Hunger Project - Looking Good
Estie
There's quite a battle going on at Wikipedia regarding the article on
The Hunger Project (THP). Apparently, THP wants to post their glossy
brochure, and some biased and agenda-driven Wikipedians keep wanting to
mention criticism of THP and the controversy which has always been
involved with it. The biased and agenda-driven Wikipedians have put it
into arbitration and mediation, charging that THP keeps rewriting the
entry. Poor Wikipedia, who only wants to have a neutral POV
encyclopedic article, is caught in the middle. I'm bettin' on them,
though. They've done a good job on other controversial subjects.
It struck me how important it is to THP, as well as est/Landmark, to
*look good*, even when that means denying reality. For THP, it's about
attacting donations. For est/Landmark, it's about appealing to new
customers.
I always had the impression that a primary motivation for Werner Erhard
in creating THP was the hope that it would bring glory and accolades to
Erhard and est. Fate has worked out quite differently. With Erhard
and est becoming public liabilities, THP now tries dilligently to
relegate Erhard to a minimal mention as just one of a number of people
involved historically in THP's founding. As one of the Wikipedia
discussion entries notes, est and THP were so intertwined in the early
years it was difficult to separate them. Werner Erhard wrote what was
always referred to as The Hunger Project "source document", published
by THP. It's really the only published example of Erhard's and est's
"principles and abstractions", and it's those principles and
abstrations that THP was founded on. Not only was Werner Erhard
vitally important as the *key* person who founded THP, THP completely
embodied Erhard's and est's philosophy/ideology. From all public
indications, they still do.
It's this effort to "look good" which fuels the continuing
controversies surrounding these groups. Try as they might to sweep
criticism under the rug and bully critics into submission, there are
always going to be people who will not sell out their integrity. This
is a case where "what you resist persists" has played out. Were THP
(and Landmark) to own up to their mistakes (as est/Landmark course
participants have done), they'd quickly find that the truth can indeed
free them from the endless task of "managing the public conversation."
Instead, they continue to dig their graves deeper.
Estie
Estie
of THP supporters tried to say something wasn't important because it
was "in the past". One of the senior Wikipedia folks said this isn't a
newspaper, it's an encyclopedia. Most of the articles are about the
past.
Guess Landmark and THP need to start an "encyclopedia of the present
moment." All entries would disappear as soon as they were written. :)
Estie
elle...@hotmail.com
LOLOL
We ought to start a collection of silly Landmark attempts to use
Landmark ~technology~ in the real world. My pick for first place would
be the judge who told Charlene Afremow to use regular English as no one
listening could understand what she was saying.
Ellen
Estie
the internet. For those who like to read original articles in their
entirety, here they are:
==================================================
THE HUNGER PROJECT: YOU CAN'T EAT WORDS
David Hoekema, The Christian Century, May 2, 1979
Representatives of an organization called the Hunger Project are
traveling around the country, visiting college campuses and other
locations, distributing literature and soliciting contributions.
Recently two volunteers were on my campus (Saint Olaf College,
Northfield, Minnesota): many students stopped to talk with them, and
perhaps a hundred signed cards by which they ''enrolled'' in the Hunger
Project, some promising to make cash contributions.
Let me address a strong word of caution to those who have recently
encountered the Hunger Project - and to those who soon will. I hope
that those who have contributed to the organization but are unaware of
its origin and character will reconsider whether their money might be
put to better use elsewhere.
The Hunger Project is an offshoot of Erhard Seminars Training, commonly
known as ''est.'' Est, the brainchild of Werner Erhard, offers an
intensive training session in self-realization and self-development to
anyone willing to invest several hundred dollars and several days'
time. The underlying message of est is that each of us is responsible
only and wholly for himself or herself. The solution to both personal
and social problems, according to est, lies in refusing to allow other
people to make demands on us and in doing whatever we really want to
do. In estian terminology, ''You have to create a context for yourself,
develop a space for where you're at.''
The Hunger Project was launched two years ago by Erhard and other
leaders of est. In the words of its promotional brochure, ''The sole
purpose of the Hunger Project is the creation of a space, a context -
the end of hunger and starvation on our planet in two decades.''
Note carefully that the project's purpose is not to provide food or the
means of growing food. No, its purpose is the ''creation of a
context.'' The Hunger Project does not try to alleviate hunger by any
direct means, because ''what we do about starvation does not work.''
Feeding people, the Hunger Project insists, does not relieve
starvation.
On this point, the Hunger Project practices what it preaches. During
1977, according to its financial statement, the organization disbursed
approximately $800,000; but apparently not a cent of that amount was
spent either on providing food for the hungry or on developing reliable
food sources for the poor. Fifteen per cent of the total went for
administration, and the remainder was spent for ''communications'' of
various kinds - brochures, newspapers, advertisements, conferences. The
''presentations'' at which the Hunger Project was announced in 1977
cost about $500,000. What the Hunger Project is about is evident:
publicity, talk, and massive media events, not concrete actions to
eliminate starvation and its causes.
The Hunger Project seems to have a hidden function as a proselytizing
arm of est. Nearly all directors of the project have undergone est
training. Half of those enrolled in the project, the representative who
visited my campus told me, are est initiates - a startling number,
considering that anyone who signs a card indicating interest is counted
as enrolled. The writers of a recent investigative report on the Hunger
Project for Mother Jones magazine (''Let Them Eat est,'' December 1978)
found that participants in the project were strongly pressured to take
est training. Mother Jones also discovered that large sums of money
donated to the tax-free Hunger Project seemed to disappear into the
overseas bank accounts of corporations created by Erhard.
None of these disturbing facts diminishes in any way the urgency of the
problem of world hunger or the truth of some of the Hunger Project's
claims. The project has rightly insisted that merely giving away food
will not solve the problems of starvation and malnourishment. A lasting
solution will require agricultural assistance, nutritional education,
sensitivity to local customs and values, and, in many countries,
large-scale land reform. The starving people of Haiti need land for
food crops, for example, but huge tracts of Haitian land are now used
to pasture cattle for McDonald's hamburgers. Unfortunately, the Hunger
Project is doing nothing in any of these directions, either.
Certainly the Hunger Project has helped increase awareness of the
problem of hunger. A recent issue of the Hunger Project newspaper
includes instructions on writing to congressional representatives in
support of programs to prevent starvation; it also offers descriptions
of organizations such as Bread for the World which - unlike the Project
- are doing something about the problem of hunger. No doubt this
publicity will encourage participation in other organizations, and for
that I am grateful.
Nor do I want to impugn the motives of all those who participate in the
project. The two men who visited my campus, both volunteers, seemed
genuinely committed not merely to talk but to action to alleviate
hunger.
Nevertheless, I cannot accept the Hunger Project's fundamental claim:
that starvation will be ended not by our doing things but by our
''getting clear,'' ''creating a context'' - in simple English, by
narcissism and empty talk. That claim is false and dangerous.
In pessimistic moments, I fear that the Hunger Project is at bottom a
scheme whereby Werner Erhard can amass vast sums of money tax-free
while appearing to act out of concern for the poor and the hungry (and
indeed, Mother Jones offers evidence that such is the case). But let us
instead take the most favorable view possible: whatever its origin and
its moral assumptions, the Hunger Project is forcing us to acknowledge
the inexcusable fact that millions of people die needlessly each year
because social and political structures prevent them from obtaining the
food they need. If those whose consciences are jolted by the Hunger
Project have more scruples than Werner Erhard and more intelligence
than most of his followers - and thank God, most people do - some good
is bound to result.
Let us not ignore the dreadful facts about starvation which the Hunger
Project brings to our attention. But if we want to work toward a
solution to the problems of world hunger, we would do better to invest
our time and money in Bread for the World, the American Friends Service
Committee, church-sponsored relief programs, or other such
organizations engaged not just in talk but in carefully chosen action.
copyright 1979 The Christian Century
====================================================
THE HUNGER PROJECT AND est:
CLOSE TIES
David Hoekema, The Christian Century, December 26, 1979
While not wishing to draw out beyond readers' patience a disagreement
that is probably irreconcilable, nevertheless I believe Mary Earle's
Reader's Response (''Collective Commitment to End Hunger,'' Aug.
29-Sept. 5) calls for further comment.
To amplify my original Speaking Out piece, to which Ms. Earle responded
(''The Hunger Project: You Can't Eat Words,'' May 2), it is true that
the two young men who visited the St. Olaf campus to publicize the
Hunger Project and solicit contributions were not ''representatives''
of the organization in any official sense. As Ms. Earle points out,
they are individuals who have donated their time to travel and promote
the Hunger Project. I was moved by their sincerity and commitment, as I
originally stated, chiefly because they were also involved in other
organizations which, unlike the Project, are carrying out concrete
programs to increase food production in underdeveloped areas of the
world.
The two men were graduates of the est training program. So is everyone
else with whom I have ever spoken who has had anything to do with the
Hunger Project. Now it may well be true, as Ms. Earle asserts, that
''only a small percentage of the 496,000 enrolled are est graduates.''
But this vast number includes anyone who has ever put his or her name
to what appears to be a simple postcard expressing support for the
cause of alleviating world hunger, presented in the form of a rather
enigmatic creed: ''Yes, I want to make the Hunger Project completely
mine. I am willing to take personal responsibility for making the end
of starvation an idea whose time has come.''
I am certain that many thousands of those who have signed this card
know nothing about est. I suspect that many of them know little about
the Hunger Project either, and have signed in the mistaken belief that
it is an organization which is committed to action to alleviate hunger.
In building her case, Ms. Earle insists that ''the Hunger Project is a
charitable corporation entirely separate from est, an educational
corporation.'' Legally, the two are separate entities, to be sure. The
''educational corporation,'' est (whose insistence on the lower-case
serves well to keep the name out of subject position in an English
sentence), is a profit-making corporation based in California but owned
by the Werner Erhard Charitable Settlement, based in Switzerland.
In 1971 Werner Erhard's ''body of knowledge'' was sold for $1 million
to Presentaciones Musicales, S.A., a Panama-based corporation which
promptly sold to Erhard Seminar Training, Inc. (est's predecessor), for
the sum of $1.2 million, the license to use that knowledge. And then
there is International Aesthetics Limited, a Nevada corporation from
which Erhard Seminar Training borrowed $1 million to pay for its
license; also Welbehagen, B.V., a Dutch corporation which now holds the
rights to Erhard's knowledge and collects royalties for its use; and
finally the Werner Erhard Foundation for est, headquartered in
Switzerland, which receives the profits of Welbehagen.
Each of these entities is legally distinct from any of the others. And
- although the secrecy in which foreign investments in Panama and
Switzerland are shrouded makes it difficult to learn the details - each
seems to have been created by Erhard and Harry Margolis, a lawyer
friend. The continual flow of huge sums of money among these
corporations and charitable foundations suggests not a remarkable
experiment in international cooperation but a desire to avoid paying
taxes on est income, which in 1978 was estimated to be greater than $16
million (Newsweek, Aug. 28, 1978, p. 78). Both Margolis and Erhard have
been in trouble with the IRS; as of last year six tax cases against
them were pending in court. (See ''Where Erhard Launders the Money,''
by Arnold Levinson, in Mother Jones magazine, December 1978.)
Now, if the Hunger Project were genuinely separate from est, all of
this financial subterfuge would be of no relevance. But the connections
are close indeed - far closer than the mere coincidence that many of
the same people enroll in both. The three initial directors of the
Hunger Project (Michael Chatzky, Robert Dunnett and Mark Schiavenza)
worked out of Margolis' office. The vice-president and the
secretary-treasurer of the Project are both members of the est advisory
board. Moreover, some who have volunteered to work for the Hunger
Project have reported coming under unrelenting pressure to enroll in
est training.
And money has flowed from the Hunger Project to est in both direct and
indirect ways. Those who are successfully recruited for est must pay
$300 for their training session. Moreover, about 4,200 people not long
ago paid $30 each to participate in a seven-session ''Hunger Project
Seminar Series,'' the proceeds of which went directly to est. (See
''Let them Eat est,'' by Suzanne Gordon, in Mother Jones, December
1978.)
More than 150,000 people have taken est training. If they have done so
voluntarily, perhaps I should not complain. It is their money and not
mine that they spend for the dubious privilege of putting in a grueling
weekend being harangued to forget about everyone else and take
responsibility for themselves alone. One who has spent ten years and
large sums of money at college and graduate school acquiring a body of
knowledge which has proved on the open market to be worth only slightly
more than a subsistence wage is in no position to criticize a man who
has discovered how to rake in millions for the use of his self-devised
body of knowledge. But when the cause of world hunger is turned into a
means for one man's self-aggrandizement, both in public image and in
hard cash, I cannot look on tolerantly.
Partisans of the Hunger Project will object that I am relying in my
assessment on sources highly unfavorable to the Project - chiefly on
the articles in Mother Jones. It is difficult to find any information
about the Hunger Project except what it chooses to promulgate. (To the
best of my knowledge, the only notice of the Project in the New York
Times has been a short article printed April 2, 1978, written by the
Project's media director.)
However, it was not from disgruntled critics but from its own financial
statements that I learned that, out of $800,000 spent by the Hunger
Project in 1977, only $2,500 went to any organization engaged in
concrete action to combat starvation. And it is the originator of both
est and the Hunger Project, Werner Erhard, who insists: ''The point is,
until its time comes, nothing you do will work. And when its time
comes, what you do will work, and you will do what works'' (Newsweek,
op. cit.).
This is nonsense, and it is dangerous nonsense. What we do to help
underdeveloped countries obtain food and develop food resources will
work - it will prevent people from starving and will reduce the
likelihood of critical food shortages in the future. It will work
regardless of whether it is an idea whose time has come, and regardless
of how many people have signed cards saying that they take
responsibility to create a context for that idea.
The Hunger Project has helped to bring the problems of world hunger to
national attention, and for that I am grateful. But it is also
collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars from well-intentioned
people and yet is not doing anything toward that goal. I therefore
reiterate my plea that those who are concerned about the problem of
world hunger devote their time and their money not to talk but to
action.
Ms. Earle insists that I have ''misinterpreted and misrepresented'' the
Hunger Project. I do not believe her charge of misrepresentation is
well-founded. I wish that I could believe I have misinterpreted the
underlying motive and purposes of the Hunger Project, but I fear I have
not.
copyright 1979 The Christian Century
==================================================
The Space Boss
humanitarian
HAPPYsamurai
> The formation of the hunger project proves that werener was a true
> humanitarian
or a good salesman / PR rep / spin doctor / good at damage control
but you know me I'm hard to please
tho the amartya sen link has got me thinkin
still those indian types are pretty naive, ... they fell for enron's BS
hook line and sinker...
they thought the US were leaders in ETHICAL business practice and
actually trusted them
still the gullable are useful to have around if you can be bothered
with them... yawn
and he's an "intellectual" probably never had an "experiential" lesson
[altho who am I to judge....]
woops did I just call a nobel prize winner gullible.... a humanitarian
economist... well time will see if that fashion ever catches on
Estie
The Space Boss wrote:
> The formation of the hunger project proves that werener was a true
> humanitarian
Yeah, ranks right up there with Warren Buffet and Bill and Melinda
Gates for his personal philanthropy.
Estie
Markus Welch
"Estie" <old_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1152682269....@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Unselfishness remaining the proper moral and ethical (and virtuous?)
measuring implement, right Estie?
I know..you were talking 'extreme' cases.....
/sarcasm off, right Estie?
The Space Boss
More than money, Werner gave of himself: his teachings changed the
world as we knew it. You GOTTA admit that. Even Newsweek, or something
admitted that recently.
Eldonbraun
Let's not forget George Soros, who has done so much to foster open
societies with his foundations. Problem is that it appears Werner's
foundations are shell games to evade taxes.
Also relevant is the growing microfinance movement. One example:
http://www.grameenfoundation.org/welcome/microfinance/
>
> Estie
Serena Nordstrup
The Space Boss wrote:
> The formation of the hunger project proves that werener was a true
> humanitarian
Did the formation of the "Hunger Project" have something to do with
humanitarianism?
Simpatice
Serena
Serena Nordstrup
The Space Boss wrote:
> Estie wrote:
> > The Space Boss wrote:
> > > The formation of the hunger project proves that werener was a true
> > > humanitarian
> >
> > Yeah, ranks right up there with Warren Buffet and Bill and Melinda
> > Gates for his personal philanthropy.
> >
>
> More than money, Werner gave of himself: his teachings changed the
> world as we knew it. You GOTTA admit that.
I, for one, will not admit that without good evidence.
> Even Newsweek, or something admitted that recently.
This reference seems a little vague...
Simpatice
Serena
HAPPYsamurai
> The Space Boss wrote:
> > Estie wrote:
> > > The Space Boss wrote:
> >
> > More than money, Werner gave of himself: his teachings changed the
> > world as we knew it. You GOTTA admit that.
which world would that be?
cell phones changed the world a little, internet too, if gates hadn't
put a windows type thing together someone would have... not to mention
the linux unix boys behind the scenes on the cutting edge so to
speak....
what did werner do again?
it reminds me of the consultant joke...
who's world?
did he change it more or less than amartya sen has?
gorbachov? tony robbins? covey? david beckham? meatloaf? goodhearts
applied kineseology? the live aid dude? the guy that first coined the
phrase" but wait, there's more" ?
the people who wrote the charter for the WLO?
the guy that started open heart surgery? Rutherford? Tesla?
the guy that openned up the chinese economy?-- [wait til those cows
come home]
changed the world of what? sales?
why is it people find salesman so awe inspiring and worthy of
reverance?
The Space Boss
Everything Werner did he did to help mankind. If your going to argue
with me, then your arguing with millions and millions of people who's
lives Werner touched throughout the years.
It's a losing proposition.
Estie
Space, you don't even know what the Hunger Project is. It "created the
context" of ending world hunger within two decades. It was supposed to
provide the missing piece that would make what everyone else was doing
"work". Two decades ended in 1997. Doesn't seem to have worked.
Werner's source document said all the other organizations who were
actually *doing* things to end hunger were "keeping it stuck." So they
collected a lot of money and didn't *do* anything because that would
"keep the problem stuck." This was back in the days of Harry Margolis'
creative accounting, and allegations were made that Hunger Project
money took a circuitous off-shore route into Werner's bank accounts.
Oh, they got a bunch of people to "enroll" in the Hunger Project, which
amounted to signing a card saying, pretty much, that ending hunger was
a good idea. There were a few exceptions. Personally, I think the
Hunger Project gives the field of hunger alleviation a black eye and
gets in the way of ending hunger.
What ideas do you think were original to Werner Erhard? I gotta admit
he took a lot of other people's ideas, bastardized them, added tricks
so that people who did the trainings would actually think they were
~valuable~. Many of the former trainers and others realized the
financial potential of this gimmick and many offshoot trainings have
resulted. I've gotta admit that, all in all, these trainings have
raked in probably billions of dollars, bilking people and turning a lot
of deluded smiling robots loose on the world. It's broken up a lot of
relationships. It's gotten a lot of people off-track in their career
paths. Otherwise, I don't see that these cockamamee ideas have
"changed" the world.
I missed the Newsweek statement. You got a source?
Estie
Eldonbraun
If they want to argue in Worner's favor, how come they don't bother to
put in a good word here and there? Especially here. Remember what Cody
said about the name of this newsgroup, ingenuously wondering why most
of the posts were negative? Could it be that this is a representative
longitudinal sample of how Werner touched people's lives?
HAPPYsamurai
i thought it was 700,000
but isense your COMMITTMENT
u were obviously touched by the experience
but can you really judge what went on in the man's mind
i mean if he'd married mother theresa or something, could be close to
irrefutible proof...
i have met people who give their whole life to the betterment of others
and its hard because they do need others to feather their nest for them
.... but it comes with the teritory and they know they are using other
peoples lives and that it may be misjudged...
still I'm open to hearing a positive argument
so how does werner define personal development ? and what is his
opinion of ethics in relation to behavior?
there must be millions of millions of people who can answer this
question succinctly....
the tien sarn monestry had the "up the mountain, down the mountain,
thru the temple - and watch out for the tiger" -- model... but I'm
interested in the LM model ...
Tex
"Eldonbraun" <Eldo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1152767942.5...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Nah, just an indication that 10 or 12 people are posting here at anyone
time.
If it had been founded honestly, it would have been labeled
alt.fan.ANTIlandmark.
But that wouldn't "lure" anyone in to rumble with, now would it?
Tex
"HAPPYsamurai" <profst...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1152768032.8...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> The Space Boss wrote:
>> Serena Nordstrup wrote:
>> > The Space Boss wrote:
>> > > The formation of the hunger project proves that werener was a true
>> > > humanitarian
>> >
>> > Did the formation of the "Hunger Project" have something to do with
>> > humanitarianism?
>> >
>>
>> Everything Werner did he did to help mankind. If your going to argue
>> with me, then your arguing with millions and millions of people who's
>> lives Werner touched throughout the years.
>>
>> It's a losing proposition.
>
> i thought it was 700,000
>
> but isense your COMMITTMENT
>
> u were obviously touched by the experience
LOL!!!!
Space hasn't taken est or the Forum.
He enjoys "trolling" the trolls.
The Space Boss
Tex wrote:
>
> LOL!!!!
> Space hasn't taken est or the Forum.
> He enjoys "trolling" the trolls.
>
No, but I listened to damn near all those tapes you gave me.
The Space Boss
Estie wrote:
>
> Space, you don't even know what the Hunger Project is. It "created the
> context" of ending world hunger within two decades. It was supposed to
> provide the missing piece that would make what everyone else was doing
> "work". Two decades ended in 1997. Doesn't seem to have worked.
Hey - at least it was an effort. I though the hunger project won like
some kind of prestigious awards, or something?
bruno Tonon
It has also helped many people to bring more quality to their lives.
It's broken up a lot ofrelationships.
It has repaired an immense amount of relationships. In fact this was one
of the strengths of Forum bringing people toghether.
The fact that LEC took advantage of this to recruit more people is fair
criticism.
It's gotten a lot of people off-track in their career paths.
Also found many peopel new career paths
Otherwise, I don't see that these cockamamee ideas have "changed" the world.
Well I don't know what you mean by changed the world but Rex's contribution
to the Internet seems to be some change, and I am sure there are countless
others
out there.
We have to agree to disagree here Estie?????
cheers Bruno
bruno Tonon
I think this was his strength that he was able to communicate abstract
philosophical ideas and make them concrete and real.
They can be valuable to anyone that acccepts and practises that mind set!!!!
Eldonbraun
Personally, I think so too. Furthermore, I think Werner gave himself a
couple of permanent black eyes that might amount to karmic retribution.
Let me tell you a story... and yes, this really is true. A friend of
mine who used to work on sailboats had made a bid to refinish the
mahogany paneling of Werner's classic sailboat residence shortly before
the whole thing came down in early 1991. He did considerable research
on stripping and sanding everything down, blocking off various areas
and applying new coats of varnish with camel hair brushes in a
dust-free environment. Major artisan project.
Then the news stories appeared. Werner had to skip town and the job was
cancelled.
One of the interviews with a former aide detailed how Werner was gently
awakened each morning as the sun rose over the harbor in Sausalito with
a gentle foot massage: "Werner... Werner...." (Breakfast tray nearby,
awaiting Werner's return to consciousness.)
Such a wakeup call if you think about it.
Serena Nordstrup
The Space Boss wrote:
> Serena Nordstrup wrote:
> > The Space Boss wrote:
> > > The formation of the hunger project proves that werener was a true
> > > humanitarian
> >
> > Did the formation of the "Hunger Project" have something to do with
> > humanitarianism?
> >
>
> Everything Werner did he did to help mankind.
* A humanitarian helps mankind.
* Everything ~Werner~ did he did to help mankind.
* ~Werner~ founded the "Hunger project".
* The formation of the hunger project proves that ~Werner~ was a true
humanitarian.
* That makes ~Werner~ some sort of humanitarian.
Have I ~got~ that right? Do we have two circular arguments going on
there, or only one?
> If your going to argue
> with me, then your arguing with millions and millions of people who's
> lives Werner touched throughout the years.
I'll happily argue with a couple of millions or so, but perish the
thought of arguing with you, Boss! I just wanted to ask the question
you didn't answer, though: Did the formation of the "Hunger Project"
have something to do with humanitarianism?
Simpatice
Serena
The Space Boss
Serena Nordstrup wrote:
>
> * A humanitarian helps mankind.
> * Everything ~Werner~ did he did to help mankind.
> * ~Werner~ founded the "Hunger project".
> * The formation of the hunger project proves that ~Werner~ was a true
> humanitarian.
> * That makes ~Werner~ some sort of humanitarian.
>
You are a pretty good logician, my dear. If each premise is taken as
fact, that's a pretty good arguement.
Serena Nordstrup
The Mildred Robbins Leet Award for the Advancement of Women: see:
http://www.thp.org/reports/jh/award601.htm
Heard of it? Sound pretty prestigious?
Simpatice
Serena
Eldonbraun
> The Space Boss wrote:
> > Serena Nordstrup wrote:
> > > The Space Boss wrote:
> > > > The formation of the hunger project proves that werener was a true
> > > > humanitarian
> > >
> > > Did the formation of the "Hunger Project" have something to do with
> > > humanitarianism?
> > >
> >
> > Everything Werner did he did to help mankind.
>
> * A humanitarian helps mankind.
> * Everything ~Werner~ did he did to help mankind.
> * ~Werner~ founded the "Hunger project".
> * The formation of the hunger project proves that ~Werner~ was a true
> humanitarian.
> * That makes ~Werner~ some sort of humanitarian.
>
> Have I ~got~ that right? Do we have two circular arguments going on
> there, or only one?
Only one in my opinion, Serena -- but it's a mobius loop argument.
Loop-de-loop. Oooh, here I am again on the same side of the infinity
sign.
Would this make an interesting new design for a roller coaster? Should
the US install one at Guantanamo? Something to think about. Perhaps
Markus and Space should have a conference call about that concept and
let us know their conclusions ;-)
Glam
Can you give us some real and concrete examples?
bruno Tonon
"Glam" <glamar...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1152792125.8...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Yes I could but somehow you would not think they were good enough
or strong enough because they did not happen to you. I can only speak
from what I experienced and saw.
I am not suggesting the courses are for everyone, but just stating that
I think they are worthwhile and valuable , and that like Tex I enjoyed
the workshops.
Eldonbraun
OK, but don't forget Cody and Rex. That makes four of you who enjoyed
the workshops. Apparently Space just listened to some tapes, so he
didn't actually have the experience, right?
Now, where are the million(s) or so others who had it and loved it?
Yup, this is an opinion poll. Hey Art, send in the troops! Direct those
enthusiasts over to alt.FAN.landmark if you've got any. Bring 'em on!
Tex
"The Space Boss" <drsmi...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1152771153.9...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
......... {;~D
Tex
There were others. Fred, Siam, JimP, Gerald, MarkG, Dakota, Cody, Lee, Rex
etc.
Arguing with cranky trolls may not be everyone's cup of tea Eldon? {;~D
Serena Nordstrup
The Space Boss wrote:
> Serena Nordstrup wrote:
The Boss seems to approve the circular logic (of his own original
devising), so we'ld better check the premises... :
> > * A humanitarian helps mankind.
Sorta definitionional, perhaps. A humanitarian may just *want* to help
mankind...
> > * Everything ~Werner~ did he did to help mankind.
Like changing his name so often and running away from marriage and
children. I don't know much about selling used cars, but I rather doubt
that that counts as helping mankind... Have to pass on this one, even
if the whole argument falls in a heap in consequence.
> > * ~Werner~ founded the "Hunger project".
Almost. He co-founded it. ~Inspired/touched/moved~ it. Let it pass.
> > * The formation of the hunger project proves that ~Werner~ was a true
> > humanitarian.
The Boss said this, so that makes it true, right? I can't see any other
way of ~making~ it right...
> > * That makes ~Werner~ some sort of humanitarian.
Perhaps at least a would-be humanitarian, "looking good'. But this
conclusion depends on the premises, and 'twere churlish to bicker.
> You are a pretty good logician, my dear. If each premise is taken as
> fact, that's a pretty good arguement.
I still worry about the circularity, and I think Eldon suspected some
circular argument too...
Simpatice
Serena
Serena Nordstrup
The one reationship reliably strengthened by rosenbergism remains the
relationship between the orgs and their willing victims.
> The fact that LEC took advantage of this to recruit more people is fair
> criticism.
>
>
>
> It's gotten a lot of people off-track in their career paths.
>
>
>
> Also found many peopel new career paths
Useless, unnecessary careers like ~seminar~ ~leadership~ and
~coaching~, suitede to the busybody manipulators who perform well
withing rosenbergism.
> Otherwise, I don't see that these cockamamee ideas have "changed" the world.
>
>
> Well I don't know what you mean by changed the world but Rex's contribution
> to the Internet seems to be some change, and I am sure there are countless
> others
> out there.
"Internet & World Wide Web History" site:
http://www.elsop.com/wrc/h_web.htm finds no search matches for
"ballard".
The "Internet History: Important People" site:
http://www.unc.edu/depts/jomc/academics/dri/pioneers2d.html appears to
lack any reference to Rex.
The Computer History Museum exhibit on the history of the Internet
finds no search matches for "ballard".
Markus Kazmierczak's page on "Internet History" (
http://www.mkaz.com/ebeab/history/ ) omits mentioning a "ballard".
Hobbes' Internet Timeline v8.1 at
http://www.zakon.org/robert/internet/timeline/ has no detectable trace
of Rex either.
And even Wikipedia has not heard of "Rex Ballard"...
Have I looked in the wrong places? Do you need to publicize Rex's deeds
more, Bruno?
Serena Nordstrup
If one adopts the bizarre rosenbergist system, abandoning all
incompatible alternatives to do so, few other (life-supporting) ideas
remain, and one must clutch desperately at what straws remain...
bruno Tonon
"Serena Nordstrup" <s_nor...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:1152869260.6...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
There may have been countless relationships repaired due to Forum.
>
>> The fact that LEC took advantage of this to recruit more people is fair
>> criticism.
>>
>>
>>
>> It's gotten a lot of people off-track in their career paths.
Some people yes I agree however others started new careers due to
the motivation after doingthe courses.
>>
>>
>>
>> Also found many peopel new career paths
>
> Useless, unnecessary careers like ~seminar~ ~leadership~ and
> ~coaching~, suitede to the busybody manipulators who perform well
> withing rosenbergism.
>
>> Otherwise, I don't see that these cockamamee ideas have "changed" the
>> world.
>>
>>
>> Well I don't know what you mean by changed the world but Rex's
>> contribution
>> to the Internet seems to be some change, and I am sure there are
>> countless
>> others
>> out there.
I never said Rex was in the History books and neither did he. He played his
part
and who knows how important that may have been.
Do you disagree with Rex's point of view .??????
>
> "Internet & World Wide Web History" site:
> http://www.elsop.com/wrc/h_web.htm finds no search matches for
> "ballard".
>
> The "Internet History: Important People" site:
> http://www.unc.edu/depts/jomc/academics/dri/pioneers2d.html appears to
> lack any reference to Rex.
>
> The Computer History Museum exhibit on the history of the Internet
> finds no search matches for "ballard".
>
> Markus Kazmierczak's page on "Internet History" (
> http://www.mkaz.com/ebeab/history/ ) omits mentioning a "ballard".
>
> Hobbes' Internet Timeline v8.1 at
> http://www.zakon.org/robert/internet/timeline/ has no detectable trace
> of Rex either.
>
> And even Wikipedia has not heard of "Rex Ballard"...
>
> Have I looked in the wrong places? Do you need to publicize Rex's deeds
> more, Bruno?
No you have looked in the right places, however I would like Rex
to have a say in this too.
Lets have a look at the right wrong debate that Tex has brought up
rather than this nonsense that we are discussing now.
Its about concepts and ideas and I know we have discussed it before
but never finished it.
I do hope you are well.
I'm surprised you live so close.
That hound dog Rex!!!!!!
cheers Bruno
bruno Tonon
What were the incompatible alternatives that were abandoned Serena??????
I sure would like to know???
cheers Bruno
Serena Nordstrup
Rubbish, Bruno. What you ~experienced~ or saw need not limit you at
all. Nothing prevents you researching this matter, uncovering
verifiable facts and assembling convincing statistics. If Rick Ross,
for example, can assemble anti-Landmark data, then you can pull
together the *real* account of what has happened in the whole history
of rosenbergism. You could even run a survey like Yankelovich's (only
better-documented, please). Go for it, Bruno. Gather together the vast
array of information which would prove indisputably to everyone that
werner-think has some sort of merit. Stop hiding and cringing behind
your stock phrase "I can only speak from what I experienced..."
> I am not suggesting the courses are for everyone, but just stating that
> I think they are worthwhile and valuable , and that like Tex I enjoyed
> the workshops.
Rubbish, Bruno. You did *not* simply state what you think and chronicle
your enjoyment: you made the grand sweeping claim that rosenbergist
~ideas~ "can be valuable to anyone that acccepts and practises that
mind set!!!!" You made the claim (!!!!) -- now justify it (or retract
it). (I've given you a possible starting point with my "clutching at
straws" comparison -- can you offer a better explanation?)
Eldonbraun
You're right in terms of changing both relationships and career paths,
Bruno. What it did was destabilize many people's ~contextual~ framework
for dealing with the world. It rattled their cages and caused them to
adopt new viewpoints. I don't think anyone will deny that.
One of the new viewpoints dangled as a ~possibility~ was Rosenbergism
as a belief system. Some bought into it and some didn't.
Whether the outcomes were beneficial on the whole, over time, is
difficult to determine. We don't hear much about the divorces, mainly
just the improved relationships. And how should one weight those
outcomes anyway in terms of importance?
Do you know anyone who started a new career with Amway? How long did
that last?
And yes, it will be interesting to hear from Rex and read more specific
details about his exploits.
bruno Tonon
Hang on Serena, I'm not out to prove anything and I never have been
apart from my possible excitement when I first joined the group.
Things since then have somewhat changed, however I still stand by
my perception and that I enjoyed doing Forum.
If Rick Ross,
> for example, can assemble anti-Landmark data, then you can pull
> together the *real* account of what has happened in the whole history
> of rosenbergism. You could even run a survey like Yankelovich's (only
> better-documented, please). Go for it, Bruno. Gather together the vast
> array of information which would prove indisputably to everyone that
> werner-think has some sort of merit. Stop hiding and cringing behind
> your stock phrase "I can only speak from what I experienced..."
I've lost the zeal in trying to persuade or convince anyone in this group
about LEC. I just want to let yu know that I ,Tex, cody, Rex....... and
others
enjoyed the Forum.
>
>> I am not suggesting the courses are for everyone, but just stating that
>> I think they are worthwhile and valuable , and that like Tex I enjoyed
>> the workshops.
>
> Rubbish, Bruno. You did *not* simply state what you think and chronicle
> your enjoyment: you made the grand sweeping claim that rosenbergist
> ~ideas~ "can be valuable to anyone that acccepts and practises that
> mind set!!!!" You made the claim (!!!!) -- now justify it
I don't have to justify anything and I still hold on to that claim.
(or retract
> it). (I've given you a possible starting point with my "clutching at
> straws" comparison -- can you offer a better explanation?)
You love to speak in riddles Serena and thats fine if it gives you pleasure.
ANswer my questions first and then I will answer yours.
I do hope you are well.
cheers Bruno
Serena Nordstrup
Not countless: some finite and very speculative number.
> >> The fact that LEC took advantage of this to recruit more people is fair
> >> criticism.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> It's gotten a lot of people off-track in their career paths.
>
> Some people yes I agree however others started new careers due to
> the motivation after doingthe courses.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Also found many peopel new career paths
> >
> > Useless, unnecessary careers like ~seminar~ ~leadership~ and
> > ~coaching~, suitede to the busybody manipulators who perform well
> > withing rosenbergism.
> >
> >> Otherwise, I don't see that these cockamamee ideas have "changed" the
> >> world.
> >>
> >>
> >> Well I don't know what you mean by changed the world but Rex's
> >> contribution
> >> to the Internet seems to be some change, and I am sure there are
> >> countless
> >> others
> >> out there.
>
> > "Internet & World Wide Web History" site:
> > http://www.elsop.com/wrc/h_web.htm finds no search matches for
> > "ballard".
> >
> > The "Internet History: Important People" site:
> > http://www.unc.edu/depts/jomc/academics/dri/pioneers2d.html appears to
> > lack any reference to Rex.
> >
> > The Computer History Museum exhibit on the history of the Internet
> > finds no search matches for "ballard".
> >
> > Markus Kazmierczak's page on "Internet History" (
> > http://www.mkaz.com/ebeab/history/ ) omits mentioning a "ballard".
> >
> > Hobbes' Internet Timeline v8.1 at
> > http://www.zakon.org/robert/internet/timeline/ has no detectable trace
> > of Rex either.
> >
> > And even Wikipedia has not heard of "Rex Ballard"...
> >
> I never said Rex was in the History books and neither did he.
You suggested his name in connection with rosenbergism ~changing~ the
world. I tried to evaluate such alleged ~change~. Did I go about it
wrongly? Does rosenbergism operate underground, unnoticed by
historians, like primitive ur-Christianity?
> He played his part and who knows how important that may have been.
Humankind trains and hires historians to answer such questions about
the ~past~. Of course, we may pose them questions too soon to get a
good perspective.
> Do you disagree with Rex's point of view .??????
I recall disagreeing with some of Rex's individual views on ~landmark~
~education~. He wrote somewhat too verbosely to convey a single "point
of view", would you not agree?
> > Have I looked in the wrong places? Do you need to publicize Rex's deeds
> > more, Bruno?
>
> No you have looked in the right places, however I would like Rex
> to have a say in this too.
Perhaps you should have thought of that before dragging Rex's name into
your current cause.
> Lets have a look at the right wrong debate that Tex has brought up
> rather than this nonsense that we are discussing now.
Let's sort out this nonsense before running off to Tex's nonsense.
> Its about concepts and ideas and I know we have discussed it before
> but never finished it.
Focus, Bruno!
Serena Nordstrup
Oh, just little things, Bruno. When one learns to behave ~unreasonably~
one abandons Reason. When one learns to disparage the ~past~ one
becomes apt to abandon the lessons (and even the ~experiences~ ) of
history. When one learns to honor ~nothing~ one abandons "something".
When one learns to reject "deciding" one abandons the faculty of
thought-based ~choice~. When one prioritizes things emotional one
abandons the world of facts and material objects. When one internalizes
~responsibility~ one abandons the sunny uplands of light-hearted
humor.
Just little things like that, Bruno. -- You may have abandoned them all
so thoroughly that you don't notice the lack. Unless we remind you.
bruno Tonon
I was talking about his Internet contributions rather than his Landmark
experiences.
He wrote about the way it made sense to him, just like you write about
the way it makes sense to you.
And yes Rex seems to make more sense than you do!!!!!!!!!
>
>> > Have I looked in the wrong places? Do you need to publicize Rex's deeds
>> > more, Bruno?
>>
>> No you have looked in the right places, however I would like Rex
>> to have a say in this too.
>
> Perhaps you should have thought of that before dragging Rex's name into
> your current cause.
>
>> Lets have a look at the right wrong debate that Tex has brought up
>> rather than this nonsense that we are discussing now.
>
> Let's sort out this nonsense before running off to Tex's nonsense.
>
>> Its about concepts and ideas and I know we have discussed it before
>> but never finished it.
>
> Focus, Bruno!
Afraid its not my strength. Thank you for reminding me to focus.
>
>> I do hope you are well.
>> I'm surprised you live so close.
>> That hound dog Rex!!!!!!
Slip of the tongue here Rex it should read Tex.
Hey Serena,
this discussion is about nonsense and I am ready to admit you are right
once again.
Do you want to look at the right and wrong issue that Tex brought up???
Just thought they may be more meat on the bone than what we have
been talking about.
cheers bruno
bruno Tonon
I do agree somewhat with the last statement about humor. The commited
leccies could lighten up a bit.
Thanks for reminding me about the others, I'll keep that in mind.
How about the right and wrong ideas?????
cheers Bruno
HAPPYsamurai
> The Space Boss wrote:
> > Serena Nordstrup wrote:
>
> The Boss seems to approve the circular logic (of his own original
> devising), so we'ld better check the premises... :
>
> > > * A humanitarian helps mankind.
>
> Sorta definitionional, perhaps. A humanitarian may just *want* to help
> mankind...
>
work force
...give a man a fish ....feed him for a day... give him a job....feed
him for life
jobs improve quality of life, relationships....got them off the
povertty line, clothed and fed
7 million
7 million
A Hitler, humanitarian?
its like the betacam vhs debate, for god's sake don't let the public
read the sales blurb
HAPPYsamurai
When one learns to behave ~unreasonably~
> one abandons Reason. When one learns to disparage the ~past~ one
> becomes apt to abandon the lessons (and even the ~experiences~ ) of
> history. When one learns to honor ~nothing~ one abandons "something".
> When one learns to reject "deciding" one abandons the faculty of
> thought-based ~choice~. When one prioritizes things emotional one
> abandons the world of facts and material objects. When one internalizes
> ~responsibility~ one abandons the sunny uplands of light-hearted
> humor.
>
> so thoroughly that you don't notice the lack. Unless we remind you.
>
i don't like liberties with the word "responsibilty" as a rule... but I
got what you meant....
When one learns to honor ~nothing~ one abandons "something".
thank you
there is a value in sacredness for sacredness' sake
The Space Boss
Serena Nordstrup wrote:
>
> Like changing his name so often and running away from marriage and
> children.
The bible says let he that is without sin cast the first stone.
Eldonbraun
Well Hap, I would say it's a little more like the Microsoft Windows
shrinkwrap agreement that allows the company to snoop around in your
computer to determine whether you're using a "genuine" or pirated
version on your computer. It says somewhere in the fine print that they
can do that through your Internet connection.
Of course, Bill "Big Brother" Gates is spending a lot of his money for
philanthropy, so maybe that excuses it.
Serena Nordstrup
It does indeed.
If you hadn't snipped so enthusiastically, you might have observed that
I gave these examples in support of the notion that ~werner~ performed
all his actions with the aim of helping mankind. Do you suggest than
name-changing and child-desertion count as sins rather than as obvious
mankind-benevolences?
Selling used cars though -- That constitutes a Sin and a Denial of
Humanity !
What does the Bible say about premise-checking?
Simpatice
Serena
Serena Nordstrup
He used to link the two. That causes suspicion.
> He wrote about the way it made sense to him, just like you write about
> the way it makes sense to you.
Really? Ever written for a specific audience, Bruno?
> And yes Rex seems to make more sense than you do!!!!!!!!!
How strange...
> >> > Have I looked in the wrong places? Do you need to publicize Rex's deeds
> >> > more, Bruno?
> >>
> >> No you have looked in the right places, however I would like Rex
> >> to have a say in this too.
> >
> > Perhaps you should have thought of that before dragging Rex's name into
> > your current cause.
> >
> >> Lets have a look at the right wrong debate that Tex has brought up
> >> rather than this nonsense that we are discussing now.
> >
> > Let's sort out this nonsense before running off to Tex's nonsense.
> >
> >> Its about concepts and ideas and I know we have discussed it before
> >> but never finished it.
> >
> > Focus, Bruno!
>
> Afraid its not my strength. Thank you for reminding me to focus.
> >
> >> I do hope you are well.
> >> I'm surprised you live so close.
> >> That hound dog Rex!!!!!!
>
> Slip of the tongue here Rex it should read Tex.
>
>
> Hey Serena,
> this discussion is about nonsense and I am ready to admit you are right
> once again.
You admit that the Hunger Project produces nonsense?
You regard the idea of ~wernerian~ humanism as nonsense ?
You have come to see ~forum~-~benefits~ as nonsense ?
> Do you want to look at the right and wrong issue that Tex brought up???
> Just thought they may be more meat on the bone than what we have
> been talking about.
Rather wooly meat.
Serena Nordstrup
You seem out to prove that you have a one-track mind. Just supply us
the facts and spare us the repetitious marginal stuff you ~experienced~
or saw.
> If Rick Ross,
> > for example, can assemble anti-Landmark data, then you can pull
> > together the *real* account of what has happened in the whole history
> > of rosenbergism. You could even run a survey like Yankelovich's (only
> > better-documented, please). Go for it, Bruno. Gather together the vast
> > array of information which would prove indisputably to everyone that
> > werner-think has some sort of merit. Stop hiding and cringing behind
> > your stock phrase "I can only speak from what I experienced..."
>
> I've lost the zeal in trying to persuade or convince anyone in this group
> about LEC. I just want to let yu know that I ,Tex, cody, Rex....... and
> others
> enjoyed the Forum.
You've said that. No point in repeating it. Have you anything else to
say?
> >> I am not suggesting the courses are for everyone, but just stating that
> >> I think they are worthwhile and valuable , and that like Tex I enjoyed
> >> the workshops.
> >
> > Rubbish, Bruno. You did *not* simply state what you think and chronicle
> > your enjoyment: you made the grand sweeping claim that rosenbergist
> > ~ideas~ "can be valuable to anyone that acccepts and practises that
> > mind set!!!!" You made the claim (!!!!) -- now justify it
>
> I don't have to justify anything and I still hold on to that claim.
A claim needs justification. If you don't want to justify it, don't
make it. If you can't support it, retract it.
> (or retract
> > it). (I've given you a possible starting point with my "clutching at
> > straws" comparison -- can you offer a better explanation?)
>
> You love to speak in riddles Serena and thats fine if it gives you pleasure.
> ANswer my questions first and then I will answer yours.
Point to the questions you've asked above and which I've not answered.
Eldonbraun
Christ said that within a particular ~context~ that might have been
regarded as an emergency situation. It wasn't just a casual roadside
lecture, you know. Somebody was about to get stoned to death.
Quite awhile earlier, God also dictated in the Ten Commandments, "Thou
shalt not kill." Do you see any connection?
Did either of them say it was forbidden to criticize immoral behavior?
I thought not. Come to think of it, Christ did quite a bit of that
himself.
Tex
>
> You've said that. No point in repeating it. Have you anything else to
> say?
>
>> >> I am not suggesting the courses are for everyone, but just stating
>> >> that
>> >> I think they are worthwhile and valuable , and that like Tex I enjoyed
>> >> the workshops.
>> >
>> > Rubbish, Bruno. You did *not* simply state what you think and chronicle
>> > your enjoyment: you made the grand sweeping claim that rosenbergist
>> > ~ideas~ "can be valuable to anyone that acccepts and practises that
>> > mind set!!!!" You made the claim (!!!!) -- now justify it
>>
>> I don't have to justify anything and I still hold on to that claim.
>
Serena said;
> A claim needs justification. If you don't want to justify it, don't
> make it. If you can't support it, retract it.
Dictionary time.
claim
To state to be true, especially when open to question; assert or maintain:
claimed he had won the race; a candidate claiming many supporters.
no requirement for justification.
synonyms
assert
To state or express positively; affirm: asserted his innocence
no mention of justify
maintain
1.. To defend or hold against criticism or attack: maintained his stand on
taxes.
2.. To declare to be true; affirm: maintained her innocence.
no mention of justify there.
the Court holds that Bruno's "claim" stands as is, with no justification
needed.
carry on!!
Tex
Nicely said Eldon.
Eldonbraun
The court will finally determine whether it deems Bruno's claim valid
-- that is, if you're trying to argue a case, Tex. They may well find
it valid or decide he was bullshitting like an ol' Texas cowboy around
the campfire. Then there's the court of public opiinion.
>
> carry on!!
You carry on too. Reading the dictionary is always helpful. Helps to
pin things down and form a semantical basis for discussion. That will
help focus your mind too, and it could use some occasionally.
Tex
Nope.
Just stating that a claim does not require justification.
As Freud once said, "Somtimes a (claim) is just a (claim)" ;-D
justify
1.. To demonstrate or prove to be just, right, or valid: justified each
budgetary expense as necessary; anger that is justified by the
circumstances.
2.. To declare free of blame; absolve.
3.. To free (a human) of the guilt and penalty attached to grievous sin.
Used of God.
4.. Law.
5.. To demonstrate sufficient legal reason for (an action taken).
6.. To prove to be qualified as a bondsman.
7.. Printing. To adjust the spacing within (lines in a document, for
example), so that the lines end evenly at a straight margin
> They may well find it valid or decide he was bullshitting like an ol'
> Texas cowboy around
> the campfire. Then there's the court of public opiinion.
>>
>> carry on!!
>
> You carry on too. Reading the dictionary is always helpful. Helps to
> pin things down and form a semantical basis for discussion. That will
> help focus your mind too, and it could use some occasionally.
Your telling me.
Try playing golf while ruminating about the influences of "cults in our
midsts."
It destroys your tempo. {:~D
A little Zen "no-mind" technique is always helpful in those situations.
On a positve note, I hit my brand spanking new 5 "metal" 235 yards straight
at the pin yesterday.
Just short of the green in two on a par-5.
I can assure you for that swing at least, my mind was focused.
Actually played pretty well.
Still too much "mental noise" though.
Need to quiet it a bit for golf.
Eldonbraun
Golf, croquet, tennis, badminton... what's the difference? Could it
possibly be the ~context~? Please explain otherwise.
Why did that Algerian footballer get so pissed off at the Italian who
insulted his mom and sisters? Was it ~context~ perhaps?
Anyway, congratulations. Glad your context is more or less working.
Please use your golf clubs in the right context. Don't hit me over the
haid, OK? Just asking for mercy here.
Tex
Tennis and badminton are fairly reactive sports, so there isn't a lot of
time to have superfluous thoughts.
If you are in the "zone," you just keep moving, almost instictively.
In croquet, a mistake won't have you lose the ball in the woods or swamp. In
golf, a fraction of a degree can cause the shot to miss by 20, 30 yards or
more. And the golf swing is violent and complex. Moving a ball over 500
yards and into a small hole in 5 shots is difficult. I'm sure great croquet
players require great focus too, but the mistakes are probably not as big as
in golf. I can hit the ball almost 300 yards straight down the middle, and
sometimes I can hit it straight into the woods. Even the worlds greatest
golfers can do this. I think it is the most "mental" sport I've ever played.
Mental, as in your mind can realy get in the way during the swing. At the
point of committing to the shot and swing you want, it is necessary to have
a very "quiet mind." It is often hard to switch it off for only the few
seconds required to strike the ball.
All these years of meditating haven't given me a definitive edge yet.
http://www.zengolf.com/
>
> Why did that Algerian footballer get so pissed off at the Italian who
> insulted his mom and sisters? Was it ~context~ perhaps?
I think it is speculated that the Italian player called his Mother and
sister "filthy terrorist whores," or something to that effect.
He still needs some anger management courses, although I can "feel" his
pain.
>
> Anyway, congratulations. Glad your context is more or less working.
> Please use your golf clubs in the right context. Don't hit me over the
> haid, OK? Just asking for mercy here.
LOL!!!
I wouldn't think about it Eldon.
Besides, you're a delightful guy.
We can agree to disagree on a few things.
For the most part, I fell we are in-sync on many topics.
Pick a topic?
Objectivism and it's influence on Libertarianism? {;~D
Or perhaps manipulative enrollment techniques of money-grubbing bastards!
>
HAPPYsamurai
> Of course, Bill "Big Brother" Gates is spending a lot of his money for
> philanthropy, so maybe that excuses it.
the humanitarian vs tesla vs pantenting for greed vs donating "ideas"
like heart surgery for the betterment of manking -- debate again
here's to an economy based on personal development
rather than personal development based on personal economic gain
Eldonbraun
> Eldonbraun wrote:
>
> > Of course, Bill "Big Brother" Gates is spending a lot of his money for
> > philanthropy, so maybe that excuses it.
>
> the humanitarian vs tesla vs pantenting for greed vs donating "ideas"
> like heart surgery for the betterment of manking -- debate again
>
> here's to an economy based on personal development
Yup, I could easily go along with the Hunger Project's concept that
feeding people is just stamping out brush fires. So far, so good. But
in fact, there are already workable models for increasing
self-sufficiency through education and simple technology. The hunger
project people appear to studiously ignore those. I don't see that
they've made any measurable gains during all the years they've existed.
Serena Nordstrup
May it please the Court: the witness "Tex" has borne no witness, but
has misused and perverted his sacred text, viz "dictionary", to no
good purpose.
My dictionary fails to mention blueness when discussing 'sky' :
1. The expanse of air over any given point on the earth; the upper
atmosphere as seen from the earth's surface. 2. The appearance of the
upper atmosphere, especially with reference to weather. Often used in
the plural: Threatening skies portend a storm. 3. The celestial
regions; the heavens: stars in the southern sky. 4. The highest level
or degree: reaching for the sky.
( http://www.bartleby.com/61/82/S0458200.html )
Bad dictionary? Or wrong authority for the circumtances?
We ask that the Court rule not on the definition of the word "claim",
but on the validity of an actual claim, taking into account evidence
(as yet unforthcoming) from witness Bruno.
Simpatice
Serena
Tex
Ah, you want a substantiated claim.
That's different than an unjustified claim.
You may rephrase and resubmit your argument for the "Court's" perusal. {;~D
>
> Simpatice
> Serena
>
Serena Nordstrup
You'll find the ball in Bruno's "court".
Simpatice
Serena
bruno Tonon
No not on my side. I'm not out to prove anything.
I'm going to claim once again that
" Forum ideas can be valuable to anyone that acccepts and practises that
mind set!!!!"
Like it or lump it!!!!!!
cheers Bruno
>
> Simpatice
> Serena
>
Eldonbraun
I lumped it long ago, Bruno. Rolled it up there in a nasty,
hypocritical ball of nonsense with the teachings of L. Ron Hubbard,
Osho (Rajneesh), Adi da, Sai Baba and Harry Palmer among other
narcissistic gurus.
Ayn Rand being a "rational" example of that pathology. Anyway, you
claim rather than asserting proof. Fine. Whatever is true for you is
fine with me.
BTW, what do you think of Kant's aesthetic theories as applied to
breast enlargement creams and cosmetic surgery? Just wondered.
>
> cheers Bruno
>
>
> >
> > Simpatice
> > Serena
> >
Serena Nordstrup
Do you expect anyone to believe your assertion, Bruno?
bruno Tonon
No I don't, but then it does not matter because most people in this
group are really not interested in what happened.
You already know so whats the use.
I am finally learning that. Its taken me a while to do so
but thats okay. I'm a slow learner
Hope you are well
cheers Bruno
Just having a Campari with my wife to celebrate 20 years
anniversary of having moved into our house.
Have been feeling a bit crook these days due to Gallstone attacks.
Not pleasant.
Eldonbraun
Well Bruno, those gallstones are not pleasant. It is entirely possible
that you're due for a gall bladder removal. It's minor surgery these
days, and only requires a bit of medication and dietary adjustment
afterward.
Anyway, I hope you are getting competent medical care by professionals
as opposed to witch doctors.
Tex
Millions have.
Eldonbraun
Then why aren't at least few hundred of them taking the trouble to post
their supportive views? Nothing is stopping them.
Tex
There are newsgroups all over the web with people posting there "happy
results" and talking about "ways of being" or "being a stand" etc.
these links below will keep you busy reading for weeks.
(Disclaimer: not responsible of you puke on your keyboard)
Hey, I didn't write this stuff. :-D
http://www.life-coaching-resource.com/landmark-education.htm
http://www.google.com/Top/Health/Mental_Health/Self-Help/Products_and_Services/Landmark_Education/Testimonials/
http://www.ecademy.com/node.php?id=66809&seen=1
http://www.teamleadership.org/index.php?body=usefulsites
Eldonbraun
> these links below will keep you busy reading for weeks.
> (Disclaimer: not responsible of you puke on your keyboard)
> Hey, I didn't write this stuff. :-D
>
It's sort of like an extended British Koan thing.
http://www.ecademy.com/node.php?id=66809&seen=1
I'm really abnormal,
But I enjoy it anyway...
Tex
> Tex wrote:
>> these links below will keep you busy reading for weeks.
>> (Disclaimer: not responsible of you puke on your keyboard)
>> Hey, I didn't write this stuff. :-D
>>
> Naw, about ten minutes at most. I really like the third one, though.
> It's sort of like an extended British Koan thing.
> http://www.ecademy.com/node.php?id=66809&seen=1
>
> I'm really abnormal,
> But I enjoy it anyway...
LOL!!!!
I'm surprised Landmark hasn't asked him to ---ahem--- refine his shares a
bit!
Divorced twice, living in his parents basement, with no money and
"powerfully living a life he loves."
Surprising this hasn't been posted on the Landmark website. ;-D
HAPPYsamurai
>
> Anyway, I hope you are getting competent medical care by professionals
> as opposed to witch doctors.
not to sound like a witch doctor but there's an old school remedie
involving olive oil and lemon juice and sleeping on ya left side....
try googling it...
bruno Tonon
"Tex" <ritte...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:jvKdnVVSavkikSDZ...@adelphia.com...
>
> "Eldonbraun" <Eldo...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1153237533.3...@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> Tex wrote:
>>> these links below will keep you busy reading for weeks.
>>> (Disclaimer: not responsible of you puke on your keyboard)
>>> Hey, I didn't write this stuff. :-D
>>>
>> Naw, about ten minutes at most. I really like the third one, though.
>> It's sort of like an extended British Koan thing.
>> http://www.ecademy.com/node.php?id=66809&seen=1
>>
>> I'm really abnormal,
>> But I enjoy it anyway...
Well thats a choice we all have to make. Do we go for the money and
hate ourselves for doing that or do we follow our own wants and needs
and try the path that makes us happy.( And all the paths in between)
After all he still lives in a big house, drives a car, plays guitar and is
happy.
Now I don't suggest this is the way to go however I respect that he made
the choice and is living that choice.
We may disagree with his choice but then we are not in his shoes to fully
understand his choice.
Can't we let him be what he wants to be.
Humans are complex beings and there is no easy solution to try
to categorise them all in small boxes the way we think they should
behave.
You may consider him to be abnormal just because he is doing what
he wants and doesn't care what others think.
Does that really disturb you?????
cheers Bruno
Tex
"bruno Tonon" <bto...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:44bd9c67$0$1210$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
> "Tex" <ritte...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:jvKdnVVSavkikSDZ...@adelphia.com...
>>
>> "Eldonbraun" <Eldo...@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:1153237533.3...@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>>> Tex wrote:
>>>> these links below will keep you busy reading for weeks.
>>>> (Disclaimer: not responsible of you puke on your keyboard)
>>>> Hey, I didn't write this stuff. :-D
>>>>
>>> Naw, about ten minutes at most. I really like the third one, though.
>>> It's sort of like an extended British Koan thing.
>>> http://www.ecademy.com/node.php?id=66809&seen=1
>>>
>>> I'm really abnormal,
>>> But I enjoy it anyway...
>
> Well thats a choice we all have to make. Do we go for the money and
> hate ourselves for doing that or do we follow our own wants and needs
> and try the path that makes us happy.( And all the paths in between)
> After all he still lives in a big house, drives a car, plays guitar and is
> happy.
> Now I don't suggest this is the way to go however I respect that he made
> the choice and is living that choice.
> We may disagree with his choice but then we are not in his shoes to fully
> understand his choice.
> Can't we let him be what he wants to be.
Who is stopping that Bruno?
He did make a "special" invitation at the bottom of his blog.
He said,
"In short, I'm living a life I love, and living it powerfully, which just
happens to be the promise of the Landmark Curriculum for Living. If that
appeals to you, my invitation is to check it out and see if it's something
for you."
And before this he said what he "got" out of doing the Forum was, I
paraphrase,
1.)He has zero money
2.) He's divorced
3.)He lives with his parents
4.)He's happy all the time, because he only does what he wants to do
(arrested development comes t mind)
Rock on dude!!!!!
But not a ringing endorsement for Landmark.
I'd have to say "No thanks!"
Sounds like he should play this song on his guitar!
PETER PAN:
Are you ready for today's lesson?
ALL:
Yes, Peter!
PETER PAN:
Listen to your teacher. Repeat after me:
I won't grow up,
----I won't grow up
I don't want to go to school.
----I don't want to go to school
Just to learn to be a parent,
----Just to learn to be a parent
And recite a silly rule.
----And recite a silly rule
If growing up means
It would be beneath my dignity to climb a tree,
I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up
Not me!
Not I,
Not me!
Not me!
I won't grow up,
----I won't grow up
I don't want to wear a tie.
----I don't want to wear a tie
And a serious expression
----And a serious expression
In the middle of July.
----In the middle of July
And if it means I must prepare
To shoulder burdens with a worried air,
I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up
Not me,
Not I,
Not me!
So there!
Never gonna be a man,
I won't!
Like to see somebody try
And make me.
Anyone who wants to try
And make me turn into a man,
Catch me if you can.
I won't grow up.
Not a penny will I pinch.
I will never grow a mustache,
Or a fraction of an inch.
'Cause growing up is awfuller
Than all the awful things that ever were.
I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up,
No sir,
Not I,
Not me,
So there!
I won't grow up!
----I won't grow up
I will never even try
----I will never even try
I will do what Peter tells me
----I will do what Peter tells me
And I'll never ask him why
----And I'll never ask him why
We won't grow up!
----We won't grow up
We will never grow a day
----We will never grow a day
And if someone tries to make it
----And if someone tries to make it
We will simply run away
----We will simply run away
I won't grow up!
----I won't grow up
No, I promise that I won't
----No, I promise that I won't
I will stay a boy forever
----I will stay a boy forever
And be banished if I don't!
----And be banished if I don't
And Never Land will always be
The home of youth and joy
And liberty
I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up
Not me!
Not me!
Not me!
Not me!
No sir!
Not me!
Eldonbraun
At first I thought maybe he was pulling people's legs. Seems to me
Landmark might pay him to expunge that endorsement ;-)
Serena Nordstrup
Other people exist outside this newsgroup, Bruno. Do you expect them to
believe you?
Lurkers (your erstwhile/potential fans) read this newsgroup, Bruno. Do
you expect them to believe you?
Having an interest in ~what happened~ has nothing to do with believing
you, Bruno. Don't you feel you owe all of us a better explanation of
not believing you doesn't matter? -- You could start making a habit of
getting distrusted...
> You already know so whats the use.
What do I already know, Bruno? How can you enrich me with more wisdom
if you won't justify your bald and self-referential assertions?
> I am finally learning that. Its taken me a while to do so
> but thats okay. I'm a slow learner
>
> Hope you are well
>
> cheers Bruno
>
> Just having a Campari with my wife to celebrate 20 years
> anniversary of having moved into our house.
Congratulations!
> Have been feeling a bit crook these days due to Gallstone attacks.
> Not pleasant.
May your health only improve!
bruno Tonon
I came into the group wanting more information about what I had witnessed
and expereinced in Forum and the LEC organisation.
I was looking for information rather than wanting to give it.
>
> Lurkers (your erstwhile/potential fans) read this newsgroup, Bruno. Do
> you expect them to believe you?
Not at all. If they are intereted they will ask questions
>
> Having an interest in ~what happened~ has nothing to do with believing
> you, Bruno. Don't you feel you owe all of us a better explanation of
> not believing you doesn't matter? -- You could start making a habit of
> getting distrusted...
Thats fine. I can live with that.
>
>> You already know so whats the use.
>
> What do I already know, Bruno? How can you enrich me with more wisdom
> if you won't justify your bald and self-referential assertions?
I've allways appreciated your enquiries but unfortunately many times
could not understand what you were driving at.
I suppose I've just lost interest especially when I am not capable
of getting your attention.
I think Cody once stated that we really did not have any reference
points that we could at least agree upon to start have a meaningful
discussion.
I do miss Cody as I thought she was good at jousting with the
EEG Brigade.
I think she gave you a run for your monies and I did appreciate
the few times she had you on the ropes.
Good learning experience for me.
Just wondering whether she is still around and whether I
could entice her back for some more jousting sessions.
Just wonder how the EEG Brigade would feel about that???
>
>> I am finally learning that. Its taken me a while to do so
>> but thats okay. I'm a slow learner
>>
>> Hope you are well
>>
>> cheers Bruno
>>
>> Just having a Campari with my wife to celebrate 20 years
>> anniversary of having moved into our house.
>
> Congratulations!
>
>> Have been feeling a bit crook these days due to Gallstone attacks.
>> Not pleasant.
>
> May your health only improve!
Thanks, I suppose you need these moments to appreciate your health
because its so easy to take it for granted.
You know I'm curious what city you live in and where you
had your run in the LEC organisation.
Also I figure you majored in Philosophy or Sociology with a
strong background in "Materialism" and are a product of
the 70's or 80's.
I'm afraid I found parapsychology and Carl Rogers more
interesting than Skinner and his cohorts that in my time
totally dominated the thinking .
Thats why the Human Potential movement was a great
breath of fresh air to me.
cheers Bruno
Eldonbraun
If you count me as a member or follower of that brigade, Bruno, I would
be quite happy to see Cody return. However, I think she has finished
her research project. It was pretty transparent.
jim_...@my-dejanews.com
Eldonbraun wrote:
> The Space Boss wrote:
> > Serena Nordstrup wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Like changing his name so often and running away from marriage and
> > > children.
> >
> > The bible says let he that is without sin cast the first stone.
>
> Christ said that within a particular ~context~ that might have been
> regarded as an emergency situation. It wasn't just a casual roadside
> lecture, you know. Somebody was about to get stoned to death.
>
> Quite awhile earlier, God also dictated in the Ten Commandments, "Thou
> shalt not kill." Do you see any connection?
>
> Did either of them say it was forbidden to criticize immoral behavior?
> I thought not. Come to think of it, Christ did quite a bit of that
> himself.
Yes, but then there's something about motes and beams that speak to
that particular pastime.
elle...@hotmail.com
jim_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> Yes, but then there's something about motes and beams that speak to
> that particular pastime.
Hey Jim,
Something about using a word like "pastime" indicates one might take
the whole assignment of pondering moral rectitude to be un or
non-essential. Would you place it in such a category?
By the way, I recall reading in an old post that you brought or
encouraged or ~enrolled~ your daughter in Landmark. What happened, if
you care to say? How did she react? And would you tell us if she
hated it or thought it was silly? Curious minds want to know. Also,
what do you think about the Darren Mack thing (again, if you care to
say)?
Ellen
jim_...@my-dejanews.com
elle...@hotmail.com wrote:
> jim_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> > Yes, but then there's something about motes and beams that speak to
> > that particular pastime.
>
>
> Hey Jim,
>
> Something about using a word like "pastime" indicates one might take
> the whole assignment of pondering moral rectitude to be un or
> non-essential. Would you place it in such a category?
For some judging others based on their own (or a perceived universal)
moral code appears (to me at least) to be a pastime.
It seems it's both easier and more fun to make those sorts of
judgements then to look within to ensure that that which is being
judged is not active within oneself.
I make no generalizations regarding 'righteousness' or what 'bucket' to
put same in. I respect those that conduct themselves in such a way
that they either 1) live with a strict adherence to the moral codes
that they espouse and therefore are in a good position to judge 2)
Admit their own hypocrisy with regard to same.
I'm not a big fan of 'Do as I say, not as I do' crowd.
>
> By the way, I recall reading in an old post that you brought or
> encouraged or ~enrolled~ your daughter in Landmark. What happened, if
> you care to say? How did she react? And would you tell us if she
> hated it or thought it was silly? Curious minds want to know.
After I did the forum I told my daughter about it and she even attended
one of those introductions. She wasn't interested and it pretty much
ended right there.
She did think the whole idea was 'silly' and ~chose no~. I respected
(and still do) that ~choice~.
Also,
> what do you think about the Darren Mack thing (again, if you care to
> say)?
He's a murderer and a thief. He also appears to be a sociopath.
Did LEC cause (or trigger) his sociopathology or otherwise encourage
murder and thievery (he stole his wife's life) ? I think not.
Hope you are well, Ellen.
>
>
>
> Ellen
elle...@hotmail.com
jim_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> He's a murderer and a thief. He also appears to be a sociopath.
>
> Did LEC cause (or trigger) his sociopathology or otherwise encourage
> murder and thievery (he stole his wife's life) ? I think not.
Would you be willing to entertain the possibility that, if not the main
"cause (or trigger)," Landmark might have been a strong secondary
influence? Or that Landmark might have tipped the balance toward
impulsivity, rage, and violent "acting out?"
Ellen
jim_...@my-dejanews.com
Sure, it's possible. WRT LEC there appears to be a wide range of what
is 'heard' (vs. what is actually said) during 'the trainings'. These
'hearings' then can be reinforced in other LEC invovlements (i.e.
assisting, coaching etc); which in itself contraindicates
overinvovlement. Human's appear to be very good at rationalizing their
own behaviour/views. Anything that could be viewed (whether real or
actually said or not) to support one's own 'agenda' (what ever that
happens to be) could be viewed as a contributing influence.
I am of the firm opinion that one's mental health doesn't tend to
improve with age. In the case of Mr. Mack, his own sociopathology
appears to have progressed and will likely continue to progress, with
or without LEC. Sociopathology is not something that is easily cured,
mainly because the afflicted person doesn't see themselves as having
'a problem'.
HAPPYsamurai
. In the case of Mr. Mack, his own sociopathology
> appears to have progressed and will likely continue to progress, with
> or without LEC. Sociopathology is not something that is easily cured,
> mainly because the afflicted person doesn't see themselves as having
> 'a problem'.
wonder what would've happened if WERNER/ klaus/ Ron?
had "coached" him per sonally [darren], would he have got the
transformative personal development he required to be a little less
violent in his problem solving and have a little more conscience??????
elle...@hotmail.com
jim_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> Sure, it's possible. WRT LEC there appears to be a wide range of what
> is 'heard' (vs. what is actually said) during 'the trainings'. These
> 'hearings' then can be reinforced in other LEC invovlements (i.e.
> assisting, coaching etc); which in itself contraindicates
> overinvovlement. Human's appear to be very good at rationalizing their
> own behaviour/views. Anything that could be viewed (whether real or
> actually said or not) to support one's own 'agenda' (what ever that
> happens to be) could be viewed as a contributing influence.
>
> I am of the firm opinion that one's mental health doesn't tend to
> improve with age. In the case of Mr. Mack, his own sociopathology
> appears to have progressed and will likely continue to progress, with
> or without LEC. Sociopathology is not something that is easily cured,
> mainly because the afflicted person doesn't see themselves as having
> 'a problem'.
So would it be fair to say that you consider the Landmark "factor"
irrelevant or non-contributory and that Darren Mack made it mean
whatever was already in his mind and just picked up those bits that
confirmed his own opinions?
Ellen
HAPPYsamurai
>
> So would it be fair to say that you consider the Landmark "factor"
> irrelevant or non-contributory and that Darren Mack made it mean
> whatever was already in his mind and just picked up those bits that
> confirmed his own opinions?
>
this happens in the old schooltransformational religions to
where instead of being transformed the "believer" just mimics the words
and maintains his old ego justifying state clothed in the new
religion...
hence christ's parable of the good samaritan who was more good in his
heart than the guy who had supposedly recieved god in his heart
its an interesting play on the word jusify
you use the new religion to justify your actions instead of being
"justified" ie "set right" by embracing the change.... goes on all the
time... beware the hypocrasy of the pharisees etc
Serena Nordstrup
Fine. And at some point you started offerring opinions, and thus became
subject to public scrutiny and cross-examination, just like other
participants.
Do you expect people outside this newsgroup to believe you, Bruno?
> > Lurkers (your erstwhile/potential fans) read this newsgroup, Bruno. Do
> > you expect them to believe you?
>
> Not at all. If they are intereted they will ask questions
Not if they don't trust you in the first place ...
> > Having an interest in ~what happened~ has nothing to do with believing
> > you, Bruno. Don't you feel you owe all of us a better explanation of
> > not believing you doesn't matter? -- You could start making a habit of
> > getting distrusted...
>
> Thats fine. I can live with that.
> >
> >> You already know so whats the use.
> >
> > What do I already know, Bruno? How can you enrich me with more wisdom
> > if you won't justify your bald and self-referential assertions?
>
> I've allways appreciated your enquiries but unfortunately many times
> could not understand what you were driving at.
What do I already know, Bruno? How can you enrich me with more wisdom
if you won't justify your bald and self-referential assertions?
> I suppose I've just lost interest especially when I am not capable
> of getting your attention.
You have my attention: I classify you as a bad example of rosenbergist
non-rigor. To attract even more of my attention, explain/justify your
contention.
> I think Cody once stated that we really did not have any reference
> points that we could at least agree upon to start have a meaningful
> discussion.
I didn't accept that either.
> I do miss Cody as I thought she was good at jousting with the
> EEG Brigade.
> I think she gave you a run for your monies and I did appreciate
> the few times she had you on the ropes.
> Good learning experience for me.
> Just wondering whether she is still around and whether I
> could entice her back for some more jousting sessions.
> Just wonder how the EEG Brigade would feel about that???
I wonder about your combatitive imagery, Bruno: "jousting', "on the
ropes", "brigade". Do you enjoy blood-sports?
bruno Tonon
What do you mean by it was pretty transparent?????
I think she had the EEG group on the ropes most of the time
as they certainly treated her with Kid gloves??/
cheers Bruno
bruno Tonon
Well there is the difficulty of our discussion. Cody was smart
enough to recognize that there were no reference points to start
a meaningful discussion. I felt it but not have the words to
identify it.
>
>> I do miss Cody as I thought she was good at jousting with the
>> EEG Brigade.
>> I think she gave you a run for your monies and I did appreciate
>> the few times she had you on the ropes.
>> Good learning experience for me.
>> Just wondering whether she is still around and whether I
>> could entice her back for some more jousting sessions.
>> Just wonder how the EEG Brigade would feel about that???
>
> I wonder about your combatitive imagery, Bruno: "jousting', "on the
> ropes", "brigade". Do you enjoy blood-sports?
No I don't , but I do like a battle of ideas and viewpoints. You can
learn something from all that jousting????
The missing reference points I believe to be that you do not
want to use the philosophy of Ontology as a reference point
but rather accept "Materialism" cause and effect as your reference
point.
If you think there is a philosophy that can be at half way between
these two please let us know so we can possibly have a more level
playing field for both of us.
Forum was about perceptions of reality.
Perception and reality and the ever changing variables
demand a more rigorous and flexible philosophy than the mere
inanimate, simple, cause and effect explanation that Materialism
uses to explain events.
cheers Bruno
jim_...@my-dejanews.com
I don't know what 'transformation' means.
jim_...@my-dejanews.com
I think you were on to something when you opined that this sort of
'education' could be 'used' by people with sociopathic tendencies.
There is a lot of information presented that 'could' be used to aide in
their manipulative/predatory activities.
Eldonbraun
> There is a lot of information presented that 'could' be used to aide in
> their manipulative/predatory activities.
So what do you think might prevent that from happening? Or should it be
prevented? Maybe I should just start selling a course that teaches how
to be a more effective sociopath. That would be a direct route. I'll
bet there's a market.
jim_...@my-dejanews.com
Not sure that there is anything to be done.
Sociopaths have been 'among us' for a long time. It often comes as a
shock, to others, when that malady comes to light. I'm sure that
would be the case with Mr. Mack AND it is only afterwards that the
'aha' happens; something like: "Gee, I just thought he had this
intensity (i.e. predatory stare)".
I opine that male sociopaths may even look like a 'catch' to females;
tyhat is they tend to look like the alpha male that seem to be what the
chicks are looking for.
We all need to be able to recognize the behaviour patterns inherent in
this mental illness as a way to 'protect ourselves'. I, personally,
don't have an example other then to say that I avoid people that 'give
me the willy's'. I'm not sure a 'normal' person can 'win' against such
a person.
elle...@hotmail.com
LOL
Somebody already has, Eldon.
(Actually, there are hundreds of them - just like LGATs, they sprouted
like weeds.)
Ellen
Eldonbraun
Well shit, I thought I had discovered a whole new market. So what can I
sell besides sleazy bar pickup lines? I mean, I wanna make money on the
Internet. How about an e-book on how to spot a cult? Do you think that
would go over?
elle...@hotmail.com
jim_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> Sociopaths have been 'among us' for a long time. It often comes as a
> shock, to others, when that malady comes to light. I'm sure that
> would be the case with Mr. Mack AND it is only afterwards that the
> 'aha' happens; something like: "Gee, I just thought he had this
> intensity (i.e. predatory stare)".
>
> I opine that male sociopaths may even look like a 'catch' to females;
> tyhat is they tend to look like the alpha male that seem to be what the
> chicks are looking for.
Course they do. They are consumate actors (the good ones, anyway).
And liars. And since women tend to respond to "verbal" stimuli in the
way that men respond to visual, a good sociopath has the patter down -
he says the things women want to hear, the things a more reticent,
mature, or prudent man might not. They're slick. Charm is the coin of
the realm. But the follow through is as shallow and flimsy as the
pages of magazines men love to read. Too bad a man might be out only
the price of a magazine but a woman can be stuck for life if she lets
one of these guys impregnate her.
Why do you think Werner Erhard put so much emphasis on words?
> We all need to be able to recognize the behaviour patterns inherent in
> this mental illness as a way to 'protect ourselves'. I, personally,
> don't have an example other then to say that I avoid people that 'give
> me the willy's'. I'm not sure a 'normal' person can 'win' against such
> a person.
It's not an "illness" in the traditional sense. The "victim" doesn't
do any suffering. They are quite happy the way they are. It's only
the other people who get involved with these types who suffer. And no,
you can't win. They aren't burdened by bad feelings such as remorse,
guilt, or shame. But there are certainly clues and these guys "leak"
information all over the place. Robert Hare has provided a good guide
book to the territory.
I think Charla Mack might have been one herself.
Ellen
elle...@hotmail.com
Eldonbraun wrote:
> Well shit, I thought I had discovered a whole new market. So what can I
> sell besides sleazy bar pickup lines? I mean, I wanna make money on the
> Internet. How about an e-book on how to spot a cult? Do you think that
> would go over?
How to start your own cult, maybe.
Ooops - somebody's already done that too. And it's free!
http://www.songpoemmusic.com/cults/guru.htm
Ellen