--- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The cult/thought reform information was useful for me but it > may not be for everyone. There are ways to understand it > that don't involve seeing yourself as a victim.
"[TM techniques] are the most sophisticated techniques for mind control that have ever been used," according to you. You also wrote, "Lifton and Singer studied [Korean war vets] and brought out a model to understand the shifting of a person's belief without their conscious participation. It describes what happened to me in TM very well." It's difficult to see how these claims of yours could be consistent with not seeing yourself as a victim. > As a teacher my first instinct in learning about this aspect of > groups was to decide that I couldn't ethically teach the system > to others. I decided that before I stopped meditating. I felt > as though the way the information was imparted was not done in > a manor that I was comfortable with. But everyone has to > decide for themselves if this information is useful for their > lives. > > Once I learned about it, I sought it out. That was my choice. > It may not be yours or you may have already checked it out and > decided it doesn't apply. How could it *not* apply if TM's techniques are "the most sophisticated techniques for mind control that have ever been used"? <snip> > I liked Margret Singer personally, and felt she was making a > contribution to our understanding of group belief dynamics. Her > heart was in the right place and she was a deep thinker. Here's my favorite statement of this "deep thinker" (at least as reported by Curtis): "According to Margret Singer who has personally worked with more than 3,000 cult victims TMers sustain the most damage of any members who have left a cult." (Note Curtis's--or perhaps Singer's--use of the term "cult victims.") One *hopes* that Curtis has somewhat mangled this assertion of Singer's, and that what she *actually* said was more like, "The former TMers with whom I have worked have sustained the most damage of any former cult members I have treated." But even that would be a rather peculiar assertion from someone who was supposedly scientifically minded. First, her "sample" of former TMers is self-selected, on two levels: (1) these are people who sought out therapy; (2) they are people who sought out *Singer* as their therapist. Second, neither Singer nor anyone else that I'm aware of has ever made a serious attempt to distinguish preexisting pathology from the effects of TM. (Indeed, given the specific claims TM makes and its documented effectiveness in some areas--e.g., reducing trait anxiety--it's likely that people with preexisting pathology tend to gravitate to TM in relatively larger numbers, so that's another factor skewing the sample.) So for her to suggest that her patients' "damage" was a result of their TM practice and/or exposure to its purported thought-reform techniques is completely unsupported by any data. Curtis, Singer may have been a very nice lady, but she was a *sloppy thinker*. To use her "model" and analysis as the basis of your perspective on your TM experience is iffy at best, and to promote it to others without the appropriate caveats is just plain irresponsible. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
