gc said:
You would remember the admonition from forum leaders, "look it up, don't make it up."

I never took the Forum. I don't remember that from the Est Training. Nor do I think "Gee, what would an Est trainer do?"

I did look up the post of Templar's I was referring to. It appears to have been edited. Mispelled words are now spelled correctly. The quote I read indicated he wished more Landmark people were in the building. But I can't find that post now. In the post I was referring to coincidence was mispelled coincedence. If it has been cleaned up then I congratulate you for doing so. I can't find it now.

If you tell me no one from Landmark was in the building I believe you. You see after 25 years of being away from it, I'm out of touch. I saw a vulgar, hateful post and wondered what was up.

I'm sure you met some nice people while involved in Landmark. And even the miserable "Estholes" you met probably don't deserve having a 747 land on their heads. Although, I still have an old list I keep from the bad old days of people.....

But, fair enough gc, I stand corrected. And I'm glad to hear that the Landmark offices were empty. I new some people there that were not so lucky. Hence, my sensitivity to the subject. Even if I did recognize it as just a poor attempt at humor.

Thanks for the clarification.

Quote

But there are still some people in the world that think communism is a good thing. I disagree with them. But they are entitled to their opinion.

Wary, is there any valid reason why communism isn't for you? Has the "wrongness" of communism been found by the use of your brain? ...or is it simply subjective, unjustified 'opinion,' such as liking the movie Amadeus or hating the colour yellow? If it is the latter, where do your opinions come from and why do you bother holding them?

This is where we can turn back to the black and white concept...

When a person talks about "black and white," he is talking about "right and wrong." To deny blacks and whites exist leaves you with two options. Either there is no right and wrong or black and white and the entire concept even of morality is bunk (the direction scholarly "ethical theory" is currently headed, in fact), or all things that we might deem to be right or wrong can actually be rated on a scale among various shades of grey. You might rank communism a bit blacker and another might rank it a bit whiter. So what?

Without a concept of right and wrong, you could not pass judgements on anything, anyone, any form of government. Because grey is a mixture of black and white, without black and white you lose all grey as well. Your dislike of communism is completely unjustified, as is your dislike of preists that molest little boys. And hey, I [i:52755b81e8]like[/i:52755b81e8] preists that molest little boys, and my opinion is equally valid, so screw your opinion!

How do we find our way out of this quagmire? [i:52755b81e8]Principles[/i:52755b81e8]. They need to be consciously identified and acted upon. (honestly, I think most people do not do this--as possibly re-evidenced by socrates' statements, on many peoples' choices of political parties). Yours tell you (quite rightly, 'imho') that the molestation of little boys is foul and disgusting. Many would not identify these principles [i:52755b81e8]as[/i:52755b81e8] principles, and therefore not question them. [i:52755b81e8]Why[/i:52755b81e8] is the molestation of little boys wrong? There are hundreds of reasons, I know, but in the end it just [i:52755b81e8]is[/i:52755b81e8]--a known, unquestioned truth. It is failure to identify [i:52755b81e8]justified[/i:52755b81e8] principles (while certainly not the sole cause, or a universal one) that leaves a person searching for certainty and finding it in an organization like Landmark.

You and I agree in our dislike of communism. My principles hold that an individual's life and body belongs to himself. Labor is an extension of the body, a conscious, creative act, done to support the laborer's own life. Just as I have no right to take your life, I have no right to take your labor or the products of it either. Communists have principles as well, but once princples are fully established and fully undertood, then one understands what it is to have certainty, to think in black and white (which, btw, can not involve shutting out the opposing argument. Certainty requires that you constantly are evaluating your own system of principles for holes, flaws, contradictions, etc. Justified opposing arguments are often best for this.) Once principles are established between both parties, [i:52755b81e8]that[/i:52755b81e8] is when a constructive conversation can take place, and the real 'blacks' and 'whites' can emerge.

Tommorrow, I think I shall torture all by posting an 18-chapter book. :twisted:

The devil, as usual, is in the details:

"In fact, an independent public opinion pollster that did a survey of Forum graduates showed a very high rate of satisfaction among participants. 7 out of 10 had it as one of their most rewarding experience. (Yankelovich DYG)"

Since we are on the subject of facts, inquiring minds would like to know,

1. Who comissioned this survey ? How much was Yankelovich compensated for doing it ?

2. When was it performed ? Was it ever repeated ?

3. What was the sample size ? What was the breakout in age and gender ?

4. How long after their training did they respond to this survey ?
Were follow ups done ?

5. What exactly was asked in the survey ? What options did the respondents have in answering the survey ? Was it a single true-false question, "would you say that this was one of the most valuable experiences of your life, sir or madam ?", or a "rate the following on a one to ten", or ...?

6. Ahem. How were the respondents selected ? If a percentage of the "graduates" wanted no more contact with the est/forum organization, and a survey person calls them one month after their delightful experience, what do you imagine the probability is that they would want to communicate with them ? Or was it given to people taking advanced courses, or people who had expressed an interest in responding to a survey in advance ?

Can't answer any of the above ? Hardly comes as a surprise. The est/forum crowd, in my direct experience, loves to sling impressive factoids which may, in and of themselves, be true enough, but their complexion decidedly changes on close scrutiny. Ask anyone who has worked in the media, politics, or both, about the corrupt nature of surveys. To naively assert a simple metric as evidence, is... well, awfully naive... if not downright gullible.

As I was just now saying. This tidbit comes in from the New York Times:

"The attorney general's civil suit accuses the drug giant GlaxoSmithKline of committing fraud by concealing negative information about Paxil, a drug used to treat depression. The suit says that the company conducted five clinical trials of Paxil in adolescents and children, yet published only one study whose mixed results it deemed positive. The company sat on two major studies for up to four years, although the results of one were divulged by a whistle-blower at a medical conference in 1999 and all of the studies were submitted to the Food and Drug Administration in 2002 when the company sought approval for new uses of Paxil. At that time it became apparent that Paxil was no more effective than a placebo in treating adolescent depression and might even provoke suicidal thoughts."

Socrates inquired about the Yankelovich studies legitimacy and then asked:

"Can't answer any of the above ? Hardly comes as a surprise. The est/forum crowd, in my direct experience, loves to sling impressive..."

Good questions all, and all though I can't answer them personally most of your questions can be answered by clicking on the hyperlink below.

[www.landmarkeducation.com]

Is Yankelovich an unwitting dupe or a shill for Landmark? I don't know. But I searched the web and found a lot of info on him. His credentials seem to be impeccable.

Briefly, it was a 1,300 person study that was done using scientifically valid methods. Now, you can question the results, but it would appear to be more trustworthy than anonymous posts on a message board indicating their like or dislike of something.

After all, you don't know if warytraveller2, elena, cosmophilosopher or templar are all being posted by the same person, do you?

Show me an indepenndently produced scientific study by a reputable pollster telling me that 8 out of 10 Landmark participants suffer from severe emotional distress and I'll view it with the credibility it deserves.

landmark won't allow anyone except whom they approve to research them.

So please, quit covering for them.

And if warytraveller2, elena, cosmophilosopher or templar are all the same person, then you, Wary, have multiple personalities and aren't all there to begin with. :D Probably induced by your est "training."

It's more than obvious all your posts are meant to discredit anyone who has any disagreement with landmark. Go back to your "center" and get better "training" from your "couch" on how to convince us we're all wrong 'cause what you're doing now isn't even close to working. Pleeaaase. :roll: Whatever!!! :roll:

very well then, I'm not to discount anyone's experience here. I fully accept that Warytraveller is speaking in good faith, from his point of view, although it may be a naive good faith. I hold no animus toward him, her, or them, as the case may be.

I have had more time with the EST group, pre Forum, than many have, although no internal experience as a volunteer or member of their clan.

Simultaneously I studied hard with the NLP schools, each of those being a subdiscipline unto itself, Bandler, Grinder (who to this day advocates something akin to being a psychopath, although his precise intention is obscure, and he shows no inclination to explain the distinction between being a "warrior" and a sociopath or a partial sociopath... but I well might misunderstand precisely what he is getting at), Dilts, and so forth.

One of my great misgivings about EST at that time was how impoverished their sense of the inner life was. (this is also considered a critical diagnostic sign for the sociopathic mindset, a very flat, superficial inner landscape... much external bravado, seductiveness, and larger than life persona, that on close examination reveals the lights-on-but -nobody-home personality)

I would repeatedly ask the training persons polite, authentically curious questions based on the things I had been learning in NLP about the relationship between their external manipulations and internal psychic processes. They appeared to be absolutely dumbfounded. Clearly, this wasn't a hostile challenge that they had been trained to reflect back on their interlocutor. You could also sense the deep discomfort they felt at having no sufficient answer. Much squirming and rhetorical easing out the back door ensued. One of them finally concluded that my questions had put the room into a condition of "swirl", whatever in the land of Goshen that is intended to mean, and the only way we could get out of this confounded "swirl" was to drop the question.

For one uncomfortable moment, our dear trainer had that frightened look of a man who was suddenly aware that he was staring into the Void and as Neitzche (may have) said, the Void was starting to stare back.

From the NY Times thanks to Socrates:

"The attorney general's civil suit accuses the drug giant GlaxoSmithKline of committing fraud by concealing negative information about Paxil, a drug used to treat depression. The suit says that the company conducted ....."


Thank God for the Food and Drug Administration. GSK is also the makers of Tums, Contac, Tagamet, to name a few. Do you think we should stop using them in light of this scandal?

ana323 wrote about her experience as a Yugoslavian national that moved to the United States:

"And I agree with whomever said that nothing is black and white. (I'm sorry i'm not looking up any of your names or doing that quoting thing, I'm just too lazy to do it right now.) I am from the former Yugoslavia, and this country bombed my family. While that's horrendous and awful, and most of my family cannot stand this country because of the pain it inflicted on them, it does not prevent me from seeing the benefits and value that do exist in this system and society. I am not blinded from seeing what works.
I feel the same way about everything. When I am over there, I try to share with them that this place is not all black and try to provide some of the value from here. When I am over here, I like to educate people on some of the benefits and some of the good concepts that existed in that communist society - even though so much about it didn't work."

I didn't bring up the communism issue. That was ana323's post.

But can you imagine how you would feel about a country that dropped bombs on your neighborhood, destroyed your bridges and powerplants, killed your friends etc.??

You'd probably have a prejudice towards Americans if you lived in Serbia. If not a downright hatred for them. Can you blame them? It would be black and white. The Evil Empire reigning terror on the defenseless people of Yugoslavia.

I could take the "esthole" position on this.

The Yugoslavian Serbs created their own misery. They have no one to blame but themselves. They are responsible. If they stood up for what is right and decent the Serbs would have stopped the death squads that were "cleansing" Muslims from Kosovo. The United States was fighting a just war to save millions from being slaughtered.

But I don't think it's that simple. And most Serbs probably wouldn't buy that logic. They probably feel they were victims of an evil oppressor. Can you blame them? I can't.

I also believe the United States is the greatest country the world has ever known. Filled with some of the most decent people also. But lot's of people hate us.

Why?

I NEVER said nothing is black and white. That was ana323 paraphrasing me.

But SOMETIMES it's not that clear cut, now is it?

I am not warytraveller.

I didnt shed a tear for any landmark employees who may have died in the terrorist attack.

I dont mind being thought of as insensitive cold or whatever words you want to use to define what feelings I inspire in anyone with my posts.

I think people who say things like "I feel sorry for you Templar" or "I pity you templar and those around you" are self righteous pompus mental cases who should probably increase thier medication.

I have never been involved with an LGAT, a MLMS, destructive church, cultic or abusive relationships, nor am I member of any hate groups.

I never claim to be an expert on anything. I am the least qualified person with an opinion on this board. I am surrounded by lawyers, nurses, and all sorts of professional people who know a hell of alot more about cults, hypnosis, NLP, mind control and all that other shit.

However, I also know evil when I see it. And unlike many other things in this life that are not black and white. Good and evil are. There is nothing you can do or say or argue that will change what I know, live and believe. Such an attempt would be the equivilant of pissing on my leg and trying to tell me its raining. If you piss on my leg Ill cut off your pisser. Anyone who has bothered to scour my posts for spelling errors will attest to that.

"Sympathy" is just a word in the dictionary found somewhere between 'shit' and 'syphilis'. Have a nice day!!