Unleash the stupidity within.
Witnesses say on Thursday, a crowd went to a park where 12 lanes of hot coals were on the grass....I only have one question: Do you have what it takes to be a regional manager?
Witness Jonathan Correll says he heard "wails of pain and screams of agony"...
"First one person, then a couple minutes later another one, and there was just a line of people walking on that fire. It was just bizarre, man."
And let's go back to 1995:
[I]t should come as no surprise that even President Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton invited a trio of self-help gurus to Camp David just before the new year.Did the Clintons scamper over hot coals? I agree that would be marvelous.
Anthony Robbins, the best-selling, self-described "peak performance coach," Marianne Williamson, the prophet of love whose devotees include Oprah Winfrey and Elizabeth Taylor, and Dr. Steven R. Covey, author of one of the most successful books on management ever — "Seven Habits of Highly Effective People" — all refuse to divulge the substance of their meeting with the Clintons. Mr. Covey said only that it was "marvelous."
Pundits quickly speculated about a White House so bereft of ideas it had to seek them in the transcendent. Mrs. Clinton downplayed the meeting, and later complained in a letter to the editor of Esquire, to be published in April, that she was not "tight" with Ms. Williamson, who was merely one of many religious and spiritual advisers invited to meet the Clintons.Merely one of many purveyors of bullshit that the Clintons consorted with. Noted. Also noted: Steven R. Covey was buried today.
Posts
116 comments:
Covey was a Mormon.
Interesting.
captcha: earerat
Mr. Covey is dead???
Did somebody swipe his cheese?
Why the hell are you bashing the Clintons here? What is the point other than your dislike of them? And it was 1995!
We could use a good coal walking here.
I can set up a fluidized-bed coal reactor, if you wish. Let me know.
... And the Crack Emcee searchlight lights up the night sky over Gotham once again.
Thousands of people do this every year, so what went wrong? Did they use organic coals?
I know that a lot of these gurus need a cleanse, but I thought Robins' stuff was pretty straight motivation and confidence kinda crap, with the coal walking being just to prove that when you go for it, you can often do what you first think to be impossible. There is truth to that.
Dr Covey had an accident bike riding some weeks (months?) ago, and he died from this.
Said, but the man was 79. I'd like to be able to go mountain biking when I turn 79. Even if it were the death of me.
Yeah why ARE YOU bashing the Clintons. They are good people. Sure Bill got impeached and lied under oath & pardoned Mrac Rich and Hillary is an ethically challenged affirmative action baby that no one seems to like. But dammit, they were Democrats.
Typical Althouse, always the right-wing extremist.
There is a trick to walking on hot coals, and that trick is don't scamper, don't hop, don't run!
The more you break up the coals (by applying vigorous agitation -- i.e. scampering, hopping, running) the more the coals break up, meaning more oxygen gets to carbon yearning to melt glaciers, meaning more heat being released as the glaciers look down and weep, PLUS a lot of that newly-oxygenated carbon ends up sticking in the nooks and crannies of the feet.
Sounds like they skimped on the instructors and didn't pay enough attention to the participants who were about to panic in the lanes.
Or, worse, no one bothered explaining the actual science of walking on coals to the participants, and instead stressed the importance of calm serenity in all things. Then I'd unleash Crack Emcee on Tony Robbins and everyone who works with/for him
I did Robbins’s firewalk in the early ’90s. An interesting experience. Nothing transcendental about it. A fun weekend.
I guess Willie figured he could learn something new from the pros.
Hillary, alas, never did.
RELEASE THE CRACKEM!
Purveyors of bullshit like to mingle with other purveyors of bullshit.
Bet that put a crimp in the sweatlodge event that night.
Robbins is basically an evil man. He mind controls people. Nothing he "teaches" has any meaning at all. It is only confusion told in an up beat voice that fools people who have no truth in their lives.
Not that there is anything wrong with that.
Let me understand this. After the first person began screaming as his/her feet were being burned, twenty more tried it??
That is some special stupid.
Sounds right out of a movie about Mill Valley, center of leftist thought in the 70s. Hot coal walking was big.
I think that's why hollywood/entertainment/"news" industry and the democrat party are so close. The ultimate purveyors of bullshit.
Wait a minute... 2000 degree coals? Holy Moses.
What about the wrecked lives of the kids of the Christianists and other superstitious parents?
Especially those who find the sensitive tip of their peckers cut off for no good reason?
Somewhere in India, a fakir is laughing his ass off.
Contra Crack, and attributed to Chesterton,
"When a Man stops believing in God he doesn't then believe in nothing, he believes anything."
Have you ever seen the video of Robbins explaining the folly of eating the rich to fix the nation's finances? He goes through it in detail showing how taxing would effect the debt, until there is no debt left and no country either. It's 20 minutes long, but worth it if you know someone who thinks the rich having too much wealth is our problem. If not, it's worth it even to skip through and see the general idea.
Robbin deconstructs the debt
for no good reason
It sets us apart as the chosen people. Rolls eyes. Duh. We did the head flattening thing and that was copied, we did the feet crushing thing and that was copied, so we did this figuring nobody in their right mind would copy it. Clever, eh? Ergo, chosen. Duh.
And if you don't like that explanation you can just suck m
Michael Haz: Let me understand this. After the first person began screaming as his/her feet were being burned, twenty more tried it??
That is some special stupid.
Let me understand this. They had all these coals and nobody thought to bring hot dogs?
for no good reason
No, a very good reason. A purpose was needed for the phrase "bell end" a euphemism too good to waste.
Robbins' website promotes 'The Firewalk Experience' in which people walk on super-heated coals.
How fucking stupid do you have to be to walk over hot charcoals?
Would you walk over your barbecue grill barefooted?
What does your gut tell you?
CLUE: It's for steaks. Not feet!
The eyes of Brievik and Holmes were said earlier to look "crazy" or demonized.
Tony Robbins eyes are examples of the crazy ones.
IMO the glazed over unblinking, dead stare is the key. The smile and the upbeat voice can be communicating great, but the eyes give it away, especially if you try to look only from the nose up and ignore the mouth.
Normal people have alive looking eyes that blink and react with looks that go the emotions being expressed. If I can spot that, so can anyone else.
But often people who have been recently traumatized and suffered frightening levels of pain also have that crazy look in their eyes. So who can say for sure.
garag mahal: Would you walk over your barbecue grill barefooted?
Only to impress someone cute. But no bullets to the head, like in that stupid song.
"Why the hell are you bashing the Clintons here? What is the point other than your dislike of them? And it was 1995!"
Any year, any time is a good time to bash the Clintons. And, why would anyone have to ask why?
Bagoh 20
"Robbin deconstructs the debt"
Excellent.
Despite 2000 degree coals, (which I do not understand - and I agree with Garage Mahal on this one)
I no longer classify Robbins as a doink after watching his debt deconstruction video.
If I can third degree burn my feet I can do anything!
Despite 2000 degree coals, (which I do not understand - and I agree with Garage Mahal on this one)...
It's a rates problem. How fast do the coals pump heat into your feet, how fast do your feet cool when they aren't on the coals?
Do it right, your feet are warm by the end, but not cooked because you didn't crush the coals. Do it wrong, you've got a Bessemer furnace following your running ass down the trench.
BTW, every really interesting problem is really a rates problem, especially in economics.
Crack does not take the bait!
traditional wrote:
Robbins is basically an evil man. He mind controls people. Nothing he "teaches" has any meaning at all. It is only confusion told in an up beat voice that fools people who have no truth in their lives.
Not that there is anything wrong with that.
i don't know that he's EVIL, or that what he teaches has no meaning at all. He basically teaches NLP, or neuro linguistic programming. Some of which is obvious bullcrap, but some of which is common sense and actually is applicable to help people to push themselves to strive for greatness. (buy spending money buying the course of course).
I listened to some of his tapes, and a lot of it is benign and applicable to what you want to do with your life. Some of it was crap.
Only to impress someone cute. But no bullets to the head, like in that stupid song.
I might consider running over 10 yards of coals for Salma Hayek. One--- two---- and done. HI!
Well it was the 90s.
Marianne Williamson got big in Los Angeles during the time of the AIDs plague before the cocktail had been found. She would give talks and it would be rows and rows of gay guys who were looking for answers. It went straight to Oprah, but diminished after the cocktail drugs gained in effectiveness. She was friends with one of my first employers (out of college). She hangs with people who have a. lot. of. money. Just saying... I'm guessing the Clintons followed the money to the gurus of their Hollywood donors.
"Witnesses say on Thursday, a crowd went to a park where 12 lanes of hot coals were on the grass...."
Welocome. Thanks for coming!
gah. Welocome = Welcome
Can't imagine the Secret Service would allow a sitting President (or First Lady) to walk on coals.
I read about the firewalking at Tony Robbins seminars in the book "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking ". At the time I remember thinking it was surprising thy of the tens of thousands of attendees over the years, there werent reports of injuries.
DIONNE: If we had better background checks, yes we'll miss some lunatics, but with real background checks, we could reduce the number of lunatics who walk on 2000-degree hot coals.
This was an obvious fuck-up:
The charlatan, Robbins, was supposed to have the marks walk over wood chips - which he never explains don't conduct heat very well - just as he conducts the "broken arrow" trick without saying to the rubes how leverage works.
The stupid is in the marks "believing" they're doing these feats with their minds.
The Clintons are there - just as they're part of the current administration - because they, too, are part of the NewAge cult, with ties to various gurus and cult leaders, all spouting jabberwocky as though it has meaning for leadership.
My question is why does pm317 feel compelled to defend these rubes?
Repeat after me:
We are not failing as a nation because of socialism, but because of a lack of critical thinking skills, which allows socialism - or any other nonsense - to seem plausible.
And, to the Romney supporters, this includes the idea that replacing a left-wing group of cultish thinkers with a right-wing group of cultish thinkers will somehow eradicate the problems this lack of critical thought delivers.
It's simply impossible,....
Firewalking is a common parlor trick. Penn and Teller had a great episode breaking it down. If people were getting burned, it means they didn't set it up properly or didn't supervise it properly.
How much CO2 was released from the charcoals and the feet? Good God, if we are not careful the oceans are gonna start rising again.
So desperate to fill that God-shaped hole, we are.
I wonder why.
I listened to some of his tapes, and a lot of it is benign and applicable to what you want to do with your life.
So jr565 buys into the supplement nonsense, AND listens to self-help tapes, AND thinks neuro linguistic programming is real. That explains a lot about his recent behavior.
I-d-i-o-t.
What Robbins REALLY engages in is called Large Group Awareness Training - basically brainwashing, with a big audience, primed not to question what they're told. It's evil because he knows what he's doing, even if the rubes, like jr565, don't.
AprilApple,
I no longer classify Robbins as a doink after watching his debt deconstruction video.
Please. I'm not impressed Robbins is spouting conservative jargon to protect his ill-gotten gains, any more than I am Romney doing the same thing. What's important to me is the question, "Is this the sort of 'good business sense' that's drawing the rest of in?"
As I 've said before, would you hire Rhonda Byrne to be our leader because she made a lot of money from The Secret?
It's terrifying to me how you guys stop at the surface when evaluating cultists, con men, charlatans and the like. So Robbins makes a video defending him keeping his wealth - so what? He made it from The Secret and appearing with Oprah, etc. - "vulture capitalism" if there ever was one. The problem is you guys don't get that. You're just saying "He's got money" and following.
It's really stupid,...
Want to really screw up a fire walking exhibition? Suggest they all anoint their feet with blessed oils first.
Ignore the screams, it would smell like BBQ.
sleepless nights,
Marianne Williamson got big in Los Angeles during the time of the AIDs plague before the cocktail had been found. She would give talks and it would be rows and rows of gay guys who were looking for answers.
Yep. She and Louise Hay sent many of them to their graves, by telling gays to resist common sense.
Now we enshrine gay thought as though they posses some special wisdom we need.
I say visit a graveyard and get back to me on that,...
Crack Emcee wrote:
We are not failing as a nation because of socialism, but because of a lack of critical thinking skills, which allows socialism - or any other nonsense - to seem plausible.
And, to the Romney supporters, this includes the idea that replacing a left-wing group of cultish thinkers with a right-wing group of cultish thinkers will somehow eradicate the problems this lack of critical thought delivers.
remove the word cultish and just say thinkers and it would still hold true. You don't have to be in a cult to have lack of critical thought. But what are the two sides arguing? If they are arguing things that run counter to one another then you shouldn't expect the same result, even if both come from cults or neither come from cults.
Take Tony Robbins in the link by bagoh20. He's a cult member, yet he outlays in very memorable terms the fallacy of thinking we can soak the rich and solve our economic problems. Despite being in a cult he seems to get it. Meanwhile someone existing in a left wing cult who espouses socialism probably wouldn't understand or agree with the point. Thus, cult members, can espouse views that are diametrically opposed to one another.
So to bring it back to Romney. OBama is in a cult and he is for Keynesian economics. Romney is also in a cult but he seems to be arguing more for cutting taxes and incentivizing business. If you replace one with the other, you will probably get a different result.
And let's not forget Steven R. Covey's "Seven Habits of Highly Effective People" was of one of the most successful books on management ever - which is more evidence that corporate culture is infused with NewAge today.
Werner Erhard's est (an off-shoot of Scientology) was adopted by General Motors and many others - even the U.S. military - before it almost got sued out of existence for brainwashing. Now it's watered-down version, The Landmark Forum, is part of companies as diverse as Lululemon Athletica and Panda Express.
Jump in the chute, kids - we're headed to the bottom - FAST!
I'm not gonna knock on Robbins. For one he has that gigantic head it I might hurt my knuckles. But mainly because he got that fat chick to look like Gwenyth Paltrow. After seeing that, if he tells me I can walk on water I might believe him.
I nominate Garage as chief griller at the soon to be annual Althouse Grillfest and Coal Walk. Sorry Chip, I like simple grilled food. You get too "Chopped" sometimes :-)
Crack Emcee wrote
So jr565 buys into the supplement nonsense, AND listens to self-help tapes, AND thinks neuro linguistic programming is real. That explains a lot about his recent behavior.
I-d-i-o-t.
I said I heard a few of his tapes and that some of what he says is junk. I've never gone to a seminar and walked on coals, and I never joined the "cult" if he is considered to have one. But I wanted to see if what he said made any sense. And in some cases it did. Some of it was just pablum and common sense and you could get the same answers from a non "cult" member. How do you know he is full of shit though if you don't ever listen to any of his tapes critically? Even a broken clock is right twice a day, so just because he's in a cult, doesn't mean that he can't also have a view point that makes sense on certain topics. Like for example his discussion about our debt.
As for supplements, yes I've taken them. And some have done me good Crack. I lump things like fiber and Omega 3 in with supplements and vitamins, but they have helped,in my view, with various ailments. If your doctor ever tells you you have high tryglicerides for example , what ever you do Crack, DON"T take fish oil, even if the doctor authorizes it. Otherwise you'd be a brainwashed hypocrite. And you'd be so stubborn hypocrite. Because fish oil is a supplement, peddled by vitamin companies. Tell your doctor that you don't want to be brainwashed by his cultish behavior.
Please. I'm not impressed Robbins is spouting conservative jargon to protect his ill-gotten gains, any more than I am Romney doing the same thing. What's important to me is the question, "Is this the sort of 'good business sense' that's drawing the rest of in?" If it wasn't Robbins making the point, would you agree with the point or not? Like say it was generic conservative instead of cult member. Either the point is valid or it's not valid whoever makes it.
I would think that being a "conservative" you would agree with the point simply because it shouldn't matter who says it. The fact that you suggest it is merely Robbins trying to protect his ill gotten gains,makes me question your conservative bonafides. His argument about the economy is not a cultish argument, it's one of basic math. Which you should agree with or disagree with not based on who is making the argument but what the argument is.
That same video could have been made by Pee wee Herman and it still would be accurate. Unless Pee Wee herman is somehow involved in new age or a cult and then it's false of course.
I thought Crack Emcee would be out somewhere dyeing his hair red, buying some more ammo and building some smoke grenades....
jr565,
Take Tony Robbins in the link by bagoh20. He's a cult member, yet he outlays in very memorable terms the fallacy of thinking we can soak the rich and solve our economic problems. Despite being in a cult he seems to get it.
Do you know how many videos there have been - by non-cultists - saying the exact same thing? So Tony Ropbbins copies them to protect his wealth - big whoop. Are you going to stick him for how he made it, or keep praising his name because now - not when he was screwing people over - he's saying the right thing?
And now Romney's doing the same thing, so he's your hero - because you're too dumb to hold his feet to the fire as well.
You're an idiot cult apologist, jr.
Crack Emcee wrote:
And let's not forget Steven R. Covey's "Seven Habits of Highly Effective People" was of one of the most successful books on management ever - which is more evidence that corporate culture is infused with NewAge today.
Ok, let's take the 7 Habits of Highly Effective people. Perhaps it's one of the most successful books on management because it makes good points about management that companies find common sense to adopt.
Now, the idea that there are only 7 habits for highly effective people (and not say 8 or 9 or 6) is the authors opinion and an example of marketing to sell a book, but lets look at what he says are the effective habits? is he somehow wrong? Are the habits he suggests somehow cultish practices? They are simply common sense. And if you discounted said habits because Stephen Covey is in a cult, then frankly you're an idiot.
Lets go through some of them just to show you what I mean and why you are being needlessly stubborn.
Habit 1: Be Proactive.
Take initiative in life by realizing that your decisions (and how they align with life's principles) are the primary determining factor for effectiveness in your life. Take responsibility for your choices and the consequences that follow.
So is it your argument Crack, that being proactive is a bad idea (because its listed as one of the effective habits by a cult member)? You should rather not be proactive, because Covey said you should and he's in a cult? You SHOULDN"T take responsibility for your choices? To me, whether Covey is in a cult or not, being proactive sounds like a good trait for management (and for life in general).
Habit 2: Begin with the End in Mind
Self-discover and clarify your deeply important character values and life goals. Envision the ideal characteristics for each of your various roles and relationships in life. Create a mission statement.
Clearly a terrible idea because Stephen Covey is in a cult and therefore we can' t possibly agree with anything he has to say.
Habit 3: Put First Things First
Prioritize, plan, and execute your week's tasks based on importance rather than urgency. Evaluate whether your efforts exemplify your desired character values, propel you toward goals, and enrich the roles and relationships that were elaborated in Habit 2.
So because Covey is in a cult, he's wrong about putting first things first? We shouldn't prioritize, plan and execute our tasks based on importance rather than urgency? You, Crack are going to ignore this common sense habit because of who is making the argument? Because he's in a cult, this is somehow WRONG?
So what does it say if you agree with Covey that yes, these are 7 habits that highly effective people have. Are you now a cult follower brainwashed by a cult if you happen to agree?
When I say I agree with some of what Tony Robbisn had to say, a lot of it boils down th things that are in fact common sense. And if you didn't recoil from all things cultish in a knee jerk fashion you would agree with them too. Because they'd be true whether tony robbins said them or Stephen covey said them or Aristotle said them.
A very interesting chant… it’s Native American, it doesn’t mean anything… (singing in an appropriate Rockaway accent) YANAH WANNA WANNA WAY-O AH-WAY-O. YANAH YANAH WANNA… ah, hell. See for yourselves.
If there were 12 lanes, there were probably 4000 people there. Higher percentage were injured in OWS 'rallies' but where was the outcry?
Crack,
The Robbins stuff on the debt was a simple slow motion math problem. He was sayin 5 - 1 does not equal zero - nothing more, but you're so blinded by emotion about your obsession that even a simple fact like that, if comes out of the mouth of someone you don't approve of, then you need to lie about what it is so you can denounce it. Get that? You lie about what your target said, so that you can call him a liar. You may be passionate, but you're not dedicated to the truth. Now your acting like them - willing to say anything to avoid dropping the veil.
Werner Erhard's est (an off-shoot of Scientology) was adopted by General Motors and many others - even the U.S. military - before it almost got sued out of existence for brainwashing.
I recommend a viewing of the 1977 romantic comedy Semi-Tough (Burt Reynolds, Jill Clayburgh, Brian Dennehy) Among the outlandish notions spoofed is Werner Erhart's EST. In the film it's called BEAT. The main idea is 50 or more people are confined in a room for hours on end with no bathroom breaks. The foolish participants are rendered into shamed-faced infants as they panic, argue, plead, beg and brawl until they finally piss their pants. This is supposed to be therapeutic -- sort of a primal scream forced by incontinence. The hero (Reynolds) defeats BEAT and confounds it leader/founder by the simple ruse of a little known device called a motorman's friend (pilots all use this trick, btw, known in the parlance as a relief tube) It's a metal flask with a rubber hose attached which is worn discretely strapped to the foreleg. The far end of the hose goes... well... on IT. When the urge occurs one just goes. Ahhhh... Nothing like since the days of diapers and talcum powder. In the movie everyone is going crazy except Burt Reynold, who blithely piddles in a can while the rest panic.
I've done about twenty Tony Robbins events as a participant or as a volunteer. I've done the firewalk about ten times. At least five times I was one of the guys shoveling fresh coals onto the lanes before participants walked. So I speak from experience here.
The firewalk, at least in Tony's context, is not magic. Hundreds of thousands of people have done it safely. The point of the firewalk is not to defy the laws of physics but to discover one's resources to go beyond beliefs and fears, then apply that to other areas where one feels stuck.
It's also true that at every firewalk some people get blistered or burned. This firewalk was freakish in the number of participants who were outright burned. In most of my firewalks I received a blister or two where a coal got caught between my toes or stuck to a foot sole too long.
But there was one firewalk where I got some large second-degree burns on both feet, even though I was an experienced firewalker. So did many others. We were all volunteers and we were pre-flighting the firewalk several hours before the participants would walk. It seems the wood and the schedule were different, and the coals were unusually hot. It was unpleasant but not terrible and by the time the participants walked, it was fine.
I assume something similar happened in the firewalk Ann links. It's regrettable, of course, and painful, but from what I read no one was seriously injured.
I understand some people consider Tony Robbins a charlatan or a con man or even flat evil. I don't agree with everything he says or does either, but I did benefit from his courses and I enjoyed them. I don't say his courses are for everyone, but I do say that there is more to the man and his work than those who would casually denounce him imagine.
Crack Emcee wrote:
Do you know how many videos there have been - by non-cultists - saying the exact same thing? So Tony Ropbbins copies them to protect his wealth - big whoop. Are you going to stick him for how he made it, or keep praising his name because now - not when he was screwing people over - he's saying the right thing?
In Tony Robbins case I think he's very good at what he does. He's a motivational speaker, and he's good at motivating people to work through their hangups and achieve their goals. Insofar as he has fans who like what he has to say, and think he is giving them good advice, they are paying him for his services. So how are his gains ill gotten?
bagoh20,
Crack,
The Robbins stuff on the debt was a simple slow motion math problem. He was sayin 5 - 1 does not equal zero - nothing more, but you're so blinded by emotion about your obsession that even a simple fact like that, if comes out of the mouth of someone you don't approve of, then you need to lie about what it is so you can denounce it. Get that? You lie about what your target said, so that you can call him a liar.
Bagoh, stop it. Whenever you come across a real reason I have for lying - how many years have we been talking now? - you let me know.
As I've shown, there are tons of these videos out there - all made before Robbins' - so let's not act like he's doing anything more than any other cultist does and protecting his ass.
People in the mind control business aren't stupid - their followers are - which is why The Landmark Forum has Lululemon Athletica quoting Ayn Rand now. They see which way the wind is blowing and conservatives - who, as their love for Romney proves, are no smarter than liberals when it comes to this stuff - are an open market. All the confidence man has to do is win their trust and - viola! - they've got a whole new set of marks to exploit.
Duh.
You may be passionate, but you're not dedicated to the truth.
Now you're lying - we have YEARS TOGETHER on this blog, bagoh. See how insidious cultism is? You are changing everything you know about me to fit a lie you're making up to defend a cult leader. I see the same thing happening around Romney - sure, we should seriously vet presidential candidates but not the guy with a cult behind him, right?
Why you would let them twist reality - to the point where you think I would lie - is only a question you can answer.
Now your acting like them - willing to say anything to avoid dropping the veil.
I repeat - we've spent YEARS TOGETHER.
Oh, shit, what am I doing? You're now my ex-wife defending NewAge over our marriage. It doesn't matter how long we've been together. You've got an idea in your head - pulled right out of the blue with no connection to the reality we've shared - and that's all that matters now.
You're gone, man.
And there's nothing I can do - or will try to do - about it.
I'm a liar? Sure, you go on repeating that to yourself if it makes you feel better,...
The "hot coals" thing isn't really new-age. Or, rather, it doesn't need to be.
There's a good scientific explanation for why it (normally) works -- ash is a lousy conductor of heat. As a "mind over matter" thing, walking on coals is bunk. As a "learning to overcome your fears" thing, however, it is valid.
I read the debt deconstruction on iowahawk long before I saw the Tony Robbins video. I'm not sure who originated it, but it really makes an important point.
Crack and Bagoh breaking up is making me cry.
Hug it out, bitch.
One wonders if T. Robbins funnels money through the government in order to enrich himself at the expense of the common taxpayer?
If he doesn't, even though he's a powerful guy with friends-in-the-know and could, I give him a lot of credit. Consider him a showman, not song-and-dance man like Andy Kaufman, but a showman none the less, and a damn successful one.
The hate should go toward those who deserve it like Sandusky and friends, J. Holmes, and stupid, environment-killing traffic lights, which control the populace in a sheep-like manner therefore conditioning the U.S. for a lack of revolution with regards to corruption.
ACORN.
Jon Corzine.
Van Jones.
Fat Teat suckers all.
bagoh20 said...
RELEASE THE CRACKEM!
OK. That's funny.
Light a candle. I agree with garage.
Reminds me of the deaths in Arizona a few years back where morons subjected themselves to spiritual cleansing in a sweat lodge with little or no water.
"A fool and his money are soon parted" to which we can apparently modify, "A fool and his life are soon parted!" Are we so coddled as a nation that common sense is no longer applicable in daily life? H.L. Mencken summed it up; "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
"And, to the Romney supporters, this includes the idea that replacing a left-wing group of cultish thinkers with a right-wing group of cultish thinkers will somehow eradicate the problems this lack of critical thought delivers. It's simply impossible,...."
Liberté, égalité, fraternité!
I had forgotten that the Clintons were Robbins supporters. Of all the toxic boomer legacies, the restless search for goo-roos might be the stupidest. Man's wisdom has about 5000 years of history. What makes one think that charlatans like Tony Robbins know something that Confucius didn't?
One of the worst purveyors of this nonsense, of course, is Oprah. She had become a parody of herself.
I guess Willie figured he could learn something new from the pros
I'd bet good money that Clinton did at least 75% of the talking. To quote Aretha: Who's zooming who?
Boys, boys!
Can't we all just get along?
Crack is correct in that people need to be alert for signs that large group awareness techniques are being used. Once you learn the tactics, they become far less effective.
Bagoh is also right, in that truth is spoken by Robbins in that video, and it is fallacious to attack the messenger.
The key concern is remain awake to the idea that we humans are often too easily manipulated, and those methods are used by cults, politics, religion, education, the military, medicine, sales, and every human endeavor.
It's a tool that can be misused; mere usage is not evil, but a warning sign.
Just because you can see how the machine works doesn't mean the machine is fraudulent. It means you have to bring something to the table as well. You have to test it by measuring it against a known standard. That standard is truth.
What makes one think that charlatans like Tony Robbins know something that Confucius didn't?
What makes one think that Confuscius isn't just an earlier version of a Tony Robbins type?
For the record, Tony Robbins has always been conservative when it comes to money. He grew up poor with a single mother. He did his share of working crummy jobs and living in crummy places. He went far beyond that but he doesn't take it for granted and he still works his a** off. In his courses he teaches that sound mind, sound body, and sound finances are essential to life mastery in our society.
Robbins is very much opposed to the entitlement mentality. If asked to pare his teaching down to one recommendation, he says, "Raise your standards." He warns participants that in life, rewards lag results, i.e. that if one produces excellent results, one receives good rewards; if one produces good results, one receives average rewards; if one produces average results, one receives poor rewards; if one produces poor results, one receives almost no rewards. To receive excellent rewards, one must be outstanding.
Robbins is almost never political in public, so I was surprised to see his video on the debt. In it he thanks iowahawk at 7:15 mark and refers viewers to iowahawk's blog url onscreen. I take it that Robbins is seriously concerned about the debt, as any sane American should be, and the futility of solving it by taxing the rich into oblivion. The majority of people attending his events are liberals, so his effort is not to be dismissed.
There is little I can say to those who are terminally cynical about Tony Robbins. Though he is hardly above criticism, I've watched him since my first firewalk in 1998 and he stands up as a sincere person dedicated to improving people's lives.
I'll just do a quote from Robbins to show where he's coming from, and suggest that even if he is a cult leader, that what he's arguing isn't really all that controversial.
Basically, you can live your life in one of two ways. You can let your brain run you the way it has in the past. You can let it flash any picture or sound or feeling, and you can respond automatically on cue, like a Pavlovian dog responding to a bell. Or you can choose to consciously run your brain yourself. You can implant the cues you want. You can take bad experiences and sap them of their strength and power. You can represent them to yourself in a way that no longer overpowers you, a way that 'cuts them down' to a size where you know you can effectively handle things."
I would argue this is simply basic empowering lessons, you control your destiny you make the choices, your fears don't have to control you type shpiel. You may disagree with the simplicity of it, or think it's treacle, or what have you, but it's not like it isn't common sense. If you went to a psychologist he might have you think about the same things. If it's mind control it sounds like you controlling your own mind and moreso than some guru telling you to believe in Cthulu or something.
Now, a case could be made that hes nothing but a hawker of his books and that is probably true. However, he's good at doing that. And people like how he says what he says and ostensibly can get some benefit from his talks (which, since they are basic common sense, it would be hard not to). As such, I don't find his gains to be ill gotten.
I've attended a number of seminars by different presenters over several decades. Tends to give one a little "perspective". I've done the firewalks several times myself.
No, its not magic. Nor wonderful "powers of mind". The POWER is learning about yourself and overcoming fears.
What people call New Age in this context is really just showmnship on top of basic skills and information on how to be more effective with your own life.
A dry factual presentation would contain just as much of use but would never be retained. For maximum retention you must be INVOLVED with the material. The best presenters know this.
Tell me, I will forget. Show me, I may remember. Involve me and I will understand.
Crack,
When you attack your targets regardless of what they say, then you are the one who becomes suspect. It's just counter-productive.
I judge people by whether they speak the truth. I don't determine what is true by who speaks it. That's the primary tool of cults - to convince people to believe or disbelieve anything based on who they hear it from. It's the basic mistake a person has to make to become a cultist.
I still support you, but I hope you strengthen this weak spot. You are much more relevant than I am, so I want you to be your best.
JohnBoy wrote:
One of the worst purveyors of this nonsense, of course, is Oprah. She had become a parody of herself.
Poor Oprah. One of a few instances whereby an extremely powerful person made themselves completley irrelevant through their own self inflicted actions. She might want to consult with Tony Robbins or Chopra to see if they can help her get her mojo back.
And I'm not against Crack either. I think I'd probably agree with maybe 75 % of what he agrees on when it comes to cults/new ageism. I think he's lumping Mormonism in with new ageism when it really doesn't belong there, and self help gurus might intersect with new ageism, but that doesn't mean that all Self Help is New age. Chopra is new age. I don't think Covey is, or is so to a lesser extent.
Here's Wikipedia on new ageism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Age
and here's some of the common practices associated with New Ageism and whether I think they are junk or have value:
meditation (has value, though not necessarily spiritually) , channeling (junk), crystal healing (junk, though Magnets seem to help with pain), astral projection (total junk), psychic experience (total junk), holistic health (it depends on what the holistic healing is (considering it includes things like massage therapy, relaxation, excercise how can you argue that it's wrong) , simple living (who would disagree with it as a practical matter? If there's a spiritual component to it, then I'm not aware of it), and environmentalism (junk as activism/spirituality, but am not pro pollution); or belief in phenomena such as Earth mysteries (junk), ancient astronauts (junk), extraterrestrial life (junk, but the universe is so large, there's a possibility), unidentified flying objects (junk, though I did in fact see a UFO when I was younger. But count UFO in that case to mean, I had no idea what it was, I can't say it was alien) , crop circles (junk), and reincarnation (not sure about this one. Logically, it's junk, but how is it any stranger than believing in heaven?)
Astrology (junk), Past Lives (double junk), harmonic convergence (junk).
So most of what you consider junk, I too consider junk. The differences that I seem to have is where there are on things like holistic medicine or simple living, where I see practical benefits, if not spiritual ones. And if you think about holistic medicine, I bet you that youd agree with a lot of it as well. Excercise is listed as holistic medicine. What doctor has argued that people shouldn't excercise? The key though is, how much excercise, what kind of excercise. And true, some fitness freaks really overdue the benefits of excercise, and do too much of it, but that doesn't mean that excercise in itself is wrong.
As far as self help gurus, there are some who are decidely new age. Like Depack Chopra (junk) and then there are those who argue practical lessons. And those are only junk, if the lessons are junk. I would lump stephen covey in that list. It seems to me that if his 7 habits are in fact good habits for hightly effective people to have, then you can't argue he's wrong simply because he belongs to a crazy religion. I've also seen self help books or economic books tied into the philosophy of Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Huck Finn, The Simpsons even. Theyr'e just books. And you can get lessons from people or ideas that you otherwise would have little agreement with. Like say you think Sun Tzu is a jerk. It doesn't mean that one of his lessons might not hold value to you in a particular situation,or multiple situations, and the author selling his book is simply providing the connection. So if a tony Roberts says something about how to overcome your fears, and you agree with the point, it doesn't mean that therefore you've joined a cult. It simply means that Tony Robbins provided a connection to a life lesson that you happen to agree with.
On a practical level, you can't possibly think that those who are self help gurus provide no value. Because what they argue are things you most likely already agree with and argue lessons that make sense on a practical level. very few self help gurus are going to argue that you should be lazy, slothful, envious for example. But if Tony Robbins says you shouldn't be lazy but proactive, because he's in a cult, that disproves the lesson somehow? And you should really be lazy, only to prove him wrong? If he's right on the point, then hes right on the point. I tend to agree with those self help gurus who argue that you can make changes to your thought processes, and less so to self help gurus who argue from a more spiritual side (like a Dwyer for example).
Crack wrote:
Do you know how many videos there have been - by non-cultists - saying the exact same thing? So Tony Ropbbins copies them to protect his wealth - big whoop.
I like Bill Whittle too (he routinely makes good videos and is a great speaker) , if that is at all helpful. But why is Bill Whittle making the same point not an example of him trying to protect HIS wealth?
jr,
You understand so little, about what you're into, yet you speak so confidently.
Mormonism isn't NewAge? Then someone's got to explain Joseph Smith's arrests as a psychic with a "seer stone."
How about mother and father gods on a distant planet, or the promise Mitt will rule his own planet, with his "spiritual wives"?
Does that sound like Christianity? Or Scientology?
That wikipedia info is outdated:
Those "beliefs" are treated as individual items, though listed under the umbrella term NewAge - why?
Because it's cult made up of many cults - AKA the NewAge Movement - and they're indoctrinating the population while mixing fake with real, almost at random, in order to give their "beliefs" the aura of truth. You can't tell the difference:
There is no "holistic" medicine. There's medicine - and what doesn't work is quackery.
Adding "holistic" to "medicine" is an example of mixing fakery with reality; the divide-and-conquer strategy over your mind and body in the name of the spirit.
"Holistic" medicine vs. the real thing. Eastern medicine vs. Western. Allopathy vs. Naturopathy. And so on.
Buying into this is evidence you're not using critical thought. Or do you think a broken bone is treated differently in China than here? Appendix removal?
No - there's only medicine. And a bunch of charlatans/quacks who can't/don't admit they have little-to-no medical training.
Exercise isn't NewAge - but if mix it with Homeopathy (AKA faith healing) and it is.
Which drives doctors crazy, because they're the ones shouldering the burden when "holistic" endeavors go wrong, because you thought - since you exercise as they wish - it was "all good," until it isn't.
Then you need a real doctor. Who you're skeptical of, And give a hard time, because you bought into the bullshit that he - with his eight-plus years of study and training - doesn't know what they're talking about since a "healer" (who set themselves up based on a feeling) said so. Good job:
You're giving a big "Fuck You" to the profession you need to save your life - until you need them to save your life.
Robbins message promises people a new mental state. But the chants and the group think experiments in releasing human mental powers will addict people to those teachings when they do sort of work a little.
Crack knows more about the latest versions of the occult than I do, but the poison in a Robbins message to surrendered minds needs only to be as simple as showing men that they can use their minds and chants to take control over their own souls... and then comes control over the souls of others.
The end result is confusion, mental bondage and broken relationships. Not that there is anything wrong with that.
If Stephen Covey's 7 habits are so good for business, why are we in "the worst recession since the great depression," or whatever Obama's silly meme is?
It shouldn't be possible. Covey's great management tool has swamped this country. Yet here we are - from following his ideas.
Getting a clue yet? Or do you still think I "can't argue he's wrong simply because he belongs to a crazy religion"?
Forget the crazy religion - HE'S STILL WRONG. And the problem is how few understand that - even as the economy declines - but couldn't spot it on first sight. I love this:
If a tony Roberts says something about how to overcome your fears, and you agree with the point, it doesn't mean that therefore you've joined a cult. It simply means that Tony Robbins provided a connection to a life lesson that you happen to agree with.
But who says - if you need help - you should be diagnosing yourself? Doctors don't treat themselves but a layman in trouble - mentally - has all the answers?
Next is "on a practical level, you can't possibly think that those who are self help gurus provide no value,"
But I say "Yes! We! Can!"
Gurus wouldn't need to write so many self-help books if the previous ones held an answer. But they don't. So the same people buy each new book to solve the same problem the last one didn't help. Worthless.
You can't "make changes to your thought processes." You can only use what you have effectively - which A) no guru has an interest in, otherwise their business model is kaput, and B) you're not doing, now, if you'll fall for (and defend) them in the first place. It's a con.
That's why they're called "con men."
jr565,
I like Bill Whittle too (he routinely makes good videos and is a great speaker) , if that is at all helpful. But why is Bill Whittle making the same point not an example of him trying to protect HIS wealth?
By ignoring every other point I made, to zero in on this one, shows how little you actually care to address an issue and how far you'll go to defend cultism. It's really sad.
Has Bill Whittle hurt anybody? Lied to anybody? Started a cult?
And I'm supposed to buy that Tony Robbins - friend and co-worker of Oprah Winfrey, Rhonda Byrne, Bill & Hillary, and recent guest of honor at an Obama White House dinner - has all-of-a-sudden become a conservative because he copied an Iowahawk message?
Or - unlike bagoh - should I judge his actions based on his history of being a sleazy operator who'll say anything?
That's a really tough call,...
If Stephen Covey's 7 habits are so good for business, why are we in "the worst recession since the great depression," or whatever Obama's silly meme is?
It shouldn't be possible. Covey's great management tool has swamped this country. Yet here we are - from following his ideas.
Maybe not enough people listened to stephen Covey or aren't Highly Efficient? Blaming Covey for the recession is kind of silly, because that assumes that everyone who screwed up even read his books. And which particular habits do you think are wrong and are the habits of highly Inefficient people? My guess, is almost all the habits would be ones that any person would say are good practices in business and in life. So unless you show that his 7 practices are in fact not good practices, then you can't really fault people for following his logic.
Crack Emcee wrote:
But who says - if you need help - you should be diagnosing yourself? Doctors don't treat themselves but a layman in trouble - mentally - has all the answers?
There's a big difference between someone who is mentally ill versus someone who is shy or who is not a go getter, or a procrastinator etc. For those people, the latter not the former, I don't see why using techniques to get past this fear or having someone use inspiring words to motivate them to solve their problems is impossible, or that it can't be done.
But I say "Yes! We! Can!"
Gurus wouldn't need to write so many self-help books if the previous ones held an answer. But they don't. So the same people buy each new book to solve the same problem the last one didn't help. Worthless.There are infinite ways to have the same thoughts expressed differently. So just as 12 notes can produce an almost infinite number of songs, so too can self help gurus write endless numbers of self help books. And the market itself is what's determining why so many are written (if it's a badly written book for example, it might not sell).
And, if Tony Robbins, or some other self help motivator writes a book that does help you change something in a positive way, you might buy their next book because you found their message to have been beneficial. Which would also lead to increase in book sales (in other words, you might buy more books BECAUSE they are helping and not because they're not)> For example, if I hate a band, I don't see myself buying their next album. But if I love it, I will.
You can't "make changes to your thought processes." You can only use what you have effectively - which A) no guru has an interest in, otherwise their business model is kaput, and B) you're not doing, now, if you'll fall for (and defend) them in the first place. It's a con.
I'm not saying that non self help guru is a con, but the fact is you can make changes to your thought processes and some motivators can help you use what you have MORE effectively, by getting you for example to think around your negative thoughts, or through positive thinking,or whatever technique they use. You are the person who controls what you ultimately do, and that's based on your thought processes. Finding ways to motivate yourself is a conscious choice, and, I'd argue that's what Robbins is good at doing. All he's doing is giving you a pep talk. And saying something like
“Let fear be a counselor and not a jailer.” Meaning, don't let your fears keep you back from achieving your goals, be it starting a business or going on a date, or what have you.
If such a thought inspires you, or reminds you of how said fears are in fact keeping you from achieving a goal, then he's done his job as a motivational speaker. And there's nothing remotely controversial about saying such a thing. Most people are ruled by their fears, and they often prevent action which can often be overcome through conscious will. I think about my own fears in life, and realize I had to make a conscious choice to move past them. So, there is something with that statement that resonates. And Robbins is good as a motivational speaker.
Crack wrote:
By ignoring every other point I made, to zero in on this one, shows how little you actually care to address an issue and how far you'll go to defend cultism. It's really sad.
Has Bill Whittle hurt anybody? Lied to anybody? Started a cult?
Who did Tony Robbins lie to? And who did he hurt? The people who walked on coals? They have to know that they are walking on hot coals and can get burned, and made a conscious choice to try to overcome their fear. If it's THEIR choice than Robbins in fact did not hurt them. If you ask a bunch of people who listen to Tony Robbins, they'd probably argue that he's inspired them, especially if they get something from his seminars. One of the guys on the board said he's been involved in at least 10 walk on coals Tony Robbins events. MEANING, that for whatever reason, he got something from those seminars. Tony didn't put a gun to his head and demand that he attend not one but ten seminars. At a certain point, we have to recognize that attending those seminars is a conscious choice, and if he didn't want to go, he wouldn't.
How is Robbins approach that different than the coach talking to the team before the big game and telling them to play the game to their fullest? It's the same approach. Would that be considered brain washing?
I
Crack wrote:
Or do you still think I "can't argue he's wrong simply because he belongs to a crazy religion"?
I'm not saying you can't argue anything. Clearly, you're entitled to your opinion. But what are you arguing he's wrong about? The seven habits of highly effective people are somehow not good habits because he happens to be part of a crazy religion? I can only speak for his 7 habits, and not his crazy religion, but I would argue that he's right about those, even if his religion is wacky. If you want to say he's wrong, then we have to get into specifics about why he's wrong, and here it would be literally arguing that being proactive is somehow "wrong". That makes no sense.
Forget the crazy religion - HE'S STILL WRONG. And the problem is how few understand that - even as the economy declines - but couldn't spot it on first sight. I love this: He may be wrong that there's only seven habits, but those habits that he highlighted are all good habits. Just as even if you are not a christian you might still find the seven deadly sins to be bad. If he instead wrote a book about the 7 bad habits of highly amoral people and said stuff like sloth, and avarice were wrong, would you argue that no those are actually positive because he believes in a crazy religion?
It's not worth it:
You'll say anything, and you come to your own conclusions about my intent - meaning I have to straighten out that clusterfuck before I even make my point - which is more than I want to go through.
Look, go on buying supplements, listening to gurus, and defending cult groups, as if they're needed. If that's what passes for normal for you, as you blow money on it as well, more power to you. I'll be here as each ugly story emerges, as always.
Time will tell,...
Crack wrote:
There is no "holistic" medicine. There's medicine - and what doesn't work is quackery.
Adding "holistic" to "medicine" is an example of mixing fakery with reality; the divide-and-conquer strategy over your mind and body in the name of the spirit.
"Holistic" medicine vs. the real thing. Eastern medicine vs. Western. Allopathy vs. Naturopathy. And so on.
Buying into this is evidence you're not using critical thought. Or do you think a broken bone is treated differently in China than here? Appendix removal?
Setting a bone and removing appendixes are examples of surgery. If something is broken or needs to be removed there are very few ways to do it other than the traditional way. But how do you cure a disease. There may in fact be more than one way to do so. If someone says they can remove an appendix using vitamins, I'll be extremely dubious, but if someone says that there are other things people can use other than cortisone to treat inflammation for example, that makes perfect sense to me. Holisitic medicine is not ALWAYS wrong and traditional medicine is not ALWAYS right. . The best doctors have their feet in both fields.
And by you saying that exercise is not new age, that ignores the fact that many people who are into excercies are also into Yoga, for example, because it works as exercise. Even martial arts has some of that spiritualism. Is martial arts, new age? if you wanted to learn to fight would you not consider Karate? What about people who are into Karate, but also into body building and also believe in traditional medicine? Its not always, and in fact rarely is an either or proposition.
And - once again - you're being highly selective about what you answer:
What happened to the question of whether Mormonism is NewAge?
You skipped right over that one, though it was the first topic you brought up and I addressed.
Instead, you want to cherry pick for arguments sake, without noticing that's not what I'm trying to do with you. And then you say stupid shit:
Maybe not enough people listened to stephen Covey or aren't Highly Efficient?
He had the best selling business management book in the history of the country - sure that's it. Not enough people knew about his ideas. Give me a break. Or how about this:
Blaming Covey for the recession is kind of silly, because that assumes that everyone who screwed up even read his books.
Did I say I blame him for the recession? No - not once. See, you're on your own messaging, without paying attention to what I say at all. And you also say things like this:
For those people, the latter not the former, I don't see why using techniques to get past this fear or having someone use inspiring words to motivate them to solve their problems is impossible, or that it can't be done.
Earth to jr:
Just because you "don't see" something, doesn't mean it isn't occurring. You're a rube, so there's lots of stuff you "don't see," like what a total waste it is to pursue these things. We are a nation going broke from throwing money down a hole but - hey - you "don't see" it so let's keep doing it.
You're a waste, yourself, jr.
And by you saying that exercise is not new age, that ignores the fact that many people who are into excercies are also into Yoga, for example, because it works as exercise.
TIME Magazine:
"Over the past three years, 13,000 Americans were treated in an emergency room or a doctor's office for yoga-related injuries,...yoga, regardless of the form, doesn't offer a comprehensive way to get fit,...It's not the best way to lose weight either,...power yoga burns fewer calories than a comparable session of calisthenics."
You're an idiot, jr.
Crack wrote:
There is no "holistic" medicine. There's medicine - and what doesn't work is quackery.
I would agree with that, only amend it to say that some "holistic" medicine works, and is therefore not quackery. That doesn't mean that all holistic medicine is valid.
Crack Emcee:
When it comes to the New Age and growth groups, I agree that they have their pitfalls. I wish people brought more critical thinking to these groups, as well as to the rest of life, but critical thinking doesn't come easy to humans.
Not to you either, judging by your comments. You reject everything from anyone associated with or coming from the groups you disapprove of. That's known as the Genetic Fallacy if you are interested.
Other fallacies come to mind as well -- the Fallacy of the Excluded Middle, Guilt By Association, Hasty Generalization, Personal Attack, and Appeal to Ridicule.
Do you have a point in this Tony Robbins topic beyond your ongoing polemical jihad against anything related to the New Age?
"Over the past three years, 13,000 Americans were treated in an emergency room or a doctor's office for yoga-related injuries,...yoga, regardless of the form, doesn't offer a comprehensive way to get fit,...It's not the best way to lose weight either,...power yoga burns fewer calories than a comparable session of calisthenics."
how many people were treated in emergency rooms due to calisthenics? The article also mentions that yoga burns as much calories as a brisk walk. A lot of doctors say walking is great excercise. So, if it's as good as walking, what's the problem? Also, improbably providesa lot more flexibility than walking could.
Again, there doesn't have to be an either or. You could do yoga, walking and calisthenics. Too much of any one thing is bad for you.
Crack, you wrote:
If Stephen Covey's 7 habits are so good for business, why are we in "the worst recession since the great depression," or whatever Obama's silly meme is?
It shouldn't be possible. Covey's great management tool has swamped this country. Yet here we are - from following his ideas.
which kind of sounds like you're blaming his management tool for the economy. You have yet to tell me what is wrong with his 7 habits, as far as management goes.
He had the best selling business management book in the history of the country - sure that's it. Not enough people knew about his ideas. Give me a break.
Again, that suggests that the ideas of 7 steps are wrong in and of themselves. So which of the 7 habits do you find to be wrong, and ones that highly effective people shouldn't have?
Mormonism isn't NewAge? Then someone's got to explain Joseph Smith's arrests as a psychic with a "seer stone."
How about mother and father gods on a distant planet, or the promise Mitt will rule his own planet, with his "spiritual wives"?
Does that sound like Christianity? Or Scientology?
It sounds like a warped version of christianity, for sure. But does that make it new age?
creeley23,
Crack Emcee: When it comes to the New Age and growth groups, I agree that they have their pitfalls. I wish people brought more critical thinking to these groups, as well as to the rest of life, but critical thinking doesn't come easy to humans.
With the insistence there are some areas of life where logical thinking applies - you don't leave the house by jumping off the roof - but others (like religion) where it does not, what do you expect? We don't teach critical thinking in schools, so we have a nation of idiots. Have you ever watched "Judge Judy"? How many episodes have you ever seen where anybody admits they're wrong - even when it's clearly proven they are? That's what I'm up against, and I know it, and - just like Judge Judy - I call stupid idiots, stupid idiots.
Not to you either, judging by your comments. You reject everything from anyone associated with or coming from the groups you disapprove of. That's known as the Genetic Fallacy if you are interested.
And the rest of you try to pretend words like "con man," "fraud," "quackery," and "charlatan" have no meaning and, if they do, they're acceptable. Fuck that. I am not a relativist, and have found no reason in my 50 years to accept that destructive point of view, or it's adherents, as anything more than destructive. If you enjoy wallowing in misinformation, be my guest, but keep it away from me - you'll get no love here.
Other fallacies come to mind as well -- the Fallacy of the Excluded Middle, Guilt By Association, Hasty Generalization, Personal Attack, and Appeal to Ridicule.
My attitudes are not hastily drawn but are the result of years studying this topic. Cults, by definition, "associate" so yes, as far as I'm concerned, you hang with 'em and accept their mess, you're in.
My views are not extreme - here's another word you don't seem to have heard before, either: "principled." I wasn't one of the hippies or other freaks determined to "change the world" with this nonsense - they are the radicals. Nobody asked them to change shit. That such nonsense is being pushed on me, to be accepted, is extreme - especially when I've made it clear I do not want it.
As far as personal attacks and ridicule, guilty as charged and proud of it. You wouldn't last a day around anyone playing "the dozens," but would probably fall apart the first time anyone said, "Your momma's so fat,…" Sorry, but I'm made of sterner stuff.
Do you have a point in this Tony Robbins topic beyond your ongoing polemical jihad against anything related to the New Age?
Do you, other than sticking your nose in my face with your bullshit? What of worth have you contributed? I explained how the charlatan got people hurt in my first post. What have you done?
Go shit on yourself and leave me alone, you hypocritical asshole.
Ha! I just looked, creely:
You've "done about twenty Tony Robbins events as a participant or as a volunteer."
So you're as big of an idiot as jr.
You two should go swap spit or something,...
Crack Emcee: Good enough. Clearly there is no point in continuing our discussion.
People often shortchange Tony Robbins. I can understand why. He is this huge goofy-looking guy with big teeth and a bizarrely animated presentation. He is in the often sleazy field of motivational speaking and self-improvement. Robbins is hard to take seriously right out of the box.
All I can say is that there is more to him than that initial impression. Much of what he teaches is common sense -- make plans, be responsible, don't blame others, notice your values and beliefs, discover your passion, consider changing your mind, pay attention to your rapport with people, find ways to contribute to others.
He's worth checking out if you're so inclined. Since many reading here are conservative, here's John Hawkins of Right-Wing New who lists his favorite Tony Robbins quotes.
The price of having an informed opinion is informing oneself.
And the rest of you try to pretend words like "con man," "fraud," "quackery," and "charlatan" have no meaning and, if they do, they're acceptable. Fuck that. I am not a relativist, and have found no reason in my 50 years to accept that destructive point of view, or it's adherents, as anything more than destructive. If you enjoy wallowing in misinformation, be my guest, but keep it away from me - you'll get no love here
you're not a relevist. You're an absolutist and closed minded. If any person, could use some meditation, it's you dude. But keep up with your crusade, Torquemada. Normally, one can find consensus with people, especially ones ou tend to agree with, but not you. So fuck it. I'm going to take everything you say and apply the same standard that you do for cults. If it comes from your mouth then it's simply wrong. If I were to happen to agree with it in principle, then clearly I erred in believing in said principle, since you hold that principle and are always wrong and a complete lunatic.
For the record, I know all about con artists, and I have never joined a cult. You're pinging me, because I took vitamins, don't find yoga to be the devils behavior, and sometimes can say that tony Robbins makes a good point, or find that the 7 habits of highly effective people are in fact 7 habits that highly effective people tend to have. I must be in a cult or have fallen for the con. Dude did you ever realize how messianic and conspiratorial you sound. You should start a cult.
He's worth checking out if you're so inclined. Since many reading here are conservative, here's John Hawkins of Right-Wing New who lists his favorite Tony Robbins quotes.
Clearly, John Hawkins believes in cults. He's brainwashed don't ya know. /sarc.
You're not a relevist. You're an absolutist and closed minded.
To bullshit? Sure. I won't be one of those 21 "open-minded" people suffering now from listening to Tony or joining James Arthur Ray's sweatlodge - you and creely will. Hey, freely, how much money have you given that asshole so far?
If any person, could use some meditation, it's you dude.
Oh yeah - I want some of what they're selling:
• 76% of long-term meditators experience psychological disorders -- including 26% nervous breakdowns.
• 63% experience serious physical complaints.
• 70% recorded a worsening ability to concentrate.
• Researchers found a startling drop in honesty among long-term meditators.
"The judgment of the married partners group (i.e. the non- meditator's judgment of the meditating partner) was very close to that of the parents. The item "perception of reality" had decreased,...the view of reality,...was now a source of great conflict. The second greatest change given by the married partners group was openness. This decreased.
Gee, a problem with reality - that sounds familiar,...
The meditation reduced openness in its being a communicative quality. As a non-verbal attribute of understanding and the ability to communicate one's thoughts, it transformed into the opposite. Through this lack of openness, honesty shows a startling drop,...ability to make contacts changes,...politeness,...warmth and sympathy,...A distinct cooling in the relationship is indicated, on the commencement of the [meditating] practice by one of the partners,...In the area of performance, therefore, [meditating] does not cause an improvement, rather a disimprovement[sic] and accordingly fails in its promises.
Ex-meditators, parents and married partners are all united in this aspect, with some individual differentiations. Even ability to make contacts and dependability as well as warmth and sympathy were reduced in the opinion of the parents.
A loss of sympathy for those who don't go along - also very familiar. If you study cultish behavior.
This major reduction in positive characteristics stands in total opposition to the promises made by the [meditation] movement.
The social behavior of meditators and the attitude of the [meditation] movement towards social life exhibit sect-like tendencies, which have nothing to do with the relaxation technique presented to the public by the movement.
Lying? Sect-like tendencies? They're trying to say something here, but I can't quite put my finger on it,…
The personality profile once more gives the trend of changes in all three groups: there is no development of personal attributes in the sense of an improvement in those attributes. Various attributes, like the emotions and a social responsibility, lose all importance throughout. [Meditation], however, promises an improvement of and increase in these attributes. Most strongly affected are the perception of reality, openness, and the ability to make critical evaluations."
"The ability to make critical evaluations" is compromised, and they like to start arguments over it. Golly, jr, that's you in a nutshell. I mean, nobody charged you with searching me out - you WANT to do this.
You're the perfect representative for your "beliefs."
Dude did you ever realize how messianic and conspiratorial you sound. You should start a cult.
Ding-ding-ding! Winner! Winner!
Is anybody keeping score on the number of times someone on this blog has suggested it's one cult critic should start a cult, or accused me of wanting to start one?
It's GOT to be in the hundreds by now, no?
And always by people who are open about their own involvement in cult shit. Do you meditate? Accuse others of starting a cult! Do yoga? Accuse others of starting a cult! Shop in places engaged in cult marketing - like Whole Foods? Accuse others of starting a cult! Join in Large Group Awareness Training? Accuse others of starting a cult! Can't handle anyone criticizing whatever "group activity" you're involved in? Accuse others of starting a cult!
It's like a mental tic.
I'd seek (real) help for that, if I were you,...
jr565,
Clearly, John Hawkins believes in cults. He's brainwashed don't ya know. /sarc.
Or clearly he DOESN'T, so he's open to what they're saying and doing. Here's Deborah Layton of The People's Temple:
"...Nobody joins a cult. You join a self-help group, a religious movement, a political organization. They change so gradually, by the time you realize you're entrapped - and almost everybody does - you can't figure a safe way back out...."
But there's no reason to protect yourself against that. Be "open-minded" about it, so you can be one of the glorious masses of the dead, or walking around with burnt feet, or giving your money to a charlatan. Don't be like me:
You know, "crazy,..."
Crack Emcee wrote:
Shop in places engaged in cult marketing - like Whole Foods?
Seriously dude, now shopping at Whole Foods is somehow being involved in a cult. We have some whole foods in the city, and they happen to have some of the better selections of ingredients if you say wanted to get a salad, not to mention a bunch of brands you wont find at your local supermarket. They are a bit pricy though, so I don't shop their that often (not to mention they're not that close).
But what if you JUST WANT A SALAD WITH INGREDIENTS THAT OTHER SALAD BARS AREN'T OFFERING?!? (for example, I like salads, and most salad bars don't offer stuff like Kale. Whole Food does) Why are you insinuating that people shopping there then are NECESSARILY involved with cults. As a CUSTOMER, buying items that one wants, you could make the argument that Whole Foods simply provides more choice or convenience than other places, and THAT is the only reason necessary to justify shopping at Whole Foods.
Rather than saying those who shop at Whole Foods are sheep, why can't you recognize that maybe WHole Foods offers something that other stores doesn't. YOu could make the same argument about Trader joe's or Walmart. Are those cult stores too?
"...Nobody joins a cult. You join a self-help group, a religious movement, a political organization. They change so gradually, by the time you realize you're entrapped - and almost everybody does - you can't figure a safe way back out...."
There is a concept that you're not getting. I don't want to minimize the idea that you can get involved in cults. But there are multiple ways to be involved in information. the lessons from a Tony Robbins or a Steve Covey or anyone frankly, can still be learned, absent the context of how they were delivered or who delivers it.
Meaning, there might be something go Yoga, or Pilates, or Tai Chi or what have you that you can still gain, even if you don't then join any cult. Millions of people can do tai chi simply as a relaxing excercise and never even care/know about the cultish aspects of said exercices.
For example, you don't have to be a Christian to get that Sloth is wrong. If you argued that because Christians argue something, you must reject it, you are also going to reject things that CHristians say that you would necessarily agree with. Like, thou shalt not kill. That's a concept that even if you don't buy the whole religious thing can still be imparted.
So, if you find that a tai chi excercise helps you, you can use it and feel secure that you're not therefore joining a cult simply because you used the excercise.
Ding-ding-ding! Winner! Winner!
Is anybody keeping score on the number of times someone on this blog has suggested it's one cult critic should start a cult, or accused me of wanting to start one?
It's GOT to be in the hundreds by now, no?
Maybe that's because you sound awfully conspiratorial and megalomaniacal with how you state your case on cults. And if anyone disagrees with you, even just to the degree of how broad the brush you are using to state your case, why then, they are defenders of cults and all things new age.
Great work! This is the type of info that should be shared around the web. Shame on Google for not buy twitter followers positioning this post higher! Come on over and visit my site . Thanks =)
Post a Comment