Brainwashing and Influence in LEC programs
Posted by:
tricky
()
Date: March 02, 2004 04:05AM
Hi all, I'm new to this forum. I have a friend who has done the landmark forum, and the advanced course. It did alarm me when she was so "out there" after the forum... and we've had some intense discussions about it, and managed to stay connected, I feel. I tried to talk her out of the advanced course, and felt like I made some progress, but I was out of town... when I realized that she was determined to take the course, I did what I could to give her some perspective on things, and also to take a middle ground with her, so that I would not be immediately shunned if she were to undergo some kind of fanatical conversion process. We are still close... but it does piss me off this loyalty to LEC. And, I've been taking it apart bit by bit for her, helping her... undoing their subversion in whatever ways I can (for instance, by the use of various anecdotes and stuff, to bring up childhood memories and good memories of who she was and who she is; also, hammering away (subtly) at this lame-ass postivist notion that LEC is based on that the outside world doesn't exist, that everything and everyone somehow revolves around your own primary process and if you can just "remove" or "resolve" the barriers from your ego, then everything you want ("extraoridinary things") will just flow to you; etc. etc.) in order to help her be grounded and giving her a basis to eventually find her way out of this trap/mess that she has so willingly walked into, and now sits inside of, perfectly secure, unaware that to leave would be, difficult.
Anyway, last night I was reading Freud's "Group Psychology and the development of the ego in psychoanalysis" ( I believe that's the exact title). Anyway, it's startling, because it basically lays out the exact LEC formula as I've seen/read/heard about it. There is the discussion of the "primal horde" ie: the group of humans led by a strong leader; all the unconscious regression and group tendencies that powerfully and instinctually come into play in this surrounding, and more and more and more. There is a discussion of group hypnosis in this context... Freud calls it "indirect" hypnosis, which he says is just as powerful as direct trance induction. The primary technique, as Freud lays it out, is for the group leader to be present, and in charge, give a few rules/directives whatever, and then to force the group members into a situation which is completely boring and uninteresting. This, after period of time, causes the mind of the group member to want to withdraw from the outside world. However, as this happens, unconsciously, the member is focusing onto the leader of the group, and essentially going into a hypnotic trance. While the people are bored/tired/uncomfortable out of their minds, the leader is always present, so that unconsciously this transference can take place. As this trance/bond is deepened, it becomes a libidinal bond that is analagous to the child's early relationship to the parent: total suggestibility, fear of the leader, craving for the leader's acceptance, etc. Freud describes such groups as having a "passion" for total authority and to be led.
I read some interesting posts by some of the senior members of this forum, some of whom were coaches/leaders/ etc. I am very interested to know something about the training you receive on the way to that level. Specifically, do you know what some of the primary hypnotic "hooks" that are used are? What are the core "suggestions" that are used to "shape" the group members attending the forum or other courses? For instance, what teaching/exercise/thought stopping/anecdote etc. is used to create the strong belief that loyalty and connection to landmark is so vital and crucial etc. etc? What suggestions/hooks are used to motivate them so strongly to recruit others? What type of ongoing self-exercises are used to break down the individual's identity?
Specifically, what are the key factors that the forum leader must accomplish in order to secure a conversion for a long period of time? For example, yes, that is cool that they do the "everything is meaningless" consciousness raiser and all, but what is the underlying "hook" that is present that binds them to landmark, instead of them just saying "shit, cool, everything is meangingless, bye!" Hopefully, I am being somewhat descriptive here as to what I am talking about.
Ok, well, thanks in advance for any postings/answers!
Anyway, last night I was reading Freud's "Group Psychology and the development of the ego in psychoanalysis" ( I believe that's the exact title). Anyway, it's startling, because it basically lays out the exact LEC formula as I've seen/read/heard about it. There is the discussion of the "primal horde" ie: the group of humans led by a strong leader; all the unconscious regression and group tendencies that powerfully and instinctually come into play in this surrounding, and more and more and more. There is a discussion of group hypnosis in this context... Freud calls it "indirect" hypnosis, which he says is just as powerful as direct trance induction. The primary technique, as Freud lays it out, is for the group leader to be present, and in charge, give a few rules/directives whatever, and then to force the group members into a situation which is completely boring and uninteresting. This, after period of time, causes the mind of the group member to want to withdraw from the outside world. However, as this happens, unconsciously, the member is focusing onto the leader of the group, and essentially going into a hypnotic trance. While the people are bored/tired/uncomfortable out of their minds, the leader is always present, so that unconsciously this transference can take place. As this trance/bond is deepened, it becomes a libidinal bond that is analagous to the child's early relationship to the parent: total suggestibility, fear of the leader, craving for the leader's acceptance, etc. Freud describes such groups as having a "passion" for total authority and to be led.
I read some interesting posts by some of the senior members of this forum, some of whom were coaches/leaders/ etc. I am very interested to know something about the training you receive on the way to that level. Specifically, do you know what some of the primary hypnotic "hooks" that are used are? What are the core "suggestions" that are used to "shape" the group members attending the forum or other courses? For instance, what teaching/exercise/thought stopping/anecdote etc. is used to create the strong belief that loyalty and connection to landmark is so vital and crucial etc. etc? What suggestions/hooks are used to motivate them so strongly to recruit others? What type of ongoing self-exercises are used to break down the individual's identity?
Specifically, what are the key factors that the forum leader must accomplish in order to secure a conversion for a long period of time? For example, yes, that is cool that they do the "everything is meaningless" consciousness raiser and all, but what is the underlying "hook" that is present that binds them to landmark, instead of them just saying "shit, cool, everything is meangingless, bye!" Hopefully, I am being somewhat descriptive here as to what I am talking about.
Ok, well, thanks in advance for any postings/answers!
Brainwashing and Influence in LEC programs
Posted by:
tricky
()
Date: March 04, 2004 01:13AM
Well, from what I've understood of their group formation/conditioning process, long before that point you have already been conditioned to agree with the leader. That is more of a means to an end, I feel, however. But, though you probably already know this, here a few factors in play.
1. The group has bonded with the leader, and has a thirst for obedience as well as a strong craving for leadership and acceptance, and a fear of rejection criticism.
2. Group dynamics and the leader's manipulation have created a situation where you feel totally like what the group is feeling is what you are supposed to be feeling. Everyone starts raising their hand (as they've been conditioned to when asked if they can be included in some affirmation) and so you suddenly feel like you must feel this way, too. Maybe you even feel more accepted and loved, too, just imagining or wanting to believe that it is true and everyone loves you. This is WAY past cognitive dissonance now, you are now in a regressive state of group behavior, where your individual thoughts and qualities have completely given way to the unconscious will of the group, which is directed by the leader. The leader says/suggests/directs, essentially, "we all feel love" and BAM you feel "love" in the pit of your stomach or whatever. Of course, it's not love like your having sex with anyone, or talking, or holding hands, or doing something... you are sitting in a chair and staring at the leader on the stage through your tunnel vision, totally receptive, and then you "feel" love. You might venture to express your love slightly, a handshake, a nod, a glance at your neighbor... but then you probably feel that euphoria curtail sharply as you feel your sense of self again, so you then re-direct your attention back to the leader.
From what I've read, I am actually starting to be somewhat of the opinion that the people in Landmark want to be hypnotized and manipulated, they want to lose themselves... landmark in some cases just provides the fix (albeit rougher, more boring and more manipulative than expected) that they want. Trying to convince someone to not be involved in LEC while they are simultaneously putting themselves through 45 hour marathon conditioning sessions, willingly, may be somewhat paradoxical in itself. A good percentage of them would probably want the conditioning to be even stronger, to erase their identity and their pain more quickly, etc.
Still, just for curiousity's sake, I would really like to know what some former staff member's think of the original question, that is, specifically what key suggestions and hooks are being used to bind people's identities to the name "landmark" and to the idea of the forum, to recruitment, etc. I can probably figure this out by myself but maybe I'm just lazy.
ok, thanks!
1. The group has bonded with the leader, and has a thirst for obedience as well as a strong craving for leadership and acceptance, and a fear of rejection criticism.
2. Group dynamics and the leader's manipulation have created a situation where you feel totally like what the group is feeling is what you are supposed to be feeling. Everyone starts raising their hand (as they've been conditioned to when asked if they can be included in some affirmation) and so you suddenly feel like you must feel this way, too. Maybe you even feel more accepted and loved, too, just imagining or wanting to believe that it is true and everyone loves you. This is WAY past cognitive dissonance now, you are now in a regressive state of group behavior, where your individual thoughts and qualities have completely given way to the unconscious will of the group, which is directed by the leader. The leader says/suggests/directs, essentially, "we all feel love" and BAM you feel "love" in the pit of your stomach or whatever. Of course, it's not love like your having sex with anyone, or talking, or holding hands, or doing something... you are sitting in a chair and staring at the leader on the stage through your tunnel vision, totally receptive, and then you "feel" love. You might venture to express your love slightly, a handshake, a nod, a glance at your neighbor... but then you probably feel that euphoria curtail sharply as you feel your sense of self again, so you then re-direct your attention back to the leader.
From what I've read, I am actually starting to be somewhat of the opinion that the people in Landmark want to be hypnotized and manipulated, they want to lose themselves... landmark in some cases just provides the fix (albeit rougher, more boring and more manipulative than expected) that they want. Trying to convince someone to not be involved in LEC while they are simultaneously putting themselves through 45 hour marathon conditioning sessions, willingly, may be somewhat paradoxical in itself. A good percentage of them would probably want the conditioning to be even stronger, to erase their identity and their pain more quickly, etc.
Still, just for curiousity's sake, I would really like to know what some former staff member's think of the original question, that is, specifically what key suggestions and hooks are being used to bind people's identities to the name "landmark" and to the idea of the forum, to recruitment, etc. I can probably figure this out by myself but maybe I'm just lazy.
ok, thanks!
Brainwashing and Influence in LEC programs
Posted by:
Hope
()
Date: March 04, 2004 05:16AM
I'll start a new thread, though on this. Sorry for the detour.
Brainwashing and Influence in LEC programs
Posted by:
tricky
()
Date: March 04, 2004 08:20AM
No prob. You seem nice. Sometimes when I read things like this, on some level I feel that "see, it's not that bad. It's really sweet, uplifting, unifying experience." I feel this kind of nihilism in the air, and think "why not? How exhilarating to just kind of dissolve or reboot one's personality, in this structured, affirmative, loving environment."
But then, for me, a couple things. One, people clearly come out of there indoctrinated. It's one thing to go in and "resist", but if you are a good strategist, then you will never put yourself in a situation where you are at a complete disadvantage. I mean, somebody wants to sell you a car... are you gonna strap yourself to a chair and let him do all the talking for 50 hours? And, we're not talking about a car, we're talking about "your self" and "reinventing yourself". Scary. And plus, I just wouldn't sit still that long, anyway. Even in an easy chair with cable TV, beer and food, that's just WAY too sedentary for me.
Other thing is... consciousness, higher thought, logical thinking... these things are clearly not taken into account, engaged or valued during forums. Why not? Why the need to confuse, tire, trick and manipulate the mind? It's really saying that the mind is the source of the trouble... so toss it. Just like some yoga groups, etc. "still the mind", and then this mystical-like imagination seems like you can acheive anything... even living in your parent's basement.
I mean, on the surface, it seems like an admirable notion, to communally get together and expand consciousness... but I don't see that consciousness is really expanded at all... quite the reverse, it seems to be a regressive group experience, and heavily flavored with indoctrination and propaganda. It certainly doesn't compare to the richness of a college class, or an in depth/interactive seminar of some sort, on anything from acting to poetry to cooking. Basically, from my vantage it just seems like a cold hollow trap designed for suckers who will try anything for a high or to jump forward to pursue their goals. Air-hard probably isn't guilty at all, because most people there are probably selfish and uncaring anyways... and in a way they're just doing it to themselves.
But I don't know, tell me some more good things, you still might convince me...
ok, thanks!
But then, for me, a couple things. One, people clearly come out of there indoctrinated. It's one thing to go in and "resist", but if you are a good strategist, then you will never put yourself in a situation where you are at a complete disadvantage. I mean, somebody wants to sell you a car... are you gonna strap yourself to a chair and let him do all the talking for 50 hours? And, we're not talking about a car, we're talking about "your self" and "reinventing yourself". Scary. And plus, I just wouldn't sit still that long, anyway. Even in an easy chair with cable TV, beer and food, that's just WAY too sedentary for me.
Other thing is... consciousness, higher thought, logical thinking... these things are clearly not taken into account, engaged or valued during forums. Why not? Why the need to confuse, tire, trick and manipulate the mind? It's really saying that the mind is the source of the trouble... so toss it. Just like some yoga groups, etc. "still the mind", and then this mystical-like imagination seems like you can acheive anything... even living in your parent's basement.
I mean, on the surface, it seems like an admirable notion, to communally get together and expand consciousness... but I don't see that consciousness is really expanded at all... quite the reverse, it seems to be a regressive group experience, and heavily flavored with indoctrination and propaganda. It certainly doesn't compare to the richness of a college class, or an in depth/interactive seminar of some sort, on anything from acting to poetry to cooking. Basically, from my vantage it just seems like a cold hollow trap designed for suckers who will try anything for a high or to jump forward to pursue their goals. Air-hard probably isn't guilty at all, because most people there are probably selfish and uncaring anyways... and in a way they're just doing it to themselves.
But I don't know, tell me some more good things, you still might convince me...
ok, thanks!
Brainwashing and Influence in LEC programs
Posted by:
liz
()
Date: March 05, 2004 07:54AM
a cold hollow trap designed for suckers
i love the way you have so appropriately verbalized this
i m amazed at how these "suckers' become so
obnoxiously agressive when they begin to harass others with
their recruitment /enrollment
Not to mention that if you dont enroll they make you bad
My husband has exited his LGAT ( PD) about 4 weeks ago
and presently he is even amazed as to how he got suckered
in. Luckily he decided thathe did not want to continue to be abused ,working long/hard hours as a commission free salesman,recruitng and enrolling in something he did not believe in ( he had many issues with his LGAT ) only to put money in someone elses bank account. Yes he realizes he was a sucker,but luckily he realized it sooner rather than
later.
Liz
i love the way you have so appropriately verbalized this
i m amazed at how these "suckers' become so
obnoxiously agressive when they begin to harass others with
their recruitment /enrollment
Not to mention that if you dont enroll they make you bad
My husband has exited his LGAT ( PD) about 4 weeks ago
and presently he is even amazed as to how he got suckered
in. Luckily he decided thathe did not want to continue to be abused ,working long/hard hours as a commission free salesman,recruitng and enrolling in something he did not believe in ( he had many issues with his LGAT ) only to put money in someone elses bank account. Yes he realizes he was a sucker,but luckily he realized it sooner rather than
later.
Liz
Brainwashing and Influence in LEC programs
Posted by:
Guy
()
Date: April 14, 2004 08:06AM
Tricky,
Ask your boyfriend and your other friends that've gone through LEC what the 3 levels/gears of their winning formula are. There will be three. Each are created at a particular time. Ask them when they occured.
Guy
Ask your boyfriend and your other friends that've gone through LEC what the 3 levels/gears of their winning formula are. There will be three. Each are created at a particular time. Ask them when they occured.
Guy
Quote
tricky
Well, from what I've understood of their group formation/conditioning process, long before that point you have already been conditioned to agree with the leader. That is more of a means to an end, I feel, however. But, though you probably already know this, here a few factors in play.
1. The group has bonded with the leader, and has a thirst for obedience as well as a strong craving for leadership and acceptance, and a fear of rejection criticism.
2. Group dynamics and the leader's manipulation have created a situation where you feel totally like what the group is feeling is what you are supposed to be feeling. Everyone starts raising their hand (as they've been conditioned to when asked if they can be included in some affirmation) and so you suddenly feel like you must feel this way, too. Maybe you even feel more accepted and loved, too, just imagining or wanting to believe that it is true and everyone loves you. This is WAY past cognitive dissonance now, you are now in a regressive state of group behavior, where your individual thoughts and qualities have completely given way to the unconscious will of the group, which is directed by the leader. The leader says/suggests/directs, essentially, "we all feel love" and BAM you feel "love" in the pit of your stomach or whatever. Of course, it's not love like your having sex with anyone, or talking, or holding hands, or doing something... you are sitting in a chair and staring at the leader on the stage through your tunnel vision, totally receptive, and then you "feel" love. You might venture to express your love slightly, a handshake, a nod, a glance at your neighbor... but then you probably feel that euphoria curtail sharply as you feel your sense of self again, so you then re-direct your attention back to the leader.
From what I've read, I am actually starting to be somewhat of the opinion that the people in Landmark want to be hypnotized and manipulated, they want to lose themselves... landmark in some cases just provides the fix (albeit rougher, more boring and more manipulative than expected) that they want. Trying to convince someone to not be involved in LEC while they are simultaneously putting themselves through 45 hour marathon conditioning sessions, willingly, may be somewhat paradoxical in itself. A good percentage of them would probably want the conditioning to be even stronger, to erase their identity and their pain more quickly, etc.
Still, just for curiousity's sake, I would really like to know what some former staff member's think of the original question, that is, specifically what key suggestions and hooks are being used to bind people's identities to the name "landmark" and to the idea of the forum, to recruitment, etc. I can probably figure this out by myself but maybe I'm just lazy.
ok, thanks!
Brainwashing and Influence in LEC programs
Posted by:
tricky
()
Date: April 14, 2004 11:00PM
Guy,
Thanks for responding! That is very interesting, I hadn't really thought about the winning formula thing. I guess that is different from the figuring out/cataloguing your winning strategies type execrcise(s). This is really super intriguing, actually.
So, are you talking about some kind of new strategies that are developed while within the landmark forum program? Are these new strategies ones that are designed by them (like the way they design an identity) or are these part of the standard curriculum, or are they coached on as to what their winning formula should be?
You mention that they are created at different times... could you elaborate on this? In what sense are they "created"? (I get mixed up because LEC uses the word "create" in kind of a different way). But in general, how would you say they are created? Is there some kind of exercise that they do? Is there some kind of test, to sort of verify the winning formula in the group environment? Is there some kind of negative type thing or bad experience that precedes the introduction of the winning formula?
Also, and I don't mean to ramble on about this, but I'm curious, what is the significance of the three gears of the winning formula?
In your estimation, how do these tie in with the psychology of the individual? That, what would you say their significance is to LEC grads once they have been "created"? Also, do you have any opinions/thoughts as to how the winning formula is used to bind their identity to landmark?
One of the things I was amazed at was the way they kept saying the word landmark every ten seconds... like the word landmark just described everything, their friends in the group, the group, the teachers and leaders, the teachings, the forums etc., the lingo, the mental "exercises", the process of enrollment, "it", just everything. It was like "oh, I'm doing landmark tonight". Just very odd...
Ok, thanks very much for the help, Guy!
Thanks for responding! That is very interesting, I hadn't really thought about the winning formula thing. I guess that is different from the figuring out/cataloguing your winning strategies type execrcise(s). This is really super intriguing, actually.
So, are you talking about some kind of new strategies that are developed while within the landmark forum program? Are these new strategies ones that are designed by them (like the way they design an identity) or are these part of the standard curriculum, or are they coached on as to what their winning formula should be?
You mention that they are created at different times... could you elaborate on this? In what sense are they "created"? (I get mixed up because LEC uses the word "create" in kind of a different way). But in general, how would you say they are created? Is there some kind of exercise that they do? Is there some kind of test, to sort of verify the winning formula in the group environment? Is there some kind of negative type thing or bad experience that precedes the introduction of the winning formula?
Also, and I don't mean to ramble on about this, but I'm curious, what is the significance of the three gears of the winning formula?
In your estimation, how do these tie in with the psychology of the individual? That, what would you say their significance is to LEC grads once they have been "created"? Also, do you have any opinions/thoughts as to how the winning formula is used to bind their identity to landmark?
One of the things I was amazed at was the way they kept saying the word landmark every ten seconds... like the word landmark just described everything, their friends in the group, the group, the teachers and leaders, the teachings, the forums etc., the lingo, the mental "exercises", the process of enrollment, "it", just everything. It was like "oh, I'm doing landmark tonight". Just very odd...
Ok, thanks very much for the help, Guy!
Brainwashing and Influence in LEC programs
Posted by:
Guy
()
Date: April 15, 2004 12:39AM
Tricky,
Keep exploring them....
Your extrapolations are warm to hot.
There are few permutations of the gears.
Everyone has them. You can't escape the mechanics by culture.
They're set in place during particular stages in life.
LEC infers that they can set you free of them and create new ones.
Horse manure, at least as far as LEC is concerned.
Guy
Keep exploring them....
Your extrapolations are warm to hot.
There are few permutations of the gears.
Everyone has them. You can't escape the mechanics by culture.
They're set in place during particular stages in life.
LEC infers that they can set you free of them and create new ones.
Horse manure, at least as far as LEC is concerned.
Guy
Brainwashing and Influence in LEC programs
Posted by:
tricky
()
Date: April 15, 2004 03:18AM
Guy,
Oh, ok, you're saying that these three gears of the winning formula were created during life... I thought you meant it was something "created" in LEC. Could you explain a bit more about
what the gears are? Or what the time periods for their creation is?
I'm not quite sure, are you saying that landmark actually tries to create a new winning formula? And a new three gears, also?
(or tries to reprogram the universal three gears or whatever)
How do they try to do this? Is it basically persuasion, then getting the people to kind of accept it... or is it a trance exercise...
or an interactive thing... does this have anything to do with "disappearing your past" and them playing old macdonald's farm and all that... ?
I mean, by your estimation, how deep does the programming attempt to go? Is it mainly a mental/emotional persuasion/conversion, or is it actually trying to get down to a fundamental level of the person's core being, even to a physiological level? What do you think are some of the most influential exercises/practices they do? Also, in what ways do you think that grads might be intimidated and/or indoctrinated to the authority of leaders and/or landmark itself?
thanks much for your help, this is extremely interesting. thanks!
Oh, ok, you're saying that these three gears of the winning formula were created during life... I thought you meant it was something "created" in LEC. Could you explain a bit more about
what the gears are? Or what the time periods for their creation is?
I'm not quite sure, are you saying that landmark actually tries to create a new winning formula? And a new three gears, also?
(or tries to reprogram the universal three gears or whatever)
How do they try to do this? Is it basically persuasion, then getting the people to kind of accept it... or is it a trance exercise...
or an interactive thing... does this have anything to do with "disappearing your past" and them playing old macdonald's farm and all that... ?
I mean, by your estimation, how deep does the programming attempt to go? Is it mainly a mental/emotional persuasion/conversion, or is it actually trying to get down to a fundamental level of the person's core being, even to a physiological level? What do you think are some of the most influential exercises/practices they do? Also, in what ways do you think that grads might be intimidated and/or indoctrinated to the authority of leaders and/or landmark itself?
thanks much for your help, this is extremely interesting. thanks!
Brainwashing and Influence in LEC programs
Posted by:
tricky
()
Date: April 15, 2004 04:10PM
Guy,
Ok, I've looked into this. I admit that I wasn't completely versed in all of landmark's philosophy... I did some research
and I did overlook the whole "winning strategy" thing, although I have heard it talked about... I had understood it to be
something that was just like "see the stupid way you act? Ok, forget that, now be a landmark person." Anyways, I
do admit, there is something interesting, almost seductive in the way the concept is laid out. That's one of the things that
bugs me... because I know this is a destructive group, I've seen the (really) odd effects of it... the anxiety, the zealousness,
the crying jags, the mood swings, the weird dissociative behavior as people start to discuss/snap out of what happened,
personality changes... yet some of the philosophy is such a "feel good" kind of thing that I am almost seduced by it, in a
way.
Anyway, talked to my boyfriend about this, briefly. He was really preoccupied and didn't seem to want to discuss it. He
got real quiet when I asked him about his winning strategies. Then he said he didn't remember what that was. Then when
I questioned him further, he said he didn't remember, and he didn't feel like talking about landmark. So, that does kind of
bug me, because it seems like maybe something that he's holding on to at some level. (good call, Guy!) Of course, he
was in traffic, stressed, only had a second to talk, etc. I will let you know what we eventually talk about.
Ok, just for fun... I will take a quick look at the "winning strategy" concept. I mean, I see other logical fallacies and absurdities
in landmark (really one would be enough), such as "you create everything good or bad that happens to you". That in particular,
seems to posit some kind of strange, unexplainable psychic multiverse where we are all actually alone, nothing exists except
us, and whatever happens to us is really created by our will, consciously or subconsciously. So, if I am one years old baby living
in Viet Nam, and a B52 bomber drops a bomb on me, I created that, etc. etc. This seems to contradict the idea of an objective universe,
as well as the existence of other minds, etc. I suppose you could regress all the way back to Descarte and just figure everything
could just be a dream... but if we accpet the fact that there is a real world, and that you, me, landmark, and landmark recruits actually exist in a real world, it is far more likely that this is just a totally subjective truth bending philosophy which is very useful for
getting people into their heads and also making it more easy to program/control them. And also, therefore, that we DO NOT create/control everything that occurs to us in our lives, but that we, as individuals, are part of an interconnected system where other individuals, and society at large, have a tremendous effect on our lives and what we experience. Therefore, that we "create" everything that happens to us, is false.
Anyways, the "winning strategy". I'll just start, because I largely feel that this is just feel good hogwash that is a lot like chinese food -
you eat it and your still hungry an hour (or two years) later. Still, here goes:
"you did not design your winning strategy, it designed you." Strategy, websters defines as "A plan of action resulting from strategy or intended to accomplish a specific goal." synonomous with "plan". That a strategy exists seems to imply that some kind of conscious awareness exists. If we are to say that an UNCONSCIOUSLY designed strategy actually "designed" or brought our conscious self and our entire life into being, then that is in fact saying that the root of ALL our adaptive, conscious ego mechanisms is either an unconscious reflex to external stimuli, or that there is in fact some kind of unconscious "person within the person" who is actually designing you. Of course they probably intend the former... the latter reeks of a kind of scientology almost. Ok, but in regards to the former, the nature of the unconscious mind has been very thoroughly explained by Freud. The basic principle of the unconscious mind is the wish. The unconscious mind forms an idea of what it wants/needs. It does not actually know the difference between the wish image, and the actual wished for object itself. The ego is the adaptive part of the personality that actually is based in self awareness and consciousness. And the ego develops strategies in order to get what it wants/needs. The ego can continue to develop new and better strategies, ad-infinitum, as needed. That is how the human race survives. Yes, we can say that sometimes we, as individuals or as groups, get trapped in a rut of trying to use a limited number of strategies etc. But we can go beyond these, if we have the will, and, further, we designed these strategies and then lazily kept using them. "Strategies" can not "design" us. We as individuals are more than just what we do to get what we want. Consciousness and self awareness, love and all the richness of the human mind and spirit can take us way beyond that basic, machine-like conception of what a human is.
Landmark, obviously, has a winning strategy, and does not deviate from it. Landmark, the corporation, the legal individual entity, follows a totally regimented plan that always repeats the same actions. I've definitely seen all the info about how things are set up, about the lingo, etc, which is from everything I've heard, very structured. A totally unveered away from "winning strategy". The shadow of landmark. If a winning strategy is a formula that is a compensation for what's NOT possible, then therefore landmark's winning strategy must also be a compensation for something not possible, and must also therefore expand the scope of what's not possible. And, in my view, what's not possible for landmark forum as a group is freedom. The infinite possibility of which they speak, etc.
I will admit that some of their ideas do kind of hint at some principles of change and transformation... but administered in such heavy doses, and dripping in the sticky sweetness of regressive/mystical/positivist psychology, I still do need to say that Landmark's system is totally flawed and obviously not some kind of world-transforming revolutionary thing.
Ok, I've looked into this. I admit that I wasn't completely versed in all of landmark's philosophy... I did some research
and I did overlook the whole "winning strategy" thing, although I have heard it talked about... I had understood it to be
something that was just like "see the stupid way you act? Ok, forget that, now be a landmark person." Anyways, I
do admit, there is something interesting, almost seductive in the way the concept is laid out. That's one of the things that
bugs me... because I know this is a destructive group, I've seen the (really) odd effects of it... the anxiety, the zealousness,
the crying jags, the mood swings, the weird dissociative behavior as people start to discuss/snap out of what happened,
personality changes... yet some of the philosophy is such a "feel good" kind of thing that I am almost seduced by it, in a
way.
Anyway, talked to my boyfriend about this, briefly. He was really preoccupied and didn't seem to want to discuss it. He
got real quiet when I asked him about his winning strategies. Then he said he didn't remember what that was. Then when
I questioned him further, he said he didn't remember, and he didn't feel like talking about landmark. So, that does kind of
bug me, because it seems like maybe something that he's holding on to at some level. (good call, Guy!) Of course, he
was in traffic, stressed, only had a second to talk, etc. I will let you know what we eventually talk about.
Ok, just for fun... I will take a quick look at the "winning strategy" concept. I mean, I see other logical fallacies and absurdities
in landmark (really one would be enough), such as "you create everything good or bad that happens to you". That in particular,
seems to posit some kind of strange, unexplainable psychic multiverse where we are all actually alone, nothing exists except
us, and whatever happens to us is really created by our will, consciously or subconsciously. So, if I am one years old baby living
in Viet Nam, and a B52 bomber drops a bomb on me, I created that, etc. etc. This seems to contradict the idea of an objective universe,
as well as the existence of other minds, etc. I suppose you could regress all the way back to Descarte and just figure everything
could just be a dream... but if we accpet the fact that there is a real world, and that you, me, landmark, and landmark recruits actually exist in a real world, it is far more likely that this is just a totally subjective truth bending philosophy which is very useful for
getting people into their heads and also making it more easy to program/control them. And also, therefore, that we DO NOT create/control everything that occurs to us in our lives, but that we, as individuals, are part of an interconnected system where other individuals, and society at large, have a tremendous effect on our lives and what we experience. Therefore, that we "create" everything that happens to us, is false.
Anyways, the "winning strategy". I'll just start, because I largely feel that this is just feel good hogwash that is a lot like chinese food -
you eat it and your still hungry an hour (or two years) later. Still, here goes:
"you did not design your winning strategy, it designed you." Strategy, websters defines as "A plan of action resulting from strategy or intended to accomplish a specific goal." synonomous with "plan". That a strategy exists seems to imply that some kind of conscious awareness exists. If we are to say that an UNCONSCIOUSLY designed strategy actually "designed" or brought our conscious self and our entire life into being, then that is in fact saying that the root of ALL our adaptive, conscious ego mechanisms is either an unconscious reflex to external stimuli, or that there is in fact some kind of unconscious "person within the person" who is actually designing you. Of course they probably intend the former... the latter reeks of a kind of scientology almost. Ok, but in regards to the former, the nature of the unconscious mind has been very thoroughly explained by Freud. The basic principle of the unconscious mind is the wish. The unconscious mind forms an idea of what it wants/needs. It does not actually know the difference between the wish image, and the actual wished for object itself. The ego is the adaptive part of the personality that actually is based in self awareness and consciousness. And the ego develops strategies in order to get what it wants/needs. The ego can continue to develop new and better strategies, ad-infinitum, as needed. That is how the human race survives. Yes, we can say that sometimes we, as individuals or as groups, get trapped in a rut of trying to use a limited number of strategies etc. But we can go beyond these, if we have the will, and, further, we designed these strategies and then lazily kept using them. "Strategies" can not "design" us. We as individuals are more than just what we do to get what we want. Consciousness and self awareness, love and all the richness of the human mind and spirit can take us way beyond that basic, machine-like conception of what a human is.
Landmark, obviously, has a winning strategy, and does not deviate from it. Landmark, the corporation, the legal individual entity, follows a totally regimented plan that always repeats the same actions. I've definitely seen all the info about how things are set up, about the lingo, etc, which is from everything I've heard, very structured. A totally unveered away from "winning strategy". The shadow of landmark. If a winning strategy is a formula that is a compensation for what's NOT possible, then therefore landmark's winning strategy must also be a compensation for something not possible, and must also therefore expand the scope of what's not possible. And, in my view, what's not possible for landmark forum as a group is freedom. The infinite possibility of which they speak, etc.
I will admit that some of their ideas do kind of hint at some principles of change and transformation... but administered in such heavy doses, and dripping in the sticky sweetness of regressive/mystical/positivist psychology, I still do need to say that Landmark's system is totally flawed and obviously not some kind of world-transforming revolutionary thing.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.