequence so has my training.

I have also assisted / staffed on a few occasions.

Quote
SaneAgain
"Going into effect" means that you react automatically to the world around you, like a machine or a computer, based on your "programming" which is based on past experience. When you are "at cause" you are supposed to be living in the present moment and creating a new experience, rather than living in the past and 'giving away your power' to others by allowing them to 'push your buttons' to get a reaction.

The only way to escape your programming and be truly at cause is by continuously clearing and / or releasing the past and past emotions.

Question lady, I think this is the underlying principle that The Sedona Method is [i:edec033fba]probably[/i:edec033fba] also based on or derived from. It stems from Scientology by the way, where L. Ron Hubbard invented the concepts of "at cause", "going into effect", "the reactive mind" and "becoming (a) clear".

I think the concept of going into effect contributes to people in lgats lacking compassion because when someone shows a negative emotion (eg feeling hurt by something you've said) then it is interpreted as that person "going into effect" and something to be dismissed because its just old programming, the other person's sh*t that they should clear rather than making it your problem.

The concepts sound just like The Release Technique - the mind is like a computer, past programming. They don't say "at cause" and "at effect' that i know of. (geez, talk about terms that no one outside the LGATcan understand) but rather 'ego' or 'ego/mind' versus "beingness". Several people, including my husband, have said it is similar to the scientology scale. And yes, i experienced the arrogance of the newly enlightened when I had any so called "negative" emotion - that I just needed to "release'.

It is frustrating. These programs are all so similar, yet my husband does not see in any way that there was covert persuasion. I wish I had taped him when he was 'in beingness" up so he could hear himself and the things he actually believed.

He now sees that Larry Crane lies, that the method does not deliver, but not that there was any covert mind control. Do you think it is necessary to know what happened to you in order to fully recover from it? I'm concerned that it is necessary and also in order to not get taken in again. And BTW, decades ago, my husband was in Scientology for a while - and yet here he goes again. And he owns "The Guru Papers" and "Snapping". I am at a loss.

Quote
SaneAgain
I think the concept of going into effect contributes to people in lgats lacking compassion because when someone shows a negative emotion (eg feeling hurt by something you've said) then it is interpreted as that person "going into effect" and something to be dismissed because its just old programming, the other person's sh*t that they should clear rather than making it your problem. Obviously its very selective and open to interpretation when a person may choose to be "at cause" for creating pain in another person that they are in relationship with, and choosing to see it as the other person's sh*t caused by them going into effect.

SaneAgain - Great explanation how lgats make people cold-hearted. Lgats substitute the old programming with one that destroys one's humanity. And, yes, application of it is very selective (crazy). Making anything about the other person's old programming gives you license to be ruthless.

The lgat I wasted time & $$ on (CONtext Associated), while programming us to be UNcompassionate, had us memorize & recite 10 tenets, one of which was, "I am compassionate with myself and others. I remember we are all wounded." So, as we used the "teachings" to dismantle our humanity, we had this handy thought-stopper (gospel) implanted in our minds which assured us that we were not what in reality we were.

CRAZY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

skeptic

I'm going to post this on the Impact thread, but I think it is relative to the current topic so I'll post here too.

This effect/reaction stuff is interesting. At Impact the logic went like this: People go through life choosing to be victims: “Everyone did this to me and that is why I am the way I am the way I am and that is how I justify being a horrible person to everyone else on the planet."

The Impact fix to this is for a person to consciously choose accountability for everything that has (or will) happen in not only their own lives, but in the lives of the people around them. Then you are not simply in "effect/reaction" to everything, rather you are at "cause", and are a "creator". They then expand this creationism to be the true divine nature of the human being, and on into the idea that all humans are in fact gods.

Now, here is where I began to see their (at that time, “our”) logic break down. Whenever something dysfunctional happened in the trainings such as oh, fornication and adultery among the office staff and the trainees for one real example, lip service was given to "accountability" by those in charge, but not "responsibility" which according to them literally means "the ability to respond". Responsibility is being at effect; and thus a victim, so no no no no. They do not take accountability by saying, "Oh...maybe its the training and our shoddy product that caused this abhorrent, deviant behavior...". No, you will [i:4f0f49f17c]never[/i:4f0f49f17c] hear that. I [i:4f0f49f17c]did[/i:4f0f49f17c] hear, "Oh, I am ONLY accountable in that I should have been more careful as to who I let into my inner circle."

Essentially saying: “[i:4f0f49f17c]The training is good the training is great we surrender our will as of this date[/i:4f0f49f17c].”

Then of course, I would invariably come to another conflict in this logic when a trainee with a history of molestation would come to Impact. They would get confused when they were told that they allowed the abuse to happen. And always, some random exception to this “logic” would be given, such as “Well, you are and have been accountable for [i:4f0f49f17c]how[/i:4f0f49f17c] you have chosen to respond to the abuse, right?” or something to that effect, but they can never directly address the flaw in their logic. If a little helpless kid is a god and is at choice, how could they be considered a victim in fact? And if [i:4f0f49f17c]they[/i:4f0f49f17c] can be, why not everyone else? I mean, we are dealing with universal truth here, right? :roll: I heard it explained this way more than a few times: "not only are we at choice, but we are also in relationship with the choices of others." Isn't that what being a victim is all about in the first place?!? This is their explanation from the Trainer In Training cult perspective: “Well, we make agreements with each other in the pre-mortal life to teach each other and learn from each other. So in fact, you did agree to be molested, you just don’t remember because the mortal veil has been placed over your eyes that you might not see so you can have this mortal experience. With our assistance, you may remove that veil and forgive your beautiful teachers...”. They reinforce this reasoning from a children’s book (that is sometimes read to them in the Summit training) called [i:4f0f49f17c]The Little Soul and the Sun[/i:4f0f49f17c].

Convenient, no? It is no wonder why so many Mormons eat this stuff up…

Maxui,
your wrote:

Quote
"Maxui
I think I have had my fill of battering from The-Shadow tho :)[/quote

I was not "battering" you, merely "expression my opinion", responding to YOUR eroneous statements, but if you choose to perceive that as battering, well, that's your reality, not much I can do about that!

Regards,
'shad'

Hi exImpact,
you wrote:

Quote
"exImpact"

Then of course, I would invariably come to another conflict in this logic when a trainee with a history of molestation would come to Impact. They would get confused when they were told that they allowed the abuse to happen. And always, some random exception to this “logic” would be given, such as “Well, you are and have been accountable for how you have chosen to respond to the abuse, right?” or something to that effect, but they can never directly address the flaw in their logic. If a little helpless kid is a god and is at choice, how could they be considered a victim in fact? And if they can be, why not everyone else? I mean, we are dealing with universal truth here, right? :roll: I heard it explained this way more than a few times: "not only are we at choice, but we are also in relationship with the choices of others." Isn't that what being a victim is all about in the first place?!? This is their explanation from the Trainer In Training cult perspective: “Well, we make agreements with each other in the pre-mortal life to teach each other and learn from each other. So in fact, you did agree to be molested, you just don’t remember because the mortal veil has been placed over your eyes that you might not see so you can have this mortal experience. With our assistance, you may remove that veil and forgive your beautiful teachers...”. They reinforce this reasoning from a children’s book (that is sometimes read to them in the Summit training) called The Little Soul and the Sun.

Convenient, no? It is no wonder why so many Mormons eat this stuff up…

Yep, blaming the victim, AGAIN. You are right, no wonder these types of movements florish. They can do WHATEVER they like, without being held accountable to the standards that us "normal" people are held accountable to. Even in this Forum, there is an individual who can say whatever hurtful things he likes, but when someone criticises him, its "oh poor battered me, I'm just telling people about MY experience, why is everyone picking on me!" Talk about the double standard!

"at cause" -- Oh brother! :lol: talk about reinventing the wheel... why not just say "being in the present". sheeesh....

what a load of bullcrap! -- And LGAT grads wonder why we think they have lost their minds!

'shad'

Hi skeptic,
your posted:

Quote
"skeptic"

Quote
"SaneAgain"
I think the concept of going into effect contributes to people in lgats lacking compassion because when someone shows a negative emotion (eg feeling hurt by something you've said) then it is interpreted as that person "going into effect" and something to be dismissed because its just old programming, the other person's sh*t that they should clear rather than making it your problem. Obviously its very selective and open to interpretation when a person may choose to be "at cause" for creating pain in another person that they are in relationship with, and choosing to see it as the other person's sh*t caused by them going into effect.

SaneAgain - Great explanation how lgats make people cold-hearted. Lgats substitute the old programming with one that destroys one's humanity. And, yes, application of it is very selective (crazy). Making anything about the other person's old programming gives you license to be ruthless.

The lgat I wasted time & $$ on (CONtext Associated), while programming us to be UNcompassionate, had us memorize & recite 10 tenets, one of which was, "I am compassionate with myself and others. I remember we are all wounded." So, as we used the "teachings" to dismantle our humanity, we had this handy thought-stopper (gospel) implanted in our minds which assured us that we were not what in reality we were.

CRAZY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

skeptic

yep crazzzzzzzy indeed. This sounds so much like my ex-husband. He was/is so emotionally distant...and everything was always my fault. Finally I had to leave him because I truly thought I was going insane. When I was away from him and in another relationship it was amazing to experience the difference.

It is frightening that the LGATs are producing a whole breed of these people. What I am curious about is how they even manage to relate to each other!

regards,
'shad'

Quote
The Shadow
It is frightening that the LGATs are producing a whole breed of these people. What I am curious about is how they even manage to relate to each other!

HAHAHAHA! It's not funny but I like how you put that. It's too true. Lgats take perfectly good people & screw them all up. I think your question is an excellent one: how do lgat-infected people relate to each other? I don't think they really do. They go through the motions, using the "tools", and fail miserably to have any real connection. I know that I felt that way in the lgat; I had a deep sense that I & others were being phoney. A therapist I once saw said that we were facades interfacing with facades. That rang true.

skeptic