--- In [email protected], turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@> wrote: > > > > The ends justify the means eh? Even if that means conning money > > out of people for things that aren't going to happen. Part of > > me thinks that if god didn't want them sheared he wouldn't have > > made them sheep but there is a much bigger part that has respect > > for people and couldn't ever see them as dumb cash cows to be > > wooed with empty meaningless promises like "you get back twice > > what you give". Folie a deux, if you wish. > > The reason that con games work so well is that the > people being conned are reluctant to admit *that* > they got conned. > > I remember when a former girlfriend of mine returned > from her early TM-siddhis course, just before I was > about to go on mine. I asked her about it, and if > there was any truth to stories commonly being passed > around at the time *as if they were true* of people > actually levitating, walking through walks, turning > invisible, etc. > > She -- to her credit -- tried to tell me the truth, > but knowing that to some extent I was still a TB, > and wouldn't be able to handle the truth, she did it > in metaphor. Instead of answering me directly, she > launched into what I thought at the time was a non- > sequitur, and related the plot of a story by Mark > Twain. > > In it, a traveling carnival arrives in a small town. > They erect an enormous tent, big enough to hold half > of the town's population of men at once. They then > start to advertise two -- and only two -- performances > of the "naughty, naughty peep show." When asked about > it by the townspeople, the carnival barkers won't say > anything more than "Just come to see it...you'll see > that it's the *naughtiest* peep show you've ever > seen." > > So the day arrives, and *all* of the town's men line > up to buy tickets. Half of them get tickets for the > first show, and go inside, while the other half wait > expectantly outside for the next show. > > Inside, the first group of men soon discover that > the "naughty, naughty peep show" is a total con. The > women are old and toothless and ugly, and in such > bad shape that no one minds that they don't really > take off much clothing. They're the kinds of strippers > to whom you're tempted to yell, "Put it back on." > > So the show ends, and the first group of men file out, > and have to walk past the second group of men, who > naturally ask them how it was. To a man, each of the > guys in the first group say, "It was GREAT...by far > the naughtiest peep show I've ever seen." And so all > of the second group of men buy their tickets and > go to the second show. > > I didn't quite "get it" when my friend told me this > story in response to my questions about the TM-siddhis > course, and what to expect there. In retrospect I > really admire her for *trying* to tell me what to > *really* expect, knowing in advance that I wouldn't > be able to hear it. A lesser person would have said, > "It was GREAT...the best TM course I've ever been on."
Ha ha, said it myself. Think we all did actually, a part of it was the belief that all the pain and boredom was for the best possible cause, I'm sure the ones who still do the sids and enjoy them still say that. My experience wasn't so good and I quit after a mere ten years [ahem] bit slow to accept the obvious fact that it wasn't doing me any good at all. Must have been some good moments but I'm much happier without it. > I can only imagine that to this day those who really > *did* invest in Vedaland tell stories about how many > benefits "came to them" in the form of "Support Of > Nature" or other Woo Woo. Anything rather than admit > that they were conned. I remember when the "Save the world" pundit programme started they promised refunds if they didn't get the group together. I thought about donating but would insist they sign a document saying I was paying for world peace not just the pundits themselves and would set out acceptable parameters for what I consider world peace, a results based refund system. Statistical fiddling and targets drawn round arrows would not be acceptable. "Phase transitions" formed no part of the original theory so none of those either! I know some TBs who would have signed it, so sure were they of their views, but I doubt the upper echelons would have risked it. Besides, I didn't have the million dollar minimum donation handy so it's all a bit moot....
