Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!floyd!cmcl2!seismo!rlgvax!cvl!umcp-cs!israel From: israel@umcp-cs.UUCP Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: Re: Experiential processes (what a name for it !) Message-ID: <7504@umcp-cs.UUCP> Date: Thu, 14-Jun-84 17:58:54 EDT Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.7504 Posted: Thu Jun 14 17:58:54 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 16-Jun-84 00:35:46 EDT References: <353@kpnoa.UUCP> Organization: Univ. of Maryland, Computer Science Dept. Lines: 237 Well, I decided to once again jump into the fray. BANZAI!!!!! From: sharp@kpnoa.UUCP >What I notice in these responses are that the people who are >saying, "don't" are the ones who haven't been there and the >ones who are saying "you might want to" are the ones who have. Well, of course !! Once you've been brainwashed you're not going to be nasty about the people who did it. That's elementary even for the KGB [:-) :-)]. Oh, excuse me! I didn't realize that I had been so brainwashed that I couldn't make judgements for myself! This point of view of yours is of course based on the "obvious" fact that everyone who hasn't, didn't because they were smart enough to see the ridiculousness of the courses, and that those who didn't were too stupid initially to detect it, and now are too brainwashed to make honest judgements. And, in actuality, they must be pretty lousy brain-washers, since both Steve and I have said positive things about the courses and the philosophy, but negative things about the organizations and a lot of the people involved with it. You'd think that they would at least brainwash us to appreciate and revere the people who brought the word of God, as it were, to us. [ :-) ] Yes, I *do* know a whole lot about it. In particular, I think I probably know more about it than most and part of that is that, *since* I have not experienced it, I can evaluate its effects without the handicap of a preformed opinion shovelled ready made into my skull by certain well-paid advocates. (You don't need to tell me they're not well-paid - even donations and other "appearance fees" are real money.) Nobody has denied that these people are not well-paid, after all it is a business, after all. If they were losing money on the deal then they wouldn't be around too long. Let's not have stricter standards for businesses like these than we would hold for IBM, GM, DEC etc. My knowledge is based on considerable reading and considerable observation of people in both before and after states. I have to admit that I was hoping to irritate by lumping such extremes together, but, for the sake of the point, it is a difference in degree but *not* in kind. I wonder which way your "basket-case" continuum goes - perhaps I'm better off being further down [:-)]. As I remarked originally, I am not especially enamoured of my life, and know that I am susceptible to such courses, but I prefer my own methods to paying large chunks of my meagre salary to professional con-artists. First of all, I don't believe reading about courses like this gives one much useful knowledge. You can learn a little about the methods and philosophies behind them, but only at an intellectual level. And if you dis-believe such things at an emotional level (and for some strange reason, I get the feeling that you do), no amount of intellectualizing in the world is going to change the way you feel. For example, I'm reading a very interesting book on communications skills called "People Skills" and in it, the author says that one way of improving ones skills is via something he calls reflective listening, summarizing what you percieve the person's communication is and what his feelings are i.e. "You feel mad because she dumped you". To me, it sounds too structured and forced, and all the author's rationalizations (which I have accepted intellectually) have not convinced me. Observation of people will give you some more information, but still, you are trying to evaluate their internal experience via external signs, and as we all know, that is very difficult. The impression that I get of you is that, because you feel you are susceptible to such courses (how did you ever figure that out, anyway?), you feel that everyone else is also, and as a result any of us that claim benefits from such course say so because of the brainwashing involved, and not through actual recognition of real benefits. Besides, I believe that anyone has enough control over their own mind so that they can go into one of these courses and not be affected if they choose not to be. (Of course, this is given the structure of these courses; I'm not saying anything about such techniques like the Viet Cong used, such as lack of food and sleep coupled with confinement and physical abuse). After all, these courses are only four or five days long, 45-50 hours total, and you can go home each night in between sessions. >Ahem...quite to the contrary, my dear Nigel, the point is not >"it's not your fault", but more concisely, "what was in the >past is past and it doesn't matter who was to blame. What you >do about it now is completely up to you. If your life is not >exactly the way you want it, then it's up to you to make it >that way." What is in the way for most people is FEAR. This appears to be the result of our different perspectives. It seems to me from the outside that the way people who have been through such trainings respond is the way I stated - they have been taught that whatever went wrong was not their fault. They are certainly, and very healthily, urged to put it behind them. Brooding on the past is a well-recognised way to make a mess of your present. As a matter of fact, these trainings try to get away from the word 'fault' and instead use the words 'accountability' and 'responsibility'. Did I hear someone say "there's no difference!"? The word 'fault' implies blame, and is used for engendering negative emotions, not necessarily for correcting the situation, Responsibility implies changing the situation, but doesn't have the negative emotions attached that allow you to wallow in guilt. And as you said, it IS unproductive to brood. >The workshop provides an absolutely safe environment to get >past some of the obstacles we put in our way. No one is >forced (explicitly or implicitly) to participate in sharing >personal experiences if that is agonizing to them...there is >an explicit agreement about confidentiality. In the workshop >I was in, no one was forced to do or not do anything including >leaving the room to go to the bathroom. It was made >sufficiently difficult because people tend to find reasons to >avoid particularly difficult parts of the workshop. Occasionally, obstacles must be tackled. It is wrong to teach that *all* obstacles should be side-stepped. This is a minor point. HUH?????????? Who said anything about side-stepping obstacles? I consider this to be tackling the obstacles, not avoiding them! Besides, these aren';t real obstacles that we're talking about here, these are imaginary obstacles that we put in our OWN way such as fears and self-limitting beliefs. I think you underestimate the force of peer pressure. By making people stay for the difficult parts, you are certainly forcing them. It is a rare individual who can stand up against the behaviour of a large crowd, and such individuals are not likely to be found in such courses. How many people were looking around to see how others behaved ? This is all force. Oh C'mon! We're not talking about being forced to do physical things here! We're talking about changing your attitude. Noone has to stand up and say anything about yourself, and plenty of people never do. Since only one person stands up at a time, it's easier to stay seated than to stand up anyway. And, in terms of the other excercises, peer pressure can't force you to do too much there either. When the trainer is talking, how does peer pressure force me to listen istead of thinking what I am going to do with my girlfriend next weekend? How can peer pressure force me to actually go through a closed-eye guided visualiaztion instead of taking a snooze? If you like yourself, and someone else doesn't, it's their problem. But if you choose to live in a society, for the benefits that has, then you must take the rough with the smooth. One of the rough parts about living in any group is that you have to take notice of other people's opinions, *even if you/they don't like them/you*. Well, you don't HAVE to take notice, but it does help to do so. Notice that we are both saying "take notice of" and not "get bent out of shape over". Neither Lifespring nor EST (from what I know of it) say that you should ignore others' opinions, just that you should not let others' opinions be so important to you that you let your whole world revolve around them. When all is said and done, the only opinion you have to count on is your own. If you let the opinions of others matter so much for you, then you open yourself up to manipulation by others (for example: Bruce: "Nigel, If you don't take Lifespring, then I won't like you!" Nigel: "Oh no, Bruce won't like me! OK, where do I sign up?", or alternatively, Nigel: "Bruce, you are an jerk for doing Lifespring. It's a crock." Bruce: "Oh no, Nigel thinks that Lifespring is a crock! OK, goodbye, all my Lifespring friends. Everybody else, don't take Lifespring! It's a crock!") To refuse to acknowledge that other people have as much right to an opinion as you do is to argue that they are lower forms of life. And me being forced to acknowledge other opinions is to argue that their opinion is more important than my own. I DO have the freedom to acknowledge or not acknowledge others' opinions, as I see fit, without that action making any judgements on the other people. And, depending on the circumstances, I will or won't pay attention to their opinions. If I am going out on a first date with someone, I am NOT going to put on my grungy, filthy clothes on the basis that I should not take her opinion into account. On the other hand, if a bum on the street comes up to me and tells me that I should invest all my money in a certain financial plan, I don't have to give much or any consideration to that suggestion (and probably won't). If you think they are misinformed, try to inform them. Again, this is based on how people have reacted. Nice people end up nicer, and very few of the people I've met have been excitable types - after all, if the other person's opinion doesn't matter, there's no reason to get upset or angry - but you have to deal with other people, not necessarily friends, every day of your life. You certainly do, and for that reason it is a good idea to be pleasant to others. But this is consideration for others' feelings, which is a different issue. Personally, my experience in Lifespring has taught me to appreciate the uniqueness of the human individual and spirit, and as a result I try to treat others with kindness even if there are no direct benefits to be gained, and I may never even see them again. >The truth of the matter is, I haven't got a clue! Hear, hear ! Neither have I, and I refuse to take someone else's reality. I refuse to automatically take some else's reality, also, but that doesn't mean that I not open-minded enough to listen to other points of view and adopt the ones that I like or that work for me, and discard the others. Well, "my dear Moira", this is interesting. Our local est people have given up even arguing with me (I think they'd dearly like to convert me), so I have to try to convert the rest of the world to my way [:-) what a way !]. Yes it has been interesting. I think that Moira may have given up arguing also, since I haven't seen a reply from her in the four or five days since I saw your article. I stick by my "friends rather than psychiatrists" line, and I have the 'phone bill to prove it. I am happy to say that I have never yet been let down by my friends to the extent of psychiatry (and I *really am* weird), but who knows what tomorrow may bring. But I'll face it as myself. I agree with that line myself, but then I consider Lifespring and EST to be more of an educational experience than to be psycho-therapy. I like to use friends for that reason myself. I would suggest, however, that you make friends that you can confide in like that in your own area of the country. It helps a lot on the phone bills. I don't understand your closing line, though. Are Steve, Moira, and I not facing tomorrow as ourselves? Who are we facing it as? -- Bruce Israel University of Maryland, Computer Science {rlgvax,seismo}!umcp-cs!israel (Usenet) israel@Maryland (Arpanet)