Quote
Blue Pill
17. EVERYONE is a properly paid staff member with proper employment contracts, salaries & benefits. ABSOLUTELY NO volunteers. Fair checks and balances on staff performance, not geared up towards purely Sales but about things like Customer satisfaction, life experience improvement etc etc.
18. Sales staff are just that, Sales staff. They are not unpaid, abused slave labour to be treated like dirt. Their performance will be measured of course, but the goal will always be about Customer satisfaction.

Ha ha ha, this is easy.

Landmark Education would simply shut itself down and sell off its holdings for cash before it would EVER comply with criteria 17 and 18.

For a case study on that, just see this article from Cult News :

Why did Landmark Education leave France?
[www.cultnews.com]

"Blue Pill’s LGAT design, here we go!

1. It would be a clearly defined NOT FOR PROFIT financial structure. No dividends, no shady financial structures. Accounts would be posted in black and white on the company website every quarter for all to see. Investment in developing the business is fine as long as it is in line with the non profit structure.
2. The board to be from accountable, professionally trained areas in appropriate backgrounds (eg – Psychology, Philosophy etc)
3. The founder(s) is (are) not the subject of significant allegations of legal or personal malfeasance
4. Its objective would be human happiness and fulfilment, tolerance for all faiths and belief systems"


Just for the sake of information, the Great Life Foundation in Salt Lake City has been operating for the last three years under this basis. It's a non-profit (and generates considerable donations to charity each year.) It's run by a large, regularly-revolving board populated with professionals including psychologists. And, nobody could really say who the "founders" are. It's a completely grad-operated and controlled organization.

At first, we had no idea if a training company could exist without the control and momentum supplied by a charismatic leader. It actually took some time to prove that it could be done. But, to date, this training is growing and thriving.

I didn't pick through the rest of your list (because it seemed to be a mix of common sense and Blue Pill's personal biases,) but I thought you might be interested in noting the existence of a full-fledged, non-profit, graduate-run LGAT.

Quote
boonetahoe
"Blue Pill’s LGAT design, here we go!

1. It would be a clearly defined NOT FOR PROFIT financial structure. No dividends, no shady financial structures. Accounts would be posted in black and white on the company website every quarter for all to see. Investment in developing the business is fine as long as it is in line with the non profit structure.
2. The board to be from accountable, professionally trained areas in appropriate backgrounds (eg – Psychology, Philosophy etc)
3. The founder(s) is (are) not the subject of significant allegations of legal or personal malfeasance
4. Its objective would be human happiness and fulfilment, tolerance for all faiths and belief systems"


Just for the sake of information, the Great Life Foundation in Salt Lake City has been operating for the last three years under this basis. It's a non-profit (and generates considerable donations to charity each year.) It's run by a large, regularly-revolving board populated with professionals including psychologists. And, nobody could really say who the "founders" are. It's a completely grad-operated and controlled organization.

At first, we had no idea if a training company could exist without the control and momentum supplied by a charismatic leader. It actually took some time to prove that it could be done. But, to date, this training is growing and thriving.

I didn't pick through the rest of your list (because it seemed to be a mix of common sense and Blue Pill's personal biases,) but I thought you might be interested in noting the existence of a full-fledged, non-profit, graduate-run LGAT.

what are your conceptual foundations, you know, we are not easily convinced ...
:lol:

NOT the easiest "market" to sell the idea of a training. At the same time, thanks for being so candid.

The basic concept comes from the Lifespring model -- experiential group training where a trainee goes through a cycle of: 1. taking a hard look at what's not working in particular areas of life, 2. then learning some tools to break through non-working patterns, 3. then at last experiencing a life-affirming peak experience. That's the basic cadence of each training.

There's no underlying philosophy per se, unless you count the body of psychology and conventional wisdom that's building around the whole "conscious living" movement in our society.

Nobody is clearer about the tendency for these trainings to become cults than we are. Many of the supporters of the Great Life Foundation originally experienced a similar life training from Hans and Sally Berger with Impact Trainings. The dictionary definition of a cult is: "a system of religious or spiritual beliefs, especially an informal and transient belief system regarded by others as misguided, unorthodox, extremist or fals, and directed by a charismatic, authoritarian leader" (MSN encarta.)

Due in large part to our former experience with what in our eyes was a "cult," we came together to build a cult-proof system that would prevent any one person or philosophy from dominating and taking advantage of the training. So, the basic concepts that arise in the training come from collaborative efforts among graduates -- new training material is formed by groups of people who come together and create it. Then other groups of graduates regularly review the material and put forward suggested changes. These groups revolve in membership as committee members roll on and off during two year terms.

To be honest, it was a difficult organizational model to get moving. Everyone was so suspicious that the organization wouldn't allow them to make their own contribution -- everyone was waiting for some charismatic figure to seize control. Also, there is something about human nature that thrives when there's a Hans Berger telling us what to do. Without that, the training company at first grew slowly.

But, we're experiencing solid growth now and the collaborative model is really proving that this can be done without the dark side of egomania that's almost ubiquitous among these programs.

Quote

Due in large part to our former experience with what in our eyes was a "cult," we came together to build a cult-proof system that would prevent any one person or philosophy from dominating and taking advantage of the training. So, the basic concepts that arise in the training come from collaborative efforts among graduates -- new training material is formed by groups of people who come together and create it. Then other groups of graduates regularly review the material and put forward suggested changes. These groups revolve in membership as committee members roll on and off during two year terms.

so sorry boonetahoe, but my thoughts on an LGAT not being cultish is like attempting to neutralise the odour of a pile of fresh manure.
I guess for me, its the thought of manure being adapted to appear unlike the crap it is, that disturbs me.

not to start a flame war. . .

But, nobody likes to think that they NEED something like this. It's much more comfortable to discard these seminars as useless than it is to imagine that I might learn something I didn't know.

Of course, it's possible that the trainings are useless and that they're a "fresh pile of manure." Considering human nature, though, it's more likely that we're just eager to throw out the things that challenge our worldview. Because, if these trainings were useful, it might mean that we could use them which might mean that we should attend one, etc..

And yet, I couldn't honestly defend the track record of these trainings -- they've been abused by megalomaniacs for a long time. It's tough to break through the general consensus of this board that they're harmful (because they have so often been harmful.) And still. . .

A good friend of mine is a psychologist and for years he sang the same tune: these trainings are worthless. Then, by some fluke, he agreed to experience the Great Life training. He was blown away. He couldn't believe how much of a difference it created in his own life in such a short period.

Also, two friends of mine who are licensed marriage and substance abuse counselors just completed the first two trainings. They felt likewise.

I'm no neophyte, either. I've watched these trainings develop over the last fifteen years since I first experienced an experiential training. There's value there for nearly everyone (so long as someone's not reaching into your pocket at the same time as you're getting vulnerable about your life.)

Quote

But, nobody likes to think that they NEED something like this. It's much more comfortable to discard these seminars as useless than it is to imagine that I might learn something I didn't know.

Of course, it's possible that the trainings are useless and that they're a "fresh pile of manure." Considering human nature, though, it's more likely that we're just eager to throw out the things that challenge our worldview. Because, if these trainings were useful, it might mean that we could use them which might mean that we should attend one, etc..

Firstly, my responses to you are not an attack on you personally, I am stating my own opinion.

Of course most of us will not respond well to the thought of NEEDing something, this implies inadequacy, no one wants to feel that way. Also true is that many of us do not enjoy having our world views challenged by anything or anyone and will consequently discard anything or anyone that does. To do the above is basic to human nature and not necessarily rectified by attending an LGAT.
My opinion of LGATs comes from the very base upon which they stand.
The base upon which LGATs stand is the precept; "we have something unique, necessary, and life changing to offer, and if you reject what we have to offer, you are in denial of your imperfections. You will continue to lack at a fundamental level, and you are weak and narrow minded for not giving what we have to offer, a chance to see that our program is indeed a critical component to your potentiality as a human being."
It is not just how LGATs are sold that gives me great pause, it is the philosophical views that underpin the LGATs in operation. There is an undeniable element of abolutism and totalistic psycychology embodied in even the most seemingly benign LGAT.

All of which I believe, is great potential to do more harm than good to a world filled with people where NOT ONE is the same as the other.

Quote
ON2 LF

Quote

But, nobody likes to think that they NEED something like this. It's much more comfortable to discard these seminars as useless than it is to imagine that I might learn something I didn't know.

Of course, it's possible that the trainings are useless and that they're a "fresh pile of manure." Considering human nature, though, it's more likely that we're just eager to throw out the things that challenge our worldview. Because, if these trainings were useful, it might mean that we could use them which might mean that we should attend one, etc..

Firstly, my responses to you are not an attack on you personally, I am stating my own opinion.

Of course most of us will not respond well to the thought of NEEDing something, this implies inadequacy, no one wants to feel that way. Also true is that many of us do not enjoy having our world views challenged by anything or anyone and will consequently discard anything or anyone that does. To do the above is basic to human nature and not necessarily rectified by attending an LGAT.
My opinion of LGATs comes from the very base upon which they stand.
The base upon which LGATs stand is the precept; "we have something unique, necessary, and life changing to offer, and if you reject what we have to offer, you are in denial of your imperfections. You will continue to lack at a fundamental level, and you are weak and narrow minded for not giving what we have to offer, a chance to see that our program is indeed a critical component to your potentiality as a human being."
It is not just how LGATs are sold that gives me great pause, it is the philosophical views that underpin the LGATs in operation. There is an undeniable element of abolutism and totalistic psycychology embodied in even the most seemingly benign LGAT.

All of which I believe, is great potential to do more harm than good to a world filled with people where NOT ONE is the same as the other.

A very well-thought out reply. . . I see the same thing regarding that absolutist view of the world and the "training" that often come from LGATs. The cult isn't always just about a charismatic leader, it can be about a philosophy too.

However, what if an LGAT were clear that the philosophy is common, even common sense, but that the method (experiential game-play) is unique? I, for one, have attended a million didactic seminars and have noted that their power to transform and to impact the lives of the attendees is far inferior to the experiential environment.

By the way, what do you mean by "totalistic psychology?"

Quote

I see the same thing regarding that absolutist view of the world and the "training" that often come from LGATs. The cult isn't always just about a charismatic leader, it can be about a philosophy too.

An LGAT without an absolutist view would not be what it is. How are the leader and the philosophy separate?

Quote

However, what if an LGAT were clear that the philosophy is common, even common sense, but that the method (experiential game-play) is unique? I, for one, have attended a million didactic seminars and have noted that their power to transform and to impact the lives of the attendees is far inferior to the experiential environment.

The only philosophy that would seem to fit in that instance, is 'live and learn'. How does one invent a 'unique' method to actively engaging in life and growing in knowledge as a result of this engagement? It seems to me that if this method includes activity other than just getting out of bed every morning, going to work, raising kids, doing social activites, being fairly optimistic about life etc.. then that method is going to be designed to illustrate something other than realistic everyday normal life. This is where, I believe, LGATs erroneously impart philosophies.
Here is a fact, not a philosophy: all of life from beginning to end, results in transformation of a human being, to both good or bad, why the NEED to make this happen artificially or in a matter of a few days? Why the need to manipulate that process with 'tools' that often boil down to being mere social or psychological constructs, constructs that are often conceived in the throes of whatever the social or philosophical climate of the time might be?

Quote

By the way, what do you mean by "totalistic psychology?"

To put it a bit simplistically, [i:c230cf103b]'one-size-fits-all and don't anyone dare challenge or disagree with this law'.[/i:c230cf103b]

Quote
ON2 LF

Quote

I see the same thing regarding that absolutist view of the world and the "training" that often come from LGATs. The cult isn't always just about a charismatic leader, it can be about a philosophy too.

An LGAT without an absolutist view would not be what it is. How are the leader and the philosophy separate?

I'm implying that the leader often prostitutes the method and the philosophy toward the goal of self-aggrandizement. But, a cult of philosophy can be pretty damaging too (standing alone.)

Quote

However, what if an LGAT were clear that the philosophy is common, even common sense, but that the method (experiential game-play) is unique? I, for one, have attended a million didactic seminars and have noted that their power to transform and to impact the lives of the attendees is far inferior to the experiential environment.

The only philosophy that would seem to fit in that instance, is 'live and learn'. How does one invent a 'unique' method to actively engaging in life and growing in knowledge as a result of this engagement? It seems to me that if this method includes activity other than just getting out of bed every morning, going to work, raising kids, doing social activites, being fairly optimistic about life etc.. then that method is going to be designed to illustrate something other than realistic everyday normal life. This is where, I believe, LGATs erroneously impart philosophies.
Here is a fact, not a philosophy: all of life from beginning to end, results in transformation of a human being, to both good or bad, why the NEED to make this happen artificially or in a matter of a few days? Why the need to manipulate that process with 'tools' that often boil down to being mere social or psychological constructs, constructs that are often conceived in the throes of whatever the social or philosophical climate of the time might be?


I suppose that you'd have to agree that learning in life is a good thing and that the faster we achieve spiritual and psychological maturity, the better. Otherwise, why live examined lives at all?

So if an examined life = a good thing, then a more examine life = an even better thing.

These trainings often accelerate clarity and experience. In my experience, they condense life experience and heighten the learning moments.

Quote

By the way, what do you mean by "totalistic psychology?"

To put it a bit simplistically, [i:5cc713b5ce]'one-size-fits-all and don't anyone dare challenge or disagree with this law'.[/i:5cc713b5ce]

That's not my experience of the LGAT I'm working with (but I know what you mean.)