Scientology and NLP?
Fredric L. Rice
Posted and mailed
>Does anyoe know of a good book or article about the integration of
>Scientology into mainstream culture in the US ?
>I see the influence in The Forum and in N L P and would like to read
>more as done by an investagative reporter etc
See "A Ganderous Cult goes Mainstream" at
http://www.skeptictank.org/hs/dancult.htm
Also see Time Magazine's "The Thriving cult of power and greed"
which covers the attempt of the crooks to go "mainstream" at
http://www.skeptictank.org/hs/time-cos.htm
Also 20/20's exposure of the Scientology cult discussed the attempt
by the crooks to go "mainstream" and that can be seen at:
http://www.skeptictank.org/hs/2020.htm
--- "de omnibus dubitandum" All is to be doubted --- Descartes
24-hour file archive access: (626) 335-9601 (FidoNet 1:218/890.0) SP4
The Skeptic Tank: http://www.skeptictank.org/ http://www.nots.org/
"I offered him an OT3/Xenu flyer. It was somewhat like offering
garlic to a vampire..." - Keith Henson (http://www.xenu.net/)
Doug Kent
Scientology into mainstream culture in the US ?
I see the influence in The Forum and in N L P and would like to read
more as done by an investagative reporter etc
Sincerely
Doug
Jeff Jacobsen
synthesis of ideas from many sources besides just Hubbard. Abreactive
therapy, gnosticism, etc. As the years went by Hubbard more and more
denied that he was influenced by anyone else. So whether you can tell
if an idea was stolen from Hubbard or the guy Hubbard stole it from
will be a task. I've seen writings that Eckankar, EST, and of course
the Process used Hubbard theories.
You might read The Hubbard is Bare linked at www.xenu.net if you're
interested in other sources Hubbard used.
On Sun, 16 Jul 2000 07:49:48 -0700, Doug Kent <Abig...@pacbell.net>
wrote:
When a Scientology staffer used a syringe to force a mixture of
aspirin, Benadryl and orange juice into McPherson's throat while others
held her down, it was "spiritual sustenance," the church argues.
Monica Pignotti
Doug Kent <Abig...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> Does anyoe know of a good book or article about the integration of
> Scientology into mainstream culture in the US ?
> I see the influence in The Forum and in N L P and would like to
read
> more as done by an investagative reporter etc
The development of NLP had nothing at all to do with Scientology.
Bandler & Grinder developed NLP, based on the work of Milton Erickson,
Virginia Satir, Gregory Baetson and others who had nothing to do with
Scientology. The only one common influence is the work of Alfred
Korzybski, who's Hubbard took and influenced Scientology. Korzybski was
also an influence on NLP, but there was no direct influence of LRH on
NLP. If you are seeing any "influences" it's what LRH ripped off from
others. At least Bandler & Grinder were honest enough to say who they
took their work from.
The Forum/EST did have a Scientology influence, as Erhard did study
Scientology, but I would hardly consider the Forum to be mainstream in
American culture.
--
Monica Pignotti
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
J. R. Ford
wrote:
>Does anyoe know of a good book or article about the integration of
>Scientology into mainstream culture in the US ?
>I see the influence in The Forum and in N L P and would like to read
>more as done by an investagative reporter etc
>
>Sincerely
>Doug
New York Times, October 9, 1979
Judge Backs Guilty Plea Bargain by Scientology Chruch Leaders
Washington, Oct. 8 (UPI)
A federal judge today upheld a disputed agreement under which nine
leaders of the Church of Scientology would plead guilty to a single
count in connection with an aleged consipiracy to steal Government
documents.
<snip>
Under the pleas agreement, Mrs. Hubbard, second in command of the
church, and Henning Heldt, Duke Snider, Gregory Willardson, Richard
Weigand, Cindy Raymond and Gerald Wolfe, all members, would plead
guilty to conspiring to obstruct justice.
Eleven church members were indicted more than a year ago on charges of
conspring to infiltrate Federal agencies and steal Government
documents. Two members still are in England awaiting extradition
proceedings.
End of Article
Mainstream?
Ralph Hilton
wrote:
>Hm. I think a problem you're going to have is that Scientology is a
>synthesis of ideas from many sources besides just Hubbard. Abreactive
>therapy, gnosticism, etc. As the years went by Hubbard more and more
>denied that he was influenced by anyone else. So whether you can tell
>if an idea was stolen from Hubbard or the guy Hubbard stole it from
>will be a task. I've seen writings that Eckankar, EST, and of course
>the Process used Hubbard theories.
>
> You might read The Hubbard is Bare linked at www.xenu.net if you're
>interested in other sources Hubbard used.
>
>On Sun, 16 Jul 2000 07:49:48 -0700, Doug Kent <Abig...@pacbell.net>
>wrote:
>
>>Does anyoe know of a good book or article about the integration of
>>Scientology into mainstream culture in the US ?
>>I see the influence in The Forum and in N L P and would like to read
>>more as done by an investagative reporter etc
I don't see a direct derivation in the original NLP - just a common source
of data in Count Alfred Korzybski.
Later NLP authors incorporated ideas from Dianetics into "Time Line Therapy"
but I see no indications of it in the writings of the founders, Grinder and
Bandler.
--
Ralph Hilton
http://www.fzint.org/rhilton
Freezone International: http://www.fzint.org
C-Meter: http://www.inquisitive-instruments.co.uk/
XxxMisterEarlxxx
Ralph Hilton
wrote:
> What is NLP?
Neuro Linguistic Programming. It has its own newsgroup alt.psychology.nlp
An Metet
pay for his crime. One of the others was his wife.
In all of recorded human history there have been few acts of cowardice
to equal this.
It's after this incident that the Church really spun in. LRH was so
ashamed of this that he completely withdrew from Scientology and
society at large. This is what let David Miscavige take over. LRH was
in cover so deep that only a few people knew where he was and those
people effectively became the management of Scientology.
J. R. Ford <jrf...@atlascomm.net> writes:
> On Sun, 16 Jul 2000 07:49:48 -0700, Doug Kent <Abig...@pacbell.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Does anyoe know of a good book or article about the integration of
> >Scientology into mainstream culture in the US ?
> >I see the influence in The Forum and in N L P and would like to read
> >more as done by an investagative reporter etc
> >
barb
>
> Oh yeah. This is the case where the honorable L. Ron Hubbard let 9 others
> pay for his crime. One of the others was his wife.
>
> In all of recorded human history there have been few acts of cowardice
> to equal this.
>
> It's after this incident that the Church really spun in. LRH was so
> ashamed of this that he completely withdrew from Scientology and
> society at large. This is what let David Miscavige take over. LRH was
> in cover so deep that only a few people knew where he was and those
> people effectively became the management of Scientology.
Damned shame he didn't withdraw from society at large after shelling the
Coronado Islands and blaming everything but himself. Wasn't his fault!
No, it was the navigator, the weather, the ocean, that seagull, the
damned dolphins made him do it! Flailing about trying to deflect the
responsibility didn't fool the Navy. He was in command, and totally
responsible for everything that happened on shipboard. Pathetic and
disgusting man!
>
> J. R. Ford <jrf...@atlascomm.net> writes:
>
> > On Sun, 16 Jul 2000 07:49:48 -0700, Doug Kent <Abig...@pacbell.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Does anyoe know of a good book or article about the integration of
> > >Scientology into mainstream culture in the US ?
> > >I see the influence in The Forum and in N L P and would like to read
> > >more as done by an investagative reporter etc
> > >
> > >Sincerely
> > >Doug
> >
> >
> > New York Times, October 9, 1979
> >
> > Judge Backs Guilty Plea Bargain by Scientology Chruch Leaders
> >
> > Washington, Oct. 8 (UPI)
> >
> > A federal judge today upheld a disputed agreement under which nine
> > leaders of the Church of Scientology would plead guilty to a single
> > count in connection with an aleged consipiracy to steal Government
> > documents.
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > Under the pleas agreement, Mrs. Hubbard, second in command of the
> > church, and Henning Heldt, Duke Snider, Gregory Willardson, Richard
> > Weigand, Cindy Raymond and Gerald Wolfe, all members, would plead
> > guilty to conspiring to obstruct justice.
--
barb
"Every week, every month, every year, every decade and now
every century, Scientology does wierd and stupid things
to damage its own reputation."
-Steve Zadarnowski
http://www.xenu.net
http://www.xenutv.com (see live Scientologists in their natural state!)
The Skipster
>
> Oh yeah. This is the case where the honorable L. Ron Hubbard let 9 others
> pay for his crime. One of the others was his wife.
>
> In all of recorded human history there have been few acts of cowardice
> to equal this.
>
> It's after this incident that the Church really spun in. LRH was so
> ashamed of this that he completely withdrew from Scientology and
>society at large. This is what let David Miscavige take over. LRH was
> in cover so deep that only a few people knew where he was and those
> people effectively became the management of Scientology.
When she was strip-searched in prison on Kentucky he apparently didn't
like that much. I'm surprised he showed any compassion, frankly, but
maybe they're hope for everyone. None of the felons I knew were at all
sorry about what they'd done, and crazily enough I never heard one of
them think hubbard had any blame, even though he was ALWAYS pulling all
the strings, all the time.
--
"Give me a smart idiot over a stupid genius any day."
-- Sam Goldwyn
Dave Bird
Hash: SHA1
In article<20000717053146...@ng-ba1.aol.com>,
XxxMisterEarlxxx <xxxmiste...@aol.com> writes:
> What is NLP?
"Neuro Linguistic Programming." I gather the idea is that you
can manipulate behaviour by calculated use of speech or body
language. I strongly suspect that it is ineffective quackery.
However, if it has anything in common with Scientology then
the traffic was one way -- Hubbard stole bits of it, as he
did bits of many things.
__ .\|/////..
||_.-' '. /\\|// ----
// ; | -----
- --._// .\|/. .==== =====. --- -----------X*E*M*U-----------+
(( //(####) \d]>||<[d]>\ (~\ |
|| v '--'\\ . | \ | ''Auditting your Garden |
|| ; v . {_ \ : \/ Plants'' by L Ron Tubbard |
// .' : .'___' : ' Bridge Publications |
// ; '. ~===~ /\ $949.99 paperback |
// . .... o : /__\'''' / \ |
. \\\\~~~~|~~~~~~~|\\ / /\/,,, further details, ring |
. | .\''. |/''''/.|,,\\ //,,,,,,, 01 800 FOR TRUT |
'.|: O :|[ / ]|,,,,\/,,,,,,,,, |
- ----------------| '...' |[__O__]|,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, --------------------------+
|_______|_______|,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1
iQA/AwUBOXNVuX8v/Y5zkfRPEQItFACcCZ/T/+u2dlhHI9wnmb3m1exEbCsAnjcw
AXnFTytvSkv3JtLYEuERqdpU
=TEE1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Ralph Hilton
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>In article<20000717053146...@ng-ba1.aol.com>,
>XxxMisterEarlxxx <xxxmiste...@aol.com> writes:
>> What is NLP?
>
>"Neuro Linguistic Programming." I gather the idea is that you
> can manipulate behaviour by calculated use of speech or body
> language. I strongly suspect that it is ineffective quackery.
>
> However, if it has anything in common with Scientology then
> the traffic was one way -- Hubbard stole bits of it, as he
> did bits of many things.
No way. NLP wasn't invented until 1975. The evidence points the other way
but well after the foundation of NLP.
Raptavio
Doug Kent <Abig...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> Does anyoe know of a good book or article about the integration of
> Scientology into mainstream culture in the US ?
This has been covered by other respondents.
> I see the influence in The Forum and in N L P and would like to
read
> more as done by an investagative reporter etc
Both NLP and The Forum/Landmark Education are "outside the mainstream."
I haven't found a lot of the former in its connections to Scientology
but the latter is most definitely influenced by Scientology. Both are
useless pseudo-science, and the latter is a cult, pure and simple.
The Forum's founder, Werner Erhard, originally founded est (the E in
est stands for Erhard). He had taken Scientology courses for many years
and the going theory is that he applied and improved upon Scientology's
techniques for "breaking" and keeping a firm hold on
students/followers/adherents. est was re-organized as The Forum (aka
Landmark Education) and continues to provide 'courses' that have the
illusion of being useful while separating people from their money, and
often their family.
I lost my stepmother to Landmark Education, and it's what sparked my
long study of cults.
--
"It must be exciting to think that way, but a drag to have to deal with
the clinical diagnosis."
Raptavio
copy of the text from one of said forum's pages:
http://www.landmark-education.com/overvw/default.htm
LANDMARK EDUCATION CORPORATION
Incorporated in the State of California in January, 1991 with
headquarters in San Francisco, Landmark Education Corporation offers
programs and curricula to individuals, organizations, communities and
institutions through its 58 offices worldwide. The company is owned by
its employees and former employees, with no one owning more than 3
percent of the stock. The management of the organization reports to a
Board of Directors elected by the stockholders.
At this stage in its development, the company is organized and operated
to invest its surpluses into making its programs, initiatives and
services more available. In 1997, the corporation had revenues of
approximately $48,000,000.
The programs of Landmark Education are the product of extensive
research and development in individual and organizational effectiveness
and communication, and are continually redesigned and updated. The
benefits of this research and development are embodied in the programs
of Landmark and offered in both the public and private sectors through
a unique and fully tested method of learning.
Landmark's programs are innovative, effective and immediately relevant.
They challenge conventional perspectives and decision-making patterns
and provide new tools - even new use of language - for effecting
significant change and shifting the very nature of what is possible.
As a result, participants can see new possibilities for effective
action in everyday matters. People are thereby able to achieve higher
standards of excellence, and to think and act beyond existing limits or
paradigms.
A fundamental principle of all the work of Landmark Education is that
people and the communities, organizations and institutions with which
they are engaged have the possibility not only of success, but also of
fulfillment and greatness. It is to this possibility that Landmark and
its work are committed.
The Landmark Forum is the foundation of all the programs offered by
Landmark Education. The Landmark Forum is designed to bring about a
fundamental shift or transformation in what is possible in people's
lives. This transformation is not a one-time event, but an ongoing
access to a previously untapped dimension of creativity and
effectiveness.
The Landmark Forum provides a technology that enables participants to
think and act outside existing views and limits, both in their personal
lives and relationships in the wider communities and areas of concern
in which they are engaged. Since its introduction in 1985, almost
500,000 people have participated in The Landmark Forum.
In many cases, people who have participated in The Landmark Forum have
also gone on to participate in the three subsequent programs in
Landmark's general curriculum to further train, develop and enable
themselves to be in action in the world as their vision, and effective
in making their vision real. Read articles about The Landmark Forum.
Landmark's general curriculum is offered in more than 100 cities around
the world. Landmark also offers many other programs, workshops and
seminars designed to address areas of specific interest, such as family
and communication. Over 100,000 people participate in these programs
annually, making Landmark one of the largest, most relevant and
diverse "campuses" in the world. For more information on The Landmark
Forum contact the Landmark office nearest you.
Raptavio
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/1998/dom/980316/society.the_best_of_es
t.3.html
The Best Of Est?
Werner Erhard's legacy lives on in a kinder, gentler and lucrative
version of his self-help seminars
By CHARLOTTE FALTERMAYER
-----------------------------------------------------------------
When Werner Erhard (born John Paul Rosenberg) founded Erhard Seminars
Training, Inc. in 1971, the former used-car salesman from Philadelphia
had a hook. Born of the theater-of-the-absurd atmosphere of the late
1960s, est (Latin for "it is") promised to help people get "it,"
whatever "it" was. Erhard's 60-hour seminars were strenuous ordeals,
complete with "body catchers" and barf bags for the weak of mind and
stomach. Trainers applauded bladder control and cursed those who didn't
get it. Still, Erhard and his message proved popular, even winning
celebrity advocates. Then, after two decades and two divorces, the self-
help messiah vanished amid reports of tax fraud (which proved false and
won him $200,000 from the IRS) and allegations of incest (which were
later recanted).
Unlike Erhard, est is still around--sort of. In 1991, before he left
the U.S., Erhard sold the "technology" behind his seminars to his
employees, who formed a new company called the Landmark Education
Corp., with Erhard's brother Harry Rosenberg at the helm. Rosenberg
admits that Erhard was in Toronto briefly last June for a family
reunion, but will not elaborate: "I'm not my brother's keeper. I'm not
his spokesman."
But he has proved to be an able keeper of his brother's legacy.
Landmark appears to be thriving. At its core is a four-part "Curriculum
for Living," which starts with a 3 1/2-day seminar called the Forum and
proceeds to courses that expand upon its brand of enlightenment. Since
1991, approximately 300,000 mostly professional and well-educated
seekers have taken the introductory Forum (an estimated 700,000 took
Erhard-era seminars). Revenues, which had been averaging $34 million
annually, hit $48 million in 1997, with profits approaching 4%.
Landmark is becoming a global brand name, with 42 offices in 11
countries, including a well-appointed San Francisco headquarters. Says
Rosenberg: "If we were doing a bad job, we wouldn't have the growth
that we have."
The secret of its success? Landmark lacks est's showcase celebrity
following, but its programs are not as costly (tuition is down some 50%
from Erhard days); they are not as lengthy (the basic course was
originally spread over two weekends); and--most important--they are
less in-your-face, nearly devoid of the shouting and door monitoring
imposed by est's stern trainers. Says a former estie who attended a
1997 Forum: "est was much more militant. You had to have a doctor's
note just to go to the bathroom. People humiliated themselves for it.
est tried to break you. Landmark doesn't do that."
At a recent Forum weekend in a nondescript room on Manhattan's East
Side, 52 men and 47 women gathered for a variety of reasons. The meek
sought a voice; the proud, humbling; the lonely, companionship. All had
signed a form stating that they are mentally and physically well. It is
important that attendees be healthy. The Forum, which costs $350, still
requires endurance. It consists of three 12- to 16-hour days--with time
out for meals--and (after a one-day breather) a one-evening wrap-up.
The Forum started promptly at 9 on a Friday morning, when a svelte,
spiky-haired woman named Beth Handel walked in and introduced herself
as the Forum leader. The Forum, she said, is a game called
transformation. Like every other game, it calls for good sportsmanship.
One should be "coachable," or open-minded about the Forum's concepts,
and committed to "forwarding the action." The name of the game is
participation or, more specifically, "sharing," which was to take place
at three microphones. The weekend, Handel warned, will be "an emotional
roller-coaster ride."
First, though, Handel took a few preliminary questions. "What is Werner
Erhard's role?" someone asked. Handel simply described him as the man
who developed and sold the technology behind Landmark. "What if I doze
off?" "Then you doze off," Handel replied with a shrug. A visibly
nervous woman stepped up to the mike. "You said this was going to be a
roller-coaster. But I'm afraid of roller-coasters. I never get on
them." "You will learn how to stop letting fear hold you back," Handel
reassured her.
Handel, 39, then drew diagrams on a blackboard as she held forth on a
series of concepts: facts have no meaning; it is the stories we concoct
out of those facts that give them meaning. She explained that "our
rackets," that is, ongoing complaints, are "killing our lives."
And "our winning formulas" are really losing formulas. She cautioned
that Landmark's ideas ("Be for each other like that" and "People 'is'
to death") aren't meant to fit together: "The Forum is holographic.
It's not linear."
But outreach was clearly part of the agenda. Pupils were assigned to
call or write people with whom they "want to make a breakthrough,"
thereby introducing others to Landmark. On graduation night
participants were encouraged to bring guests, who were then led away to
learn more and sign on. From Day 1, attendants were told that for a
limited time, the Forum's tuition included a $95 follow-up, "The Forum
in Action." The crowd was also repeatedly invited to sign up for the
$700 "Advanced Course." Act now and get a $100 discount.
Some Forum grads weren't sold. Rabbi Yisroel Persky, 24, who chose to
get his money's worth and take "The Forum in Action," today
remains "unfazed" by what he calls the Forum's common-sense concepts
cloaked in esoteric packaging. For Richard Giordanella, 49, a software
executive, the Forum was enough: "I'm still high on the Forum's main
message, that my life is in my control. But I can do without the
narcotic effect of their reinforcement."
Others, though, are hooked. Anthony, 32, a stockbroker, came to the
Forum because he didn't know whether he wanted to be married anymore.
He owned up to stashing $50,000 in cash for a clean getaway. During the
Forum, he said, "I had been pointing the finger at my wife. But I've
got to work on me." Now Anthony has completed the "Advanced Course,"
and is taking the final course in the curriculum, "Self-Expression and
Leadership." He says he feels like a newlywed. His wife agrees. "It's a
miracle," she says. And the woman afraid of roller-coasters? Mildred
Rodriguez, 33, has signed up to be a Landmark volunteer. Says she: "I'm
glad I got on for the ride."
Critics say Landmark is an elaborate marketing game that relies heavily
on volunteers. Says Tom Johnson, an "exit counselor" often summoned by
concerned parents to tend to alumni: "They tire your brain; they make
you vulnerable." Says critic Liz Sumerlin: "The participants end up
becoming recruiters. That's the whole purpose." Psychiatrists who speak
on Landmark's behalf dispute these claims. But Sumerlin says a 1993
Forum turned her fiance (now her ex) into a robot. She organized an
anti-Landmark hot line and publications clearinghouse. Landmark
officials made sounds to sue her.
Landmark alumnus Walter Plywaski, a Colorado electronics engineer who
took on the company after his daughter ran up a $3,000 tab on courses,
thinks Erhard is still pulling the strings. Says he: "Erhard is like
the Cheshire Cat. He has gone away, but the smile is there, hanging
over everything." Rosenberg says his brother is not and never has been
involved in Landmark. Steven Pressman, author of a scathing 1993
biography of Erhard, calls that slick corporate maneuvering: "They've
gotten out of the yoke of Werner because he became their worst p.r.
man. But it's one of the greatest success stories in mass marketing."
Indeed, the transformation has been such a success that it was the
subject of a recent case study by the Harvard Business School.
According to the study's co-author, Karen Wruck, the product that
Landmark sells is "an abrupt or jarring change, like an 'aha'"--
a "peculiar" one, certainly, but patently marketable. But Landmark, the
study notes, has challenges ahead. It will have to gauge the
effectiveness of its volunteers in expanding the business and weigh the
need to raise outside capital. Perhaps, Wruck says, it will need to go
public.
--With Reporting by Richard Woodbury /San Francisco
Raptavio
You'll have to check the links to see more, and for that you'll have to
go to the URL.
http://www.landmark-education.com/overvw/cntrvrsy/default.htm
I find it very interesting that this carries a lot of the same hero-
worship of Werner Erhard, but learning from Scn's mistakes, they don't
really demonize an enemy, and in fact don't seem threatened by
conventional 'psyches' like Scn does. They do of course overstate their
group's innocence a bit too much. And, as an aside, they are every bit
as litigious as Scientology is if you cross them.
---------
CONTROVERSY REGARDING LANDMARK EDUCATION AND WERNER ERHARD
Some of what has been written and said about Landmark Education and the
Landmark Forum has cast Landmark and its programs in a controversial
light.
Much of the controversy has been the result of the fact that The
Landmark Forum was originally created by Werner Erhard who had
previously created a course called "The est Training" or "Erhard
Seminars Training".
Over the years Mr. Erhard and his work have been the subject of
newspaper and magazine articles, television and radio programs, movies
and books. Unfortunately, a number of these stories have been founded
on misconceptions and misrepresentations. When republished over and
over, those misconceptions and misrepresentations have developed a life
of their own.
Recently some of those misconceptions and misunderstandings have begun
to be corrected in the mainstream media. For example, in the March
16th, 1998 issue of Time Magazine, false allegations about tax fraud
and Mr. Erhard abusing his family were laid to rest.
While ultimately, like anyone else, Werner Erhard is responsible for
how he is perceived in the public domain, outside forces have had a
major impact on how he and his ideas have been viewed.
The material in this section includes information and articles that
further address the controversy, the misrepresentations, and the
misunderstandings.
WERNER ERHARD AND LANDMARK'S RELATIONSHIP
Landmark Education is an employee-owned corporation that is a leader in
the field of developing and providing programs for individuals,
communities and organizations. The management of Landmark Education is
selected by the Board of Directors, which in turn is elected by the
employee-shareholders (none of whom own more than 3% of the stock).
Landmark Education's programs and initiatives are based on research and
a technology originally developed by Werner Erhard. Mr. Erhard has no
ownership or management role in Landmark Education (see Time Magazine
article). Landmark Education considers him a friend and respects and
appreciates the invaluable contribution he has made to millions of
people through his work.
While there has been some controversy in the media regarding Werner
Erhard, he has been recognized worldwide (including being given the
Mahatma Gandhi Humanitarian Award) for contributions in a broad range
of concerns. Mr. Erhard continues to be engaged by corporations,
consultants, charitable organizations, and governmental agencies around
the world as a consultant in creative and strategic thinking, corporate
culture, productivity and leadership. The May 15, 1995 issue of Fortune
Magazine recognized his contribution. In its 40th Anniversary issue, in
an article examining the major contributions to management thinking,
Fortune noted Werner Erhard's creation of est as the major innovation
of the 1970's in shaping modern management thinking towards empowering
people. (See also Industry Week).
Mr Erhard is the founder of five non-profit charitable organizations
with a profound and lasting impact on such issues as hunger (including
spearheading successful campaigns to raise money for famine relief in
Cambodia and later in Ethiopia in the 1980's), disability, education,
international development, and youth at risk.
In the early 1970s, Werner Erhard introduced the notion
of "transformation" to the public in a way that it had not been heard
before in a course he called "The est Training". Often misunderstood
when first introduced, it has come to be seen as a powerful, practical,
and relevant resource in contemporary society. (See Quest Magazine
article). As with many leading edge ideas, his work was a source of
discussion, debate, and intense controversy. Mr. Erhard even
accumulated a number of powerful enemies.
In order to provide an opportunity for the ongoing availability of the
work of transformation, unimpeded by the attack on his personal
reputation, Werner Erhard offered to license the course content to his
former employees. In 1991 the employees formed their own company,
Landmark Education, obtained a license for the use of the technology,
and purchased assets of Mr. Erhard's company. Mr. Erhard retained many
of the liabilities of the previous company.
Shortly thereafter, an article appeared in the Los Angeles Times that
documented a well-organized, media campaign engineered by a particular
organization to ruin Mr. Erhard's reputation. Still later, one of his
daughters, the one who had initiated allegations that he was an abusive
father, recanted her statements, saying she had been offered $2 million
dollars in book royalties to lie about her father, by a reporter, who
she later sued. This was reported in a July 1993 edition of San Jose
Mercury News.
Several publications have now documented that the allegations made
about Werner Erhard were untrue and recanted. (Time Magazine, Boston
Globe, The Tablet (an international Catholic publication), and Los
Angeles Daily News.)
MEDIA, WERNER ERHARD AND LANDMARK EDUCATION
There are two major factors that have contributed to generating and
perpetuating misconceptions and misunderstandings both about Werner
Erhard and Landmark Education.
A. Influences on the media
1. What Sells vs. The Truth
Although obvious, it is important to acknowledge that the media is
often caught between a responsibility to objectively inform the public
and to produce what sells. Journalist Carl Bernstein (one of the
reporters who uncovered Watergate and is now an editor for The
Washington Post) called attention recently to this fact lamenting
that "in the search for what's hot, the real story - not to mention the
truth - is often overlooked."
In Mr. Erhard's case, in addition to the phenomenon referred to by
Bernstein, various individuals and groups have through the media sought
to destroy Mr. Erhard's reputation. A book that was written by a
Georgia reporter, Dr. Jane Self, 60 Minutes and the Assassination of
Werner Erhard, chronicles this phenomenon and addresses other
misrepresentations. (Also see the Los Angeles Times article.)
2. Lack of Thorough Research
While some reporters will take the time to do careful research, there
are occasions when others don't do thorough research, and instead use
whatever information is on hand without contacting appropriate parties
to verify the information. This is often how misleading and unbalanced
stories get disseminated.
Although some publications will issue retractions and/or corrections
once they have taken the opportunity to review the facts, the initial
inaccuracy or misrepresentation may have already impacted some people.
There have also over the last couple of years been a number of
publications and reporters that have taken the time and trouble to do
thorough and accurate research. Although we may not agree with every
piece of content in these articles, and although there are things in
some of the articles that we feel were over-exaggerated or understated,
nevertheless we know the reporters and publications went out of their
way to do fair and balanced reporting on Landmark Education. (See Time
Magazine, Boston Globe.) A number of publications have also published
stories about people who have taken Landmark programs who have used
what they got from Landmark's programs to contribute to society as a
whole. (See additional articles .)
B. Misconceptions in the Media Regarding Landmark Education being
Psychology, Sect-like or Religious in Nature
As with many new technologies that are on the leading edge, when Mr.
Erhard introduced his work, it was largely misunderstood. No one knew
how to discuss it or relate to it on its own terms. There were no pre-
existing categories or paradigms into which his work neatly fit.
Consequently, early on, many tried to attach familiar and simple labels
to his work; labels that in and of themselves often cast Mr. Erhard and
his work in simplistic and inaccurate terms.
For example, a few people in the 1980's without researching,
characterized Mr. Erhard's programs as psychological in nature. The
facts are clear that Landmark's programs do not constitute and are not
based in psychology or psychotherapy. The content, techniques,
procedures and delivery of the Landmark Forum have been carefully
studied by dozens of psychiatrists and psychologists. A respected U.S.
psychologist renowned for his objectivity and professionalism recently
completed a study of The Landmark Forum. In his report he stated his
opinions that The Landmark Forum was not a cult, was not psychotherapy
and was not harmful to participants. For details of his opinion and a
copy of his report in Adobe Acrobat format, CLICK HERE*. Numerous
other psychologists and therapists have echoed those conclusions. (See
Letters from sample of psychotherapists)
In another vein, despite it being abundantly clear that The Landmark
Forum does not remotely resemble a cult, The Landmark Forum had been
labeled by a few narrow interest groups as "cult-like". Their
characterization found its way into small pockets of the public
conversation. The allegation that the work of Landmark Education is
cult-like has been shown to be completely inaccurate in every sense.
o A respected U.S. psychologist completed a study of The Landmark
Forum and stated that "in my opinion, The Landmark forum is not a cult
or anything like a cult, and I do not see how any reasonable,
responsible persona could say that it is."
o The characteristics of a cult have been clearly distinguished and it
is obvious that Landmark Education is not a cult in any way.
o Margaret Singer, a well-known cult expert and co-author of "Cults in
our Midst", has stated that she does not believe that Landmark or the
Landmark Forum is a cult or sect or meets the criteria of a cult or
sect". (See Margaret Singer statement )
o The Board of Directors of the original Cult Awareness Network (CAN)
settled a lawsuit that was brought by Landmark Education against them.
In the settlement, CAN stated that it does not hold Landmark or any of
its programs, including The Landmark Forum, to be a cult, and has
acknowledged that it never had any evidence that would justify taking
such a position. [This Settlement Agreement was reached with the Board
of Directors of the original CAN, the organization against which
Landmark's lawsuit was brought, NOT with the new organization holding
itself out as the Cult Awareness Network Hotline which is operated by
the Foundation for Religious Freedom and in some way related to
Scientology.]
Letters that are representative of the views of numerous qualified and
professional people who are familiar with or have participated in the
Landmark Forum and who state unequivocally that Landmark and its
programs are not psychology, cult-like, or religious in nature are: A
letter from a Bishop in the Episcopal Church; letters from other
clergy; a letter from an internationally recognized expert on cults; a
letter from an expert on brainwashing; and letters from other
psychotherapists, a former member of the U.S. FBI, and a Police Chief
in Los Angeles.
LANDMARK POLICY REGARDING PUBLIC PERCEPTION IN THE MEDIA
Landmark does not expect that its work will always be perfectly
represented in the media and public conversation, and recognizes that
as with any corporation or enterprise, there will be valid criticism
and room for improvement.
At the same time, Landmark is committed that it be represented in the
media and public conversation consistent with the facts regarding the
quality, content, and results of its programs. Landmark's policy is to
take appropriate action to both generate consistent representations and
to correct misrepresentations.
Dave Bird
>On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 19:51:37 +0100, Dave Bird <da...@xemu.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>In article<20000717053146...@ng-ba1.aol.com>,
>>XxxMisterEarlxxx <xxxmiste...@aol.com> writes:
>>> What is NLP?
>>
>>"Neuro Linguistic Programming." I gather the idea is that you
>> can manipulate behaviour by calculated use of speech or body
>> language. I strongly suspect that it is ineffective quackery.
>>
>> However, if it has anything in common with Scientology then
>> the traffic was one way -- Hubbard stole bits of it, as he
>> did bits of many things.
>
>No way. NLP wasn't invented until 1975. The evidence points the other way
>but well after the foundation of NLP.
My mistake, I thought it was older than that.
|~/ |~/
~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'0-|~~
P | Woof Woof, Glug Glug ||____________|| 0 | P
O | Who Drowned the Judge's Dog? | . . . . . . . '----. 0 | O
O | answers on *---|_______________ @__o0 | O
L |<a href="news:alt.religion.scientology"></a>_____________|/_______| L
www.xemu.demon.co.uk 2B0D 5195 337B A3E6 DDAC BD38 7F2F FD8E 7391 F44F
Bloody Viking
XxxMisterEarlxxx (xxxmiste...@aol.com) wrote:
: What is NLP?
"neuro-linguistic programming" a bullshit self-help techique. It used to be
talked about a lot on alt.support.shyness but died down. Apparently doesn't
work on shyness. The only practical self-help for shyness is illegal drug
manufacture.
--
DANGER: Charles Darwin is the lifeguard of the gene pool. Swim at own risk.
Monica Pignotti
Dave Bird <da...@xemu.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article<ibh7ns8s63rgr20ff...@4ax.com>, Ralph Hilton:
> >On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 19:51:37 +0100, Dave Bird
<da...@xemu.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >>In article<20000717053146...@ng-ba1.aol.com>,
> >>XxxMisterEarlxxx <xxxmiste...@aol.com> writes:
> >>> What is NLP?
> >>
> >>"Neuro Linguistic Programming." I gather the idea is that you
> >> can manipulate behaviour by calculated use of speech or body
> >> language. I strongly suspect that it is ineffective quackery.
> >>
> >> However, if it has anything in common with Scientology then
> >> the traffic was one way -- Hubbard stole bits of it, as he
> >> did bits of many things.
> >
> >No way. NLP wasn't invented until 1975. The evidence points the
other way
> >but well after the foundation of NLP.
>
> My mistake, I thought it was older than that.
Ralph is correct. It was started around 1975 by Bandler & Grinder.
They took some much older material, however, from Alfred Korzybski, who
was also an influence on L. Ron Hubbard so some of the similarities
people are seeing might be because of that.
Primal Therapy and Rebirthing are two later forms of therapy that bear
a great deal of similarity to Dianetics. Reading The Primal Scream by
Arthur Janov, I kept wondering if he had been familiar with Dianetics
because much of the theory is so similar about prenatal and birth
experiences impacting a person.
--
Monica Pignotti