Discussion about EST, The Forum, Landmark Education

Discussion about EST, The Forum, Landmark Education - Part 2

In article <KCKLUGE.95Mar29212513@krusty.eecs.umich.edu*,

Karl Kluge <kckluge@krusty.eecs.umich.edu* wrote:

*When you last looked was obviously quite some time ago. About 4 years ago *there was a big wave of people from the department I was in who did the *Forum, and at that time the cost was already over $500.

So?

*: As to "hounding"-there's no hounding. People are called with information on *: the next seminar, or invited to volunteer to assist. If they say "no" it *: means "no." If the rely on polite circumlocution, the caller might continue *: with the conversation to bring them to "no" or "yes"--it doesn't matter *: which. If they say they don't want to be called, DNC is put on their card *: (Do Not Call) and that's it. Your account suggests to me that you have a *: problem being clear or being decisive. That's not someone else's fault. * *Thanks for documenting why, despite any change in name or methods, the *label "esthole" can still be appropriate. As Miss Manners would no doubt *say, "And what is wrong with polite circumlocution?" If you can't *TELL* *that someone is using polite circumlocution to say "no", then of course *it is reasonable to continue the conversation until you figure it out. *If you *CAN* tell that they're saying "no" and you continue the conversation *to force them to say "no" in so many words, then you're being an esthole. *Is that clear and decisive enough for you?

You're making up a label, failing to define it, and then using it as a pejorative. Not rational.

As to polite circumlocutions, often they're a substitute for being decisive, and indecisiveness has ruined many lives. Thus it is a principle of Werner's to bring people to choice. Another reason many people's lives don't work is that they're not responsible. It becomes everybody else's fault but theirs when something doesn't work. The essence of responsibility is confronting choice and then standing behind the choice one makes. Your own comments are an illustration of the above principles.

It's perfectly true that many people hate to be brought to choice, and hate it when their avoidance of responsibility, disguised as "polite circumlocution" is brought forward. But they came to Werner's programs in the first place to get the things in their lives that aren't working taken care of. Werner is just doing his job. If you don't like it, tell his people (o.k. the successor org's people) not to call and you're out of it and back in your own stew. If I go to a doctor and ask for help, he's going to help me until I tell him to stop. If part of my problem is I can't bring myself to say "stop", then that's part of what I asked him to deal with. Getting me to say "do not call" is a victory for me if that's my problem.

Have you noticed that your dentist keeps after you, too. You may not like it but as long as you're his patient it's his duty to remind you to come in for check-ups. A good dentist will not take "I don't have time right now" as

final, but will have his secretary keep calling until you "get" that you need to come in for a checkup or take the responsibility for your dental health back from the dentist formally. "Welcome to the Hotel California. You can always check out, but you can never leave." That's how life works.

*:The last is untrue. The purpose of the organization is human transformation. *:Making money is a test of validity in the real world. If the programs aren't *:serving people, they won't make money and the organization should go under. * *People who sell subliminal tapes make money and stay in business. Thatdoesn't *mean that subliminal tapes objectively produce results. It merely means that *the people who buy them *believe* that they have produced a result. In fact, *this has been documented in controlled studies. However good the Forum may *have made people I know who did it feel about themselves, frankly I didn'tsee *much difference before and after.

There have been extensive arms-length long-term retrospective studies of both the est training and the Forum, but disinterested academics. The results are very positive.

As for the "placebo effect", there is a huge body of psychological research on this and the bottom line is that most medical and other therapy gains strongly from it. If it makes the patient better, good. The statistics for the placebo effect are about double those from spontaneous remission in the absence of treatment.

When you've done controlled experiments replicating those in the literature you will be entitled to say "there's not much difference before or after". Until then your comment must be considered sour grapes.

*: The Forum, which basically teaches the work of the mainstream philosopher *:Heidegger, provides valuable insight into the being of human beings, what it *:means to be a human being, and related stuff relevant to understanding one's *:own life and to being-in-the-world. Its value lies in that work, not in any *: self-congratulatory groupie phenomenon.

*The Forum cloaks a bunch of standard techniques for emotionally manipulating *people in a Heideggerian verbal framework. I will, however, admit that as *such organizations go it appeared relatively benign compared to groups like *Lifespring.

This is false. The forum is mostly conversation and there's little "emotional manipulation" in the presentation of the material. Let's see some evidence, please.

*: As to why the Scienos have Werner and his orgs on their enemies list,

*: including such as The Hunger Project, which has nothing to do with est, the *: Forum, or personal development, but is strictly a consciousness-raising *: organization about world hunger, you'll have to ask the Scienos. *

*The Hunger Project has nothing to do with the Forum? So when the presenterfor *a Hunger Project presentation talk about changing the "conversation" about *hunger, and making the "distinction" between famine and chronic persistent *hunger, and has the audience do visualization exercises, you're saying that *none of that comes out of the Forum?

What's wrong with using Heideggerian concepts? Where they were learned is irrelevant--you can take a course in it at Berkeley or Stanford, read hundreds of books by Heidegger or about his work, or simple have it explained by a friend. If it's useful and it works, who are you to tell others what philosophers they should believe in. When you can can refute Heidegger's ideas, come back and talk to us. Until then you're simply name-calling, and displaying your ignorance of nineteenth and twentieth century mainstream philosophers as well.

By the way, the notion that the being of human beings is rooted in the conversation that they are is pure Heidegger.

The notion of distinctions gives tremendous power in everyday life as well as thinking. Recall (if you were paying attention in the Forum) the distinctions about snow. We have about three: snow, sleet, and slush. The eskimo has about 82, including names for the kind of snow that will break under the weight of a dogsled, and the yellow kind you shouldn't drink. As a result the eskimo is very powerful in his environment and we'd constantly be getting into trouble in it without the necessary distinctions.

If you're going to discuss Werner's work or the Forum, it would help if you were substantive. Nobody likes a whiner.

David

"I don't understand why they call it public broadcasting. As far as I am concerned, there's nothing public about it; it's an elitist enterprise.

'Rush Limbaugh' is public broadcasting." Newt Gingrich

*From adobe!decwrl!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!news. duke.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!new s.claremont.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!csulb.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!strnlght Sun Apr 2 13:58:51 PDT 1995

In article <3lepvv$r07@uuneo.neosoft.com*,

Andrew J. Testa <testa@starbase.neosoft.com* wrote:

** *

** False. First of all, you don't seem to know what "esthole" means since you ** didn't do the est Training, but the Forum, a completely different thing. *

*True. The Forum was less abusive than EST, but still made estholes. *I dealt with them a lot.

Please define "esthole" in the context you are using it. It's still nothing more than name-calling as far as I can see. Not fit material for civilized discourse.

** The seminars are almost break-even--they cost about $75 for ten sessions in ** a first class hotel ballroom. Each is on a different topic--money, ** creativity, etc. They are independent of the Forum, there's no "bridge" to ** get up, and when you've done the Forum you've gotten the result.

*Wrong. Our seminars were NOT in a first class ballroom. They were at the

*local Area Center. They are NOT independent of the Forum, and the Forum *is not the end of the trail. At the end of the Forum, you are hit with a *hard sell for the seminars, and told that you only KEEP the results of the *Forum as long as you remain active in the seminars. You are EXPECTED to *always be enrolled in at least one seminar. The Forum is only the beginning *and this is made clear when the Forum is over.

You are confusing strong suggestions, based on the benefits people have received, with "expected". Who expects it, and on what basis? Are you still taking orders from your mommy? Most adults can make their own decisions.

I think you are misrepresenting when you assert that at the end of the Forum people are told that they can only keep the result if they enroll in seminars. Please provide specific evidence for what I think to be this false assertion. WHO said what you claim? In what specific words? On what authority?

*Yes, it IS practically free compared to CoS, and I don't consider it a *cult as I do Co$, for the reasons I outlined below. But the Advanced *program cost WELL over $1000 ten years ago. And we were told to take it *NOW before costs went up.

Did the costs go up? Were they giving you a chance to avoid a cost increase? If so, what's the problem?

* It most certainly IS part of whole Forum- *seminar program. I was told by the Area Center folks to change my life *so that I could take the Advanced course. I was a poor student at the time *working part time, and they told me to make the advanced course my goal. *They wanted me to get a different job so I could afford the advanced course.

Evidence is that many people are in a rut, and when they have to confront getting out of the rut to get something they really want, their lives change for the better. If you talk to people who "didn't have the money" but wanted the 6-day (I assume that's what you're talking about) badly enough, you will find many whose lives changed dramatically for the better by becoming dissatisfied with their jobs or incomes and finding something better and more fulfilling.

Not everybody succeeds at this, but if you want to stay in the trap you're in for now (I don't say it's your fault), you can. You don't HAVE TO do the 6-day right now. Your comments suggest you somehow expect a free handout. If you didn't, then you'd either find the money or say that you can't do it right now because you don't have the money or because you choose not to do it now or even ever. As a human being you have free CHOICE. Choose not to do it. Choose to try to get the money if you want to do it. If you find you cannot get the money then choose not to do it because you don't have the money. But stop whining.

By the way, there are full and partial scholarships for the 6-day but they go to people who have already demonstrated merit and future promise by the achievements of their lives to date, not those who think they deserve it because they're taking up space. You can also choose to assist at the 6-day, and get some of the benefits of the program, though you won't be a participant in it. Talk to some who have assisted at the 6-day and see what they tell you.

*I'll say it again for those not paying close attention: We were told that *if our life situations were preventing us from participating in the *programs, to change our lives.

If you wanted to participate in the program, and you life prevents it, yes. You always have the choice not to participate if you don't want to. But to imply that you're somehow entitled to participate when you haven't the wherewithal sounds like you think the world owes you a living. I'll bet that's at the root of your issues.

*The program was what's important. I worked *nights and couldn't take a seminar, I was told to work another shift. I *couldn't afford the advanced course, and I was told to get another job so *that I could. They wouldn't listen when I told them my future career plans *were more important than taking the course. They said the course may not *be around when I feel like taking it, that I needed to take it as soon as *possible. And it was heavily promoted at the "sales pitch" section in *the middle of each seminar meeting.

Listen, if you future career plans were more important then that's your free choice. Just say "I choose not to take the course." When they ask why, say "I choose not to take the course." Even the most dense assistant will get it after a couple of passes, though those for whom the Forum "took" will get it at once. Your problem sounds like you REALLY WANTED to take the course but couldn't figure out how, so you communicated indecisiveness. In such situations it's the assistant's job to bring you to choice. Either change your life so you can do it, or choose not to do it.

"I really want to go the the movies BUT I have to study" is a "problem".

"I really want to go to the movies AND I have to study."--Pick one. That's no problem.

*But we were told that volunteering was a part of our participation.

If you don't participate you don't participate. You can't participate without participating. Your choice.

*Yes it is. Others have told me as well. When I declined to sign up for *a seminar, I was treated like a truant.

Who first treated you like a truant in your life? What did you decide about

yourself as a result of that?

* I was accosted by the center people

*and told that my desire to stop taking the seminars was a indicator that I *was sliding back, and that I'd have a great breakthrough if I continued.

It's often true (ask any psychiatrist) that the great breakthroughs in people's lives come through overcoming resistances.

*I always kept my agreements when I assisted, even down to measuring the *distance between chair legs and making sure the information packets *under the chairs were in the right order and exactly centered under the *seats.

Good. I'm glad you learned to follow the instructions. Did you do the other part as well--"follow the instructions and take what you get"? Or did you follow the instructions resentfully and get nothing from it, not even noticing your resentment and asking yourself what that was about?

*On of the first things the Forum teaches is that there is no such thing *as pressure, as in peer pressure. That you can't be made to do what you *don't desire to do. Besides being a crock of shit, it allows them to put *the fault on you if you tell them to stop pressuring you. I was hounded *for weeks. They called me almost everyday, telling me about the *breakthroughs that awaited me. They would not take no for an answer. It *got to the point where I had to hang up on them or they'd never stop. *Finally the calls petered out and stopped. The sad part is that the phones *aren't manned by staff members, but grunt level volunteers. So I was *being hounded by people I had sat in groups with and who were persuing *their own breakthroughs by cold calling truants. I have NO problem saying *what I think, and saying NO definitively.

You seem not to have gotten the notion of "pressure" that was offered you. Since to get this you need to have an insight, I won't damage you by "explaining" it. But ask yourself: "Where's the pressure?" "Where is it coming from?" "What, EXACTLY, are others doing that you perceive as 'pressure'?" Pick a specific example and think it through. Find the source of the pressure. Think about earlier, similar experiences in your life. Take it as far back as you can.

*Yeah, I hear you. I give them credit for trying, but I don't believe it. *I worked for an Aerospace company whose top management was all involved *in Werner's program.I even did a Forum recruitment session with one of them. *They had a "Leadership" class that was mandatory for anyone who wanted to *go into management, and it was suggested that all employees take it. It was *heavily patterned after the seminars. It sucked. It taught that our way *is the only way. If you disagreed with them you were "obstructing" the *learning of others. You got negative marks in your Human Resources files *if you argued the validity of the class teachings. So human transformation *may be the stated goal, but it doesn't live up to it. People stay in and *continue taking the seminars because they become dependant on the group. *The group tells them it is their path to transformation, and leaving that *path means you don't get transformed. Come to think of it, it DOES *sound a bit like a cult now, doesn't it?

How did you behave in the program? Were you publicly disruptive? Publicly argumentative? Did you listen to what was offered and take what you found valid, or did you try to show that you were right and another was wrong?

*No, I'm saying that group reinforcement and promises of personal *breakthroughs are NOT the end, but a means. The end is a life in *transformation, but you must have the means to get there. Werner provided *that means but you had to continually ride the wagon. There is no *"your transformed, go in peace" with this organization. You lose your *transformation when you decline to participate further. Therefore the *promise of transformation is only an illusion.

The way that is _the way_ is not the way, as the Tao says. There are no secret insights--no hidden meanings.

Note also that life is over when you die, and not a moment before.

** The Forum, which basically teaches the work of the mainstream philosopher ** Heidegger, provides valuable insight into the being of human beings,what it ** means to be a human being, and related stuff relevant to understandingone's

** own life and to being-in-the-world. Its value lies in that work, not in any ** self-congratulatory groupie phenomenon.

*But you can't do it on your own. You MUST be involved in the organization *to achieve its promises. This is suspicious. We were told you couldn't *get the results of the Forum anywhere else. Not from a book, not from *personal insight. You needed the group.

That's what Heidegger believed and taught. Human beings define themselves by their interaction with others, groups, society. If you don't accept that then you are rejecting the basic notions. To find out who you really are, you MUST participate. You can pick some other group for your participation--it doesn't have to be a Forum-related group. That's up to you. But it's a lot easier with those who are coming from a common philosophical framework. It's a bad idea for a vegetarian to try to become a groupie with cannibals.

*I really don't mean to flame you David. I agree with some of *what you say about Co$, but I'm surprised at the hard line you suddenly *took about criticism of Werner. Can you not see the similarities? I *am perfectly willing to acknowledge that Werner is nowhere NEAR LRH, *but there are certainly similarities. I don't begrudge Werner some *money, but I don't think the promises are delivered on, and I don't *like what I've seen people do as a result of their breakthroughs. *Nothing terrible, nothing illegal. And I have seen people have good *breakthroughs. But I've seen unethical things too, not just from grunts, *but seminar leaders, and it made me uneasy.

I don't take a "hard line" but rather make a strong distinction. I think Werner is in the mainstream of Western culture, philosophy, and democracy. I think Scientology is a paranoid and in some essential ways nonsensical cult, despite some useful insights and techniques. It's that simple.

David

"I don't understand why they call it public broadcasting. As far as I am concerned, there's nothing public about it; it's an elitist enterprise. 'Rush Limbaugh' is public broadcasting." Newt Gingrich

*From adobe!decwrl!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!news.uh.edu!uuneo.neo soft.com!hou.moc.com!testa Sat Apr 8 00:24:09 PDT 1995

The entity known as Bruce D. Scott (bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de) posted: * It has really been amazing, watching someone I thought was a cool, rational * individual self-destruct the way David Sternlight has in this thread. Can * we be sure he isn't being impersonated?

What truly suprised me was how quicky David became accusatory. From my experience, the est folks usually are quite calm while they work you over. I've never had one tell me I was lying before. And I'm sorry if I came across as a bit shrill in the last post, but I think it was necessary since he didn't want to acknowledge that maybe when I said "no", I meant it. Apparently, he still won't.

* In any case, this exchange with Andy Testa has convinced me that EST, too, * is insidious and dangerous. We can apparently expect more of this sort of

* thing during the long slide of the American economy, as more corporate * leaders become ever more desperate and allow the spread of such rot through * their establishments.

It's a lot more subtle, but I don't think it's a workable "technology" for

business to emulate. As David showed, you can't question the tech.

/ Xenu stole my lunch money \

/ Andy Testa (KoX) I'm OT! I could KILL you with \

\ testa@hou.moc.com a thought! BWAAAHHAAAAHAAAAAA! /

\ Contributing to the downfall of Scientology since 1995. /

*From adobe!decwrl!lll-winken.llnl.gov!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!sgiblab!cgl!sch af Sun Apr 9 19:06:29 PDT 1995

testa@starbase.neosoft.com (Andrew J. Testa) writes:

* The entity known as David Sternlight (strnlght@netcom.com) posted:

[text deleted]

** Shouting "I said no" from now til doomsday won't answer any of the aboveand

** they are the material questions you've been evading since the start of this ** conversation.

David, this sort of "you say no with your mouth, but YES with your eyes!" behavior of yours sounds like a prelude to spiritual rape.

Ask yourself if there is any way that you can respect a persons opinion to stay away from EST.

I'd like to know what you come up with.

** David

*This kiddies is more illustration of why the people in Werner's operations

*just won't take no for an answer. No matter how many time you say no

*they just keep coming back again and again and again trying to tell you *that your not communicating honestly, that you have issues holding you back, *etc. Here David is even trying to suggest I'm being disengenuous about my *experiences. He tries to invalidate them, and keep a conversation going *where I don't wish one. This will await you too if you get involved in *any of Werner Erhard's operations. They just can't hear anything other than *"sign me up". This is why you have to finally resort to hanging up on them *when they call every day.

Thanks, I've always been curious about EST and what it has in common with Scientology and now it is clear to me that they employ the same mechanisms.

It has been very informative for you to pull David Sternlight out like this to expose the lack of respect that EST supporters have for other peoples descisions if they run counter to the goals of EST.

It is the identical behavior that I have heard people get from Scientology "registraars".

*I am not going to argue with you anymore David. I've posted my experiences *and your responses have verified them completely. In case that doesn't *sound like a definitive NO, you can add FOAD.

*/ Andy Testa I'm OT! I could KILL you with a thought! \

.Chris.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Christian E.A.F. Schafmeister Biophysics graduate student

University of California, San Francisco UUCP: ucbvax!ucsfcgl!schaf

"Biophysics . . . THE future." INTERNET: schaf@cgl.ucsf.edu

*From adobe!decwrl!hookup!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net! zib-berlin.de!informatik.tu-muenchen.de!lrz-muenchen.de!ipp-garching.mpg.de!bd s Sun Apr 9 19:07:02 PDT 1995

It has really been amazing, watching someone I thought was a cool, rational individual self-destruct the way David Sternlight has in this thread. Can we be sure he isn't being impersonated?

In any case, this exchange with Andy Testa has convinced me that EST, too, is insidious and dangerous. We can apparently expect more of this sort of thing during the long slide of the American economy, as more corporate leaders become ever more desperate and allow the spread of such rot through their establishments.

Gruss,

Dr Bruce Scott The deadliest bullshit is

Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik odorless and transparent

bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de -- W Gibson

*From adobe!rchansky Tue Apr 18 22:04:23 PDT 1995

Article: 55175 of alt.religion.scientology

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology

Path: adobe!rchansky

From: rchansky@mv.us.adobe.com (Rob Chansky)

Subject: Re: What about Werner Erhard and Scientology ?

Message-ID: <1995Apr18.230935.2594@adobe.com*

Sender: usenet@adobe.com (USENET NEWS)

Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated

References: <strnlghtD6swnD.4E8@netcom.com* <schaf.797835872@cgl.ucsf.edu* <strnlghtD78Lv0.Fw2@netcom.com*

Date: Tue, 18 Apr 1995 23:09:35 GMT

In article <strnlghtD78Lv0.Fw2@netcom.com* david@sternlight.com (David Sternlight) writes:

*He knows this perfectly well. In the Forum there's an exercise in which one *is asked to choose between Chocolate and Vanilla. When one chooses, the *leader asks "why". If you give reasons, it's not a choice. The exercise

*continues until everyone understands that a choice is to select freely and *AFTER all considerations.

*Thus the answer to "Why did you choose Chocolate?" is "Because I chose *Chocolate." and not "because I like it better than vanilla". The latter *isn't a free choice but is driven by considerations. This is a trickly *philosophical point, but well-established in the mainstream literature as *well as in Zen and elsewhere. He says he not only did the Forum but also *volunteered to assist. Thus I assume he is aware of the material in this *paragraph, and in that context my question "What did they say and what did *you then say?" is perfectly reasonable. His avoidance of that while playing *mind games on lay readers here by saying "'no' means no" is at least *disingenuous if it is not evidence that he wan't paying attention in the *Forum.

I'd really like to know why the answer to "Why did you choose chocolate" is "Because I chose chocolate." It certainly does sound like a tricky philosophical point, and one I admit to failing to get my mind around. If I liked chocolate, would I not exercize my free will to choose it? And is that not an exercize of my total, absolute free will? Or is there some "higher" will that would request I choose vanilla, disregarding my mere "likes"? (And I'm not talking about the revelation that "vanilla has been proven to be better for me." I'm talking only the situation as outlined: I like chocolate better.)

Is not every decision made by every human being a weighing of the facts, a consideration of all options and their benefits/drawbacks, usually using the shorthand of emotions to arrive at an action?

Or is this example flawed? Perhaps a better one is the originally discussed decision to stop taking the forum. I didn't take the forum because they were Icky. I capitalize Icky because it wraps up the elements of an experience I had, and which I could detail here if I bothered (and will if anyone asks; it makes a good anecdote for my friends at the moment). My decision not to take the forum is built upon my estimation of its Ickyness, as I feel sure was the other fellow's (sorry, don't have your name handy) based on his internal definition and which I will also wrap up by describing in that same shorthand: Ickyness. Since my decision was based on that, only a re-weighing of the facts would make me reform it. What mystical decision-making apparatus are you outlining here? What are its parameters, besides that it's "kind of Zen"? (I use "it's kind of Zen" too sometimes, when I explain complex computer problems to my users, and it means about as much to me.)

From my looking over the conversation my opinion (which could be wrong) would seem to be that the ex-forumite was in fact outlining what I term the Ickyness of the forum and what pissed him off about it, and you seemed pissed that he was not producing 'evidence' or 'specific examples.' Perhaps he would like to be convinced that the forum is a good thing in the world, and it was only his

chapter/segment/whatever that had gone wrong somehow. But the conversation never seems to get any farther than your asking for evidence.

*[this was actually above the above paragraph]

***Bullshit. I have absolute respect for his decisions about himself. I reject ***his defaming others and think he is required, on grounds of simple fairness, ***to put up or recant on matters involving charges against others. **

**David, I was watching the entire conversation.

**It was like watching a car crash in slow motion.

*More repetition of accusations without evidence. No proof here either.

.. I note here that you are asking for evidence, for the same whys that you mention, in a way that would *appear* to mean you don't believe their choice or decision was a choice or decision, but a decision based on the qualifications you decry.

In what way could he "prove" that your conversation was like watching a car crash in slow motion? In what way, for that matter, could you "disprove" it?

(.signature at 50 meters)

From: testa@starbase.neosoft.com (Andrew J. Testa)

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology

Subject: Re: What about Werner Erhard and Scientology ?

Date: 3 Apr 1995 18:08:44 GMT

Organization: Xenu's Clambake Palace

First off, does anyone else get the feeling that David is responding like Milne here?

The entity known as David Sternlight (strnlght@netcom.com) posted:

* In article <3lepvv$r07@uuneo.neosoft.com*,

* Andrew J. Testa <testa@starbase.neosoft.com* wrote:

* Please define "esthole" in the context you are using it. It's still nothing

* more than name-calling as far as I can see. Not fit material for civilized

* discourse.

esthole: n. a term used to describe followers of the est or Forum programs who will not take no for an answer, and have a distant, smug demeanor that "They know the secret".

* You are confusing strong suggestions, based on the benefits people have

* received, with "expected". Who expects it, and on what basis? Are you still

* taking orders from your mommy? Most adults can make their own decisions.

Not a positive response, David.

* I think you are misrepresenting when you assert that at the end of the Forum * people are told that they can only keep the result if they enroll in * seminars. Please provide specific evidence for what I think to be this * false assertion. WHO said what you claim? In what specific words? On what * authority?

The last day of the Forum has nothing to do with the participants, but is geared to recruiting family and friends. The day is spent giving "success stories" to the guests, whereafter they are separated from the person who invited them and subjected to a hard sell. I participated in these hard sells on guests during Forums I assisted in. During this time, the participants get the hard sell on the seminars.

* in for now (I don't say it's your fault), you can. You don't HAVE TO do the * 6-day right now. Your comments suggest you somehow expect a free handout. If

You are wrong. I never mentioned or implied that I wanted anything free.

* you didn't, then you'd either find the money or say that you can't do it * right now because you don't have the money or because you choose not to do * it now or even ever. As a human being you have free CHOICE. Choose not to do * it. Choose to try to get the money if you want to do it. If you find you * cannot get the money then choose not to do it because you don't have the * money. But stop whining.

* By the way, there are full and partial scholarships for the 6-day but they * go to people who have already demonstrated merit and future promise by the * achievements of their lives to date, not those who think they deserve it * because they're taking up space. You can also choose to assist at the 6-day, * and get some of the benefits of the program, though you won't be a * participant in it. Talk to some who have assisted at the 6-day and see what * they tell you.

Don't talk AT me, David. None of what you say is new to me. I've heard the sucess stories from the 6-day, I've talked with those who've assisted. The problem is that my CHOICE was NOT RESPECTED.

* *I'll say it again for those not paying close attention: We were told that

* *if our life situations were preventing us from participating in the * *programs, to change our lives.

* If you wanted to participate in the program, and you life prevents it, yes. * You always have the choice not to participate if you don't want to. But to * imply that you're somehow entitled to participate when you haven't the * wherewithal sounds like you think the world owes you a living. I'll bet * that's at the root of your issues.

Don't start to analyze me David. You have twice now stated that I expected something for free. I never said that. I never said I was entitled to participate in anything. When I declined participation my choice was not respected. It was instead analyzed for what was at the root of my issues.

* *The program was what's important. I worked * *nights and couldn't take a seminar, I was told to work another shift. I * *couldn't afford the advanced course, and I was told to get another job so * *that I could. They wouldn't listen when I told them my future career plans * *were more important than taking the course. They said the course may not * *be around when I feel like taking it, that I needed to take it as soon as * *possible. And it was heavily promoted at the "sales pitch" section in * *the middle of each seminar meeting.

* Listen, if you future career plans were more important then that's your free * choice. Just say "I choose not to take the course." When they ask why, say * "I choose not to take the course." Even the most dense assistant will get * it after a couple of passes, though those for whom the Forum "took" will get * it at once. Your problem sounds like you REALLY WANTED to take the course * but couldn't figure out how, so you communicated indecisiveness. In such

No, listen up, will you. I SAID NO! IT WAS NOT RESPECTED!

* situations it's the assistant's job to bring you to choice. Either change

* your life so you can do it, or choose not to do it.

* *Yes it is. Others have told me as well. When I declined to sign up for * *a seminar, I was treated like a truant.

* Who first treated you like a truant in your life? What did you decide about * yourself as a result of that?

Don't insult me like this David. For the uninitiated, this question is the basis of the "transformation" of the Forum. Find out when you made decisions about yourself and analyze the cause of those decisions. The premise is that as a child, you decided that you were bad, and all of your actions since are based on these childhood decisions. So if a person is obstructing or being indecisive, they haven't resolved these issues and are not acting "transformed". This is why it's OK to hound people. It's considered a good thing to get them to confront their issues, even if that means calling them every day until they hang up on you.

* You seem not to have gotten the notion of "pressure" that was offered you. * Since to get this you need to have an insight, I won't damage you by * "explaining" it. But ask yourself: "Where's the pressure?" "Where is it * coming from?" "What, EXACTLY, are others doing that you perceive as * 'pressure'?" Pick a specific example and think it through. Find the source * of the pressure. Think about earlier, similar experiences in your life. Take * it as far back as you can.

Yeah, yeah, more of the same. How's this for pressure:

10 call me on the phone, tell me about the great seminars coming up.

20 "NO."

30 GOTO 10

* *go into management, and it was suggested that all employees take it. It was * *heavily patterned after the seminars. It sucked. It taught that our way * *is the only way. If you disagreed with them you were "obstructing" the * *learning of others. You got negative marks in your Human Resources files * *if you argued the validity of the class teachings. So human transformation * *may be the stated goal, but it doesn't live up to it. People stay in and * *continue taking the seminars because they become dependant on the group. * *The group tells them it is their path to transformation, and leaving that * *path means you don't get transformed. Come to think of it, it DOES * *sound a bit like a cult now, doesn't it?

* *

* How did you behave in the program? Were you publicly disruptive? Publicly

* argumentative? Did you listen to what was offered and take what you found

* valid, or did you try to show that you were right and another was wrong?

Any disagreement, regardless of the manner of its expression, was considered hostile and counter-productive. This was the experience of many people who took the class. Very bright, intelligent people who did not like the fact that they were told leadership wasn't amenable to discussion.

* I don't take a "hard line" but rather make a strong distinction. I think

* Werner is in the mainstream of Western culture, philosophy, and democracy. I * think Scientology is a paranoid and in some essential ways nonsensical cult, * despite some useful insights and techniques. It's that simple.

I'm afraid I find too many common areas between Werner and the CoS. Confronting issues doesn't require a new jargon, incredibly retentive adherence to policies, continual reinforcement from a central authority, and the insistance that you will find the secret to life here and nowhere else.

/ Brought to you by Mars [tm] brand candies. Xenu's favorite! \

/ Andy Testa I'm OT! I could KILL you with a thought! \

\ testa@hou.moc.com BWAAAHHAAAAHAAAAAA! /

\ Contributing to the downfall of Scientology since 1995. /

From: testa@starbase.neosoft.com (Andrew J. Testa)

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology

Subject: Re: What about Werner Erhard and Scientology ?

Date: 5 Apr 1995 13:28:59 GMT

Organization: Xenu's Clambake Palace

The entity known as David Sternlight (strnlght@netcom.com) posted:

* You are still evading answering every single question I asked in response to

* what appear to me to be your vague, general smears. You still don't get that

* you did it. Instead, you persist in blaming your problems on others.

Never blamed my problems on others, just posted my experience. Live with it.

* Unless and until you are ready to be specific, you will find yourself

* ignored. You've posted so many statements that seem false on their face to

* me that you have zero credibility.

Apparently as long as I don't fawn over Werner you'll continue to find all kind of reasons why there's something wrong with me. No Dice.

* In fact, your posts are starting to seem like yet another Scieno smear

* campaign against Werner. You make what seem to me to be vague, general

* charges, and when challenged you seem to change the subject. When asked to * be specific you play a broken record, repeating the vague and general charge * over and over.

Who's the one here who can't understand NO! David. How many times do I have to say NO! David? How many times will you answer by saying "but did you say no?" Who's the broken record?

* For the last time:

good

* Did you say you didn't want to be called any longer, in clear and

* unambiguous languagee

* Did you say No in just those words, and if pressed, repeat that No means No?

* Or did you say "maybe" by your conduct? If you entered into a discussion

* about it, that's maybe, not "no".

I FUCKING WELL SAID NO! GET IT THROUGH YOUR SKULL THAT I SAID NO!

888b 88 ,ad8888ba, 88

8888b 88 d8"' `"8b 88

88 `8b 88 d8' `8b 88

88 `8b 88 88 88 88

88 `8b 88 Y8, ,8P ""

88 `8888 Y8a. .a8P aa

88 `888 `"Y8888Y"' 88

Jesus Christ, Deja Vu all over again. Here ya go kiddies. Definition of

an esthole. Stay away from anything started by Werner Erhard, or you too

will be able to scream NO! into deaf ears.

/ Brought to you by Mars [tm] brand candies. Xenu's favorite! \

/ Andy Testa I'm OT! I could KILL you with a thought! \

\ testa@hou.moc.com BWAAAHHAAAAHAAAAAA! /

\ Contributing to the downfall of Scientology since 1995. /

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology

From: an190820@anon.penet.fi (Prignillius)

X-Anonymously-To: alt.religion.scientology

Organization: Anonymous contact service

Reply-To: an190820@anon.penet.fi

Date: Fri, 7 Apr 1995 07:44:19 UTC

Subject: Re: What about Werner Erhard and Scientology ?

If anyone doubts the connection between Scientology and Erhard Sensitivity Training (EST), just look at comments made recently by David Sternlight to Andy Testa. My responses are from the hypothetical point of view of a hypothetical Scientologist who has better grammar than most.

[All 3 articles are greatly snipped without further notice]

In article <strnlghtD6Byy3.Du6@netcom.com*, strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) disappointed my by writing:

*In article <3lepvv$r07@uuneo.neosoft.com*,

*Andrew J. Testa <testa@starbase.neosoft.com* wrote:

[He ad-hominems and belittles:]

*Who expects it, and on what basis? Are you still

*taking orders from your mommy? Most adults can make their own decisions.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[Andy complains of hard-sell:]

**And we were told to take it NOW before costs went up.

*Did the costs go up? Were they giving you a chance to avoid a cost increase? *If so, what's the problem?

I was seeking immortality, which is beyond price.

[On employment:]

**They wanted me to get a different job so I could afford the advanced course. *

*Evidence is that many people are in a rut, and when they have to confront

*getting out of the rut to get something they really want, their lives change