Landmark Education Technology - BLOCKING technique
Posted by:
Dynamix
()
Date: September 15, 2005 06:02PM
A Landmark person would argue that this is actually a prime example of personal truth over absolute truth. In the advanced course, they talk about the three levels of perception.
The first is at the level of 'personal perception' where whatever one experiences is what is true.
The second is at the level of social agreement, that different groups form agreements in order to function as societies, for example, we agree that the colour blue is 'blue' and that round metal discs constitute 'money' and have value. They say that social agreements usually override personal perception.
The third level I didn't quite get a good grasp on. They seemed to make a point about things that are 'specific and measurable' and then refute it later on by saying that the measurements themselves are actually nothing more that social agreements anyway. This lead them to the conclusion that ultimately, everything is subjective. Nothing is absolute.
Therefore in the face of your practical example, they would probably argue something to the effect that a cold hand experiencing tepid water is just as valid for determination of truth as a room temperature hand experiencing the same tepid water. (I hope I interpreted your experiment correctly :D)
I think the key is that you make Landmarkers realise that even though everybody experiences the same thing differently, what really counts is that the individual is sensitive to how others experienced it, and is willing to compromise, rather than expressing only their own perception, as if it is the only one that counts. I think maybe a lot of people could stand to learn this lesson, really.
What seems to be a common attitude with graduates (and actually establishes the Landmark chain of command) is that when someone up the chain tells them that they're running a racket, they instantly submit, but anyone down the chain who disagrees is the one running a racket. This is where the blocking comes in. They completely ignore facts, or when the facts don't suit, they adjust or make them up.
People must be willing to examine bare facts before they decide to relinquish or argue their views. To say that water is tepid is something that is subjective. To say it is 22 degrees C is something objective. Even if Landmark says it isn't. :roll:
The first is at the level of 'personal perception' where whatever one experiences is what is true.
The second is at the level of social agreement, that different groups form agreements in order to function as societies, for example, we agree that the colour blue is 'blue' and that round metal discs constitute 'money' and have value. They say that social agreements usually override personal perception.
The third level I didn't quite get a good grasp on. They seemed to make a point about things that are 'specific and measurable' and then refute it later on by saying that the measurements themselves are actually nothing more that social agreements anyway. This lead them to the conclusion that ultimately, everything is subjective. Nothing is absolute.
Therefore in the face of your practical example, they would probably argue something to the effect that a cold hand experiencing tepid water is just as valid for determination of truth as a room temperature hand experiencing the same tepid water. (I hope I interpreted your experiment correctly :D)
I think the key is that you make Landmarkers realise that even though everybody experiences the same thing differently, what really counts is that the individual is sensitive to how others experienced it, and is willing to compromise, rather than expressing only their own perception, as if it is the only one that counts. I think maybe a lot of people could stand to learn this lesson, really.
What seems to be a common attitude with graduates (and actually establishes the Landmark chain of command) is that when someone up the chain tells them that they're running a racket, they instantly submit, but anyone down the chain who disagrees is the one running a racket. This is where the blocking comes in. They completely ignore facts, or when the facts don't suit, they adjust or make them up.
People must be willing to examine bare facts before they decide to relinquish or argue their views. To say that water is tepid is something that is subjective. To say it is 22 degrees C is something objective. Even if Landmark says it isn't. :roll:
Landmark Education Technology - BLOCKING technique
Posted by:
Excalibur
()
Date: September 18, 2005 02:43AM
Glam said:
Next time he says that to you, tell him, "I just hope you're right friend. Because I DON'T WANT IT!!"
lol
Quote
My friend absolutely refuses to hear anything negative about LEC, dismissing me with an arrogant "you'll never get it."
Next time he says that to you, tell him, "I just hope you're right friend. Because I DON'T WANT IT!!"
lol
Landmark Education Technology - BLOCKING technique
Posted by:
sonnie_dee
()
Date: September 18, 2005 04:06AM
Quote
What seems to be a common attitude with graduates (and actually establishes the Landmark chain of command) is that when someone up the chain tells them that they're running a racket, they instantly submit, but anyone down the chain who disagrees is the one running a racket. This is where the blocking comes in. They completely ignore facts, or when the facts don't suit, they adjust or make them up.
This is absolutely correct. If you are told you are running a racket (something used regularly to get you to capitulate) then you submit. HOWEVER if we use the same reasoning on landmark its not a racket!
The scary thing is that while people are deeply involved in Landmark you can't see the hypocrisy of it all. It's only once you are out and making a concious effort to not use the "technology" that you realise the two sides of it
Landmark Education Technology - BLOCKING technique
Posted by:
grub
()
Date: September 18, 2005 05:24AM
Quote
sonnie_deeQuote
What seems to be a common attitude with graduates (and actually establishes the Landmark chain of command) is that when someone up the chain tells them that they're running a racket, they instantly submit, but anyone down the chain who disagrees is the one running a racket. This is where the blocking comes in. They completely ignore facts, or when the facts don't suit, they adjust or make them up.
This is absolutely correct. If you are told you are running a racket (something used regularly to get you to capitulate) then you submit. HOWEVER if we use the same reasoning on landmark its not a racket!
"Do as I say, not as I do" comes to mind. Just be good sheep with your Landmark Brand tinfoil hats tight on your head and everything will be fine. ;)
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.