Quote

I am curious to know how the top level people, who are actually making money from this, insulate themselves from the same techniques that catch everyone else. Are they sociopaths?

I believe so. And I believe their "seminars" implant sociopathic tendencies into attendees.

Quote

Is the double-talk language something that comes from hypnotic suggestion? Why aren't these people able to see how stupid it sounds to say "it's everything and it's nothing," "what you said is not wrong nor is is right, it is what it is," "I got everything from it and yet I got nothing," "I knew all this before, yet I didn't know anything," "I am the same person I was before I went, but now I am transformed."

I believe the double-speak comes from hypnotic suggestion, and also [b:53dfe4099f]leads[/b:53dfe4099f] to hypnotic suggestion.

The reason Landmark's seminars are so long (at least 15 hours a day, 3 days in a row), physically and emotionally uncomfortable, and confusing is because they want attendees to break down. This emotional breakdown is achieved through physical and mental exhaustion and mental confusion and emotional stress.

The moment of the mind entering this condition has been called "snapping," "enlightenment," or, in Landmarkian terminology, "transformation" or "getting it." Once your mind enters this trance state, you are extremely suggestible, and will believe anything anyone tells you at the time.

Landmark's double-speak causes mental confusion and exhaustion that helps promote this state, and the double-speak is reinforced once you enter this hypnotic/trance state to keep your mind confused and suggestible. It SEEMS to make sense when you're in this state, and you FEEL that you're enlightened, but that's only because your mind isn't functioning properly. Everyone around you who's NOT in such a state (like us) can see that it's nonsense.

Quote

The other question is, when they say they can't tell you what it is, you have to see for yourself (or whatever) is it because they don't know or because they're told to say that? I read the personal stories and got the basic thing, which I think is that you're taught to disassociate strong feelings tied to tragic or painful events in your past. So what - I mean, how is that a breakthrough? (if that is the breakthrough, I don't know) Most people are capable of doing that on their own through the natural grief process and time. Are they told they never dealt with it or something?

The "breakthough" is the trance state. It feels wonderful, I've heard. It's an emotional relief after all the confusion and exhaustion you've been put through in the seminar, and it releases endorphins, causing a drug-like high.

Landmark coaches its participants to tell people "you have to see for yourself" for one reason: to get you to attend the seminars! And it IS impossible to explain the experience, because it's pretty much impossible to describe what the trance state feels like. And because participants have NO awareness that they've even entered such a state. They've been told, while suggestible, that what they're feeling is "transformation," so that's what they believe. They also believe they can only get it through Landmark, which is a lie, of course. This trance state has been used for thousands of years by all sorts of groups to control people's minds.

Glam

Quote
corboy
Certain kinds of dissociation (disruption of normal conscious awareness) can be confused with spiritual breakthrough and healing, if a person is under pressure and in social situations where they're encouraged to get confused.

I would not discount the reality of the breakthroughs.

I do think that people unused (theoretically and experientially) to unsane or non-dual in which categories such as good and bad or changed or static merge. getting out of the dual can act as such a relief that you can accept anything.

Quote
corboy
a profit driven entity like an LGAT, run by person who are not trained in proper discernment between genuine non-dual breakthrough vs dissociation could not provide the best environment for sorting all this out.

definitely.

Quote

([i:2d2a360822]One has to be careful with Wilber's material, as he is not a mental health professional, writes as a free agent, and has not, to my knowledge exposed himself to critiques by other scholars. [...] Plus he has endorsed a series of very questionable people--Da Free John/Adi Da, Andrew Cohen, David Deida. Wilber's ideas are interesting and in some cases, such as his pre-trans post trans fallacy, provide valuable frameworks. But he's not infallible, despite being Pope of the New Age..)[/i:2d2a360822]

I have just read the one short and popularized book by Wilber (forget which one) and interviews. out of one of the interviews (the one in a book entitled [i:2d2a360822]Rational Mysticism[/i:2d2a360822] he said that he thought of Adi Da as a flawed personality from whose books who can learn much.

as far as not his not having experience as a mental health professional... good for him.

Excellent information, thank you all.

Glam, I really appreciate your answers, it helped me quit trying to search for some secret answer to how someone could change so drastically over a few days.

Corboy, I've never read about depersonalization before, it was very interesting, and also strange because that's how I've felt these past few days - this whole subject is vile, I don't think the average person wants to know that there are people who do this to others profit from it.

thanks to Hope. She found the URL and made sure we found out about it.

Thats the great thing about the RR.com message board. Everyone here has different interests and concerns, different styles of dong online reading & research. As a result, we get a rich selection of material.

Just wanted to add that David Deida mentioned above was a long-time follower of cult-leader Da Free John and seems to aspire to such a role himself. Mr. Deida changed his last name to include "da".

Your letter is very much on target and very well written. But if you think you can't reach your friend, think about where he's at.

You can do Landmark. learn things about yourself and figure it was very good to do it and not get hard core about it, but still mistakenly think they're a pretty impeccable organization. If you come at somebody like that who likes Landmark with lots of nasty feeling about Landmark, it just doesn't make any sense to them and you can't communicate with them and everyone will get frustrated. Read posts from people who can see good and bad in Landmark and you will understand better.

Alex_Rush said,

Quote

Read posts from people who can see good and bad in Landmark and you will understand better.

I don't think so.

See [www.culteducation.com]

Landmark's history is overwhelmingly negative. This private for-profit company has a history of bad press, lawsuits, labor violations, complaints and personal injuries.

"Mass marathon training" like Landmark in general has a sordid and deeply troubled history.

See [www.culteducation.com]

This is a research paper done by a clinical psychologist and he cites the liablilities of such training.

Some Landmark supporters seem to think that they can "reform" Landmark.

It would be impossible to do this without the support of the owners.

The Rosenberg family controls Landmark (brother and sister of Werner Erhard, formerly known as "Jack" Rosenberg). And there is no reason to expect that the Rosenberg's would do anthing to reform a business that has provided so well for their family.

See [www.culteducation.com]

This is the transcript of a television report about the Forum (Landmark's flagship program) done in France done three years ago. Rather than change anything or address any concerns, Landmark left France.

Note the company reaction to criticism, which is essentially stonewalling and denial.

Also see [www.culteducation.com]

This is an article about how to deal with cult members. Much of what is said would apply to dealing with Landmark devotees.

Quote
Alex_Rush
Your letter is very much on target and very well written. But if you think you can't reach your friend, think about where he's at.

You can do Landmark. learn things about yourself and figure it was very good to do it and not get hard core about it, but still mistakenly think they're a pretty impeccable organization. If you come at somebody like that who likes Landmark with lots of nasty feeling about Landmark, it just doesn't make any sense to them and you can't communicate with them and everyone will get frustrated. Read posts from people who can see good and bad in Landmark and you will understand better.

Well, my initial post is over 2-1/2 years old. We've seen glimmers of the person we once knew less than a handful of times, and as far as we know, he hasn't attended any Landmark classes in more than a year, maybe much longer. I don't think he'll ever be himself again.

If you believe what you wrote, I hope that you can eventually see that you are reciting a script - there are many posts like yours, nearly word-for-word. I appreciate the kind tone, do you realize that you are telling me that in order for me to "think about where he's at," I would need to attend Landmark? This is recruiting, that is pretty hardcore to me.

Softening your approach doesn't work on those who have seen how destructive Landmark is, but I would much rather you spend time here because it means to me that you might have doubts about what Landmark has done to your thought process.

I encourage you to read posts from those who've never attended Landmark, because they are the people who are objective about what they've witnessed in people who have attended Landmark.

You didn't join a secret society where others "just don't get it." We get it. We're only here because we get it.

Quote
Alex_Rush
Your letter is very much on target and very well written. But if you think you can't reach your friend, think about where he's at.

You can do Landmark. learn things about yourself and figure it was very good to do it and not get hard core about it, but still mistakenly think they're a pretty impeccable organization. If you come at somebody like that who likes Landmark with lots of nasty feeling about Landmark, it just doesn't make any sense to them and you can't communicate with them and everyone will get frustrated. Read posts from people who can see good and bad in Landmark and you will understand better.

Hi Alex,

You've used the word "impeccable" in your post. This is one of Werner Erhard's buzz words. It has special meaning within the cult and is probably some sort of "anchor" or post-hypnotic suggestion. Most people wouldn't pick this word as it is kind of prissy, anal, and overly fastidious. Think about why you've used it. You may find some more hidden "suggestions" that you've unwittingly adopted as your own but are really part of the programming.


Ellen