Quote
JFQuote
SavernakeQuote
JF
One of the 'rules' of Landmark is that anyone who hasnt done the Forum does have a racket, winning formula or story.
Why is that?
I gather than a "racket" is essentially self-deception. Is it not possible for a person to become enlightened or self-aware other than through Landmark?
A racket is a persistant complaint you have about something, someone, yourself, etc.
I think what they mean by saying that someone doesnt have a racket unless they have done the Forum ....
Ah -- first time you said "does" -- I can see now that you meant "doesn't" (I do that all the time when I write, leave out a "not" or put one in where it doesn't belong).
This idea, that people who haven't done the forum don't have "rackets", seems contrary to what my Landmark friend peddles. And to everything I read on the internet.
I can't tell you whether or not Landmark has affected you badly. I can imagine that for a [i:64a215c821]small minority [/i:64a215c821]of people, Landmark might offer more good than harm. My own experience growing up with the philosophy (and EST is pretty much the same as Landmark), I think it's pretty negative and blinkered overall -- but, then again, talking to my Landmark friend, the impression that I got is that, if you aren't in any way an introspective person, Landmark [i:64a215c821]might [/i:64a215c821]allow you to look at things in a new way. I doubt that many people are so lacking in powers of introspection though, which makes me think that the rest who think they've learned something new must be being brainwashed.
In any case, can I ask what's up with calling Landmark a "technology"? I might as well refer to a spectrophotometer as a "philosophy", or an X-ray machine as "literature". I suspect that Landmark likes to use confusing terminology, to undermine people's use of language and thus impair their ability to make effective use of reasoned argument... but I'm prepared to be convinced otherwise (it has to be a good argument though, not just Landmark doublespeak ;) )