Видео

I loved that statement: The answer to a question is nearly as valuable as the journey that the question opens up

Great coversation! Too many things to comment on. Thanks Dale and Anne.

Anne, I appreciate your anecdotal assessment of w/ and w/o Landmark as this relates to personal development. Growing up in the CA, the belly of Human Potential Movement beast, I've noticed the same thing for donkey's years....and, certainly, in the so-called coaching field. I've just never understood the perceived need to transform oneself, or other people. For me, it, transformation, is akin to what we now call "luxury beliefs," and luxury in the sense that most humans don't have the financial or time resources to concern themselves with introspection and self-improvement. Maybe, this is a blessing?

Shit

Dale… please improve your sound quality in the future. Thank you

Not sure what is all this talk about "the work" and the company and how its going to go forward etc. It is a money making machine, based on free work and selling conecepts and experiences that you bring about. Everything that is not build on a pillar of integrity will collaps eventually, so will Landmark. Focus should be on recovery not about being worried about company that failed, brainwashed and used its customers.

I participated for many years 26+ at Landmark- when it came to source- yes got trained to source myself in the work- but ultimately I was left with "I" was the source of my results and life not Landmark - interesting- we all have our own experiences.

Chapter 7 bankruptcy is designed for businesses (or individuals) that want to liquidate their assets to pay off creditors and then cease operations. Under Chapter 7, a trustee is appointed to oversee the liquidation of the company's assets, and the business is usually dissolved after the process is complete. For restructuring purposes, a business would more likely use Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Chapter 11 allows a business to continue operating while it reorganizes its debts and other obligations under a court-approved plan. This type of bankruptcy provides the business with the opportunity to negotiate with creditors and potentially emerge stronger and more financially stable. It is my understanding that Landmark Worldwide filed for Chapter 7.

I am currently researching Erhard's "prison projects". I believe these were conducted under the umbrella of "Prison Possibilities" and were executed by Erhard and 'volunteers'. I am particularly interested in something called "The Lompoc Project"....whereby, the efficacy of est was measured among a prison population w/ control group. I believe these experiments were carried out a Lompoc State Prison (CA), San Quentin Prison (CA) and at other venues. The time frame would be 1972-1975. The only published research results I am aware of are dated 1975. I would be interested in speaking to any former est/Landmark member who has information about this work in prisons.

Common to virtually all LGAT organizations that I am aware of is the use of large cadres of volunteers. I wonder if the reliance on volunteer labor prevents these entities from professionalizing. It seems to me that absent a labor agreement, such workers operate w/o a range of legal protections.

"Using standard business practices" is literally standard business practice. It's a for-profit company, people!

Here is a challenge for you: what is the distinction "Transformation"?

Bottom line, if you put the work, the work works. Else it is loat in a few days. Regarding the business model. It is like a bank: you have money you keep in the bank to get interest. In landmark you keep participating in programs to keep hetting the value and meeting the people you love. Perfect

They could have fixed their business by not using the distinction enrollment to turn people into sales bots. That began eroding me right away.

They call him “source?” wow, I guess the total Scientology rip off is actually a thing.

Im so conflicted. Still an IL but ive been feeling concerns for a year.

For every party who had the resources and backbone to sue Landmark for damages, there are probably a thousand injured parties.

I remember making my "declaration" at the Forum. I had to think up something fast, because there was a lot of pressure to "being" something and creating that possibility. I made something up and felt stupid doing it, because it was facile. I did get a few good things from the Forum/Advanced Course, but that faded over a few days and I was back to just being me with the same problems and hopes and my own "possibilities" (that I made for myself). And if Landmark really, truly wanted to test its effectiveness, they have to have an independent study done over years to track a lot of graduates and see what happened to them over time. You two always have such great discussions! Thanks, Dale and Anne.

The movie is called "Goodbye Lenin", Dale

One of my favorite Wernerisms was all about how we have to continue to water the tree (of transformation) and not just pick the fruit. In other words, do the next course!

Dale, the Forum Leaders “killer shares” were so verbatim that people in the back of the room would sometimes mouth along with them!! 😳

Staff are being told there's a waiting list to participate in the in person Landmark Forums. Is that true?

55:00 I'd love to know what podcast Anne was referring to, was it a presentation by David Emerald?

12:00 Being coachable - put aside your own thinking - doing as instructed, 14:00 being ordinary vs being extraordinary 16:00 being in integrity, 19:00 your thinking vs their thinking - being a possibility, 20:00 complete vs incomplete, clean slate theory - reinvention, 32:00 agreements - being our word, 37:00 effects of participating - hyperarousal dopamin theory (John Hunter, PhD), 45:00 facts vs stories, 1:00:00 gossiping

Love the paradox conversion: “It’s great to keep your word and life is complicated.” I could have so used that during my 25 years of participation.

If you're making an assumption, that means you're creating a story. That means you're making up a story when you assume an agreement. How does Landmark reconcile that with their teaching that we shouldn't make up stories about things?

They got your feedback ssns are altering what didn't work i don't work there

They got your feedback and are altering what didn't work

Another great conversation! I tend to lean toward the Budhhist saying "Before [Landmark] enlightenment, chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment - chop wood, carry water." Thanks, Dale and Ann!

Very interesting discussion. I have a good friend who was raised in the Church of Scientology until age 16 by OT-VII parents. Her parents didn't leave because they stopped believing, they were in the huge wave of long-time members who left in the few years after LRH died because they didn't agree with the changes David Miscavaige was making. They became part of the independent Scientologist movement and still held the beliefs without belonging to the organization. After she graduated from college she got very into Landmark for a few years, even volunteering for them. When I asked her about it, she told me she felt "comfortable" in Landmark because it was like the good parts of Scientology without the crazy science fiction.

Me too! The best thing I got out of Landmark was hearing the stories of others. I became far more compassionate and patient overall. It's truly amazing to see how well we get along as a whole knowing we are all going through our stuff currently or have gone through something big in the past

Thank you Ann and Dale!

This is great work! Thank you for speaking out!

Again with the responsibility collapse? Response - ability. You cannot control what happens to you, you can control how you respond. That is the sum total of the responsibility distinction. It's Victor Frankl. It's not "it's your fault", not "there are no criminals". It is your response is 100% in your control.

It feels like Landmark is fading fast.

SCARF status certainty autonomy relatedness fairness - I got it from a book called Your brain at work.

L Ron Hubbard was definitely a narcissicist and it's suggested that he might have had frontal lobe epilepsy. This was another great discussion! Thanks, Dale and Ann. Even for us lowly graduates, there's a lot about Landmark that messed us up - and it sticks.

wonderful, thank you,..I really learned from this and resonated with so much of it!

The ICF compliance system ONLY 'regulates' infringement of the use of its brand, or fee disputes. It has zero capability to discipline coaches for boundaries breaches such as sexual and emotional abuse (common in my experience). Prior to the ascendancy of this organization, corporate coaches were required to carry professional liability insurance. I think this practice has fallen by the wayside owing to the illusory idea that the ICF is regulating the field. Were I seeking a coach for organizational work (or life coaching for that matter) I would look for someone who had academic credentials in fields relevant to people and organization development and, ideally, some experience in leadership roles in actual businesses. An ICF-certified coach could be a former waiter, English teacher, DJ, or long term Landmark participant. I have seen all of this.

Coaching in organizations 'emerged' in the 1930's and was the purview of consulting psychologists. There are over 100 research studies dating back to that period. The male partner of the Kimsey House's was delivering 'est' programs in Japan w/ Werner Erhard dating back to 1975. James Flaherty who founded New Ventures West was an 'est' facilitator. Newfield Network, as you said, was founded by parties who had extensive engagement with Erhard. I know many parties who participated in Newfield Network coach training and who described a program VERY similar to 'est'. Participants, some of whom were sent to the program by their organizations, were required to publicly 'confess' their darkest secrets. I have heard descriptions of meltdowns and seizures occuring in these programs.

I think you're right on Ann, at least in my case, young plus from a challenging family system equals more vulnerable to adopting an LGAT as their replacement family.

I think you're right on Ann, at least in my case, young plus from a challenging family system equals more vulnerable to adopting an LGAT as their replacement family.

Back in the day, there was a concept called "Power Source - Power Feeder". The power source's role was to make the Power Feeder, right - always, no matter what.

Such a rich conversation. I recognized myself here, especially since I started in the NY center at 17 years old in 1977, grew up in a chaotic family, and also assisted in logistics on the weekends while I attended college. I did the training, started assisting 2 days later, and didn't stop for about 17 years. It was in Anne Peterson's Wisdom course at 40, that I figured out I used est/Landmark as surrogate parents as I sorely lacked the training I needed to function in so many ways as an adult. I'm grateful for that training, yet it certainly came couched in the "ickies." I love the golden age of healing from cults and narcissists. I became a mental health therapist with that aim in mind, and these conversations lately are helping my own healing I forgot I needed to do as I face this cognitive dissonance. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

John Hanley was the founder

The lifespring founder was leading Mind Dynamics and Leadership Dynamics with Werner, they both branched out at about the same time.

People can get habituated to the influx of adrenalin (and dopamine -- but let's not ascribe everything to dopamine, it's a player, but only one of many in terms of LGATs and the brain/human system). A really great example of this is the movie The Hurt Locker, about a man who defuses bombs in Iraq but can't deal with day to day life because he's so habituated to the excitement. There's a great scene where he's in the frozen food section of a grocery store in the US and he can't figure out what to do (so he reups to do another tour of service).

Would Anne please provide a link to Chris's talk she mentioned near the end about "being cause"? I find looking at the distinctions in a "healthy" way, like Anne & Dale discussed agreements here, is extremely helpful in keeping the "good stuff" without the culty parts. Thx!

I've concluded that for most participants, there is no life after Landmark, only trying to 'fix' Landmark. The ICF (International Coaching Federation) mentioned at 1:14:00> is an iteration of est/Landmark. It was 'founded' by one of Erhard's generals and a fellow est graduate. Its competency model was, with one exception, created by a panel of est/Landmark members, who neglected to employ standard research methodology. "X" or "Y" coaching method is 'good; because we, 'successful coaches,' say it is. Maxims like the client/coachee is "happy, joyous and free" and possessed of the tools necessary to personal transformation are not based on any measurable reality. While the ICF postures itself as an organization that "teaches nothing," its coach mentors collect sizable fees for training the gullible in pseudoscience. Additionally, many/most? ICF accredited coach training programs utilize stressor techniques like long hours and public confessionals. As for ethical protections, the ICF has convinced people who should know better that the coaching field must self-regulate, which translates into "must be regulated by the ICF". The sphere of ICF compliance (performed by untrained individuals with major conflicts of interest) encompasses mis-use of the brand or fee disputes. Working with an ICF certified coach does not does not afford the coachee redress for many forms of professional misconduct Participating in an ICF-accredited coach training program confer no protection from the psychological damage a meaningful percentage of participants experience in est/Landmark programs.

From a South Park episode, seemed relevant: ruclips.net/video/ifHjG4JKIOk/видео.htmlsi=E4tHcBev9iqHaTPp