Total Incomprehensible Unequivocal *FOR PROFIT* Bullshit

[Pazdispenser]

Hey Mac -
Surya Das also recommends PoN, and having studied with him, I think his perspective trumps Oprah and the millionaire (or should I say, the gazillionaire and the wannabe?).

But then, I could be wrong, I could be right Damn I loved that song......

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

Good collection of critical articles regarding 'The Secret' and other 'you get what you manifest' kind of "New Wagers"-
http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/secretrons.html

Otherwise I wouldn't recommend a 'Skeptic' website that focuses only on debunking paranormal claims since those websites are often clever limited hang-outs that also deride 'conspiracy theorists' as if there were no such thing as criminal military-intelligence black ops.

[chlamor]

It is the "Don't Think" school of Politics - sort of the New Age version of Christian Fundamentalism.

I both commented, and did not comment.

[compared2what?]

I have usually found that the people who are the least centered, whose mind is churning, who are constantly in a state of fight-or-flight reaction, are generally the ones who HATE this stuff to the point of apoplexy.

What stuff would "this stuff" be? I don't feel obligated to talk about my personal spiritual life. And I'm not going to. But I already endorsed meditative/contemplative approaches and philosophies at least twice in the course of this thread. The words you use in describing what kind of people "HATE this stuff" are, frankly, a little scary to me. I take you at your word that it is simply an accurate characterization of what you've usually found.

But fwiw, I've heard very, very similar words used many times by the teachers of every manipulative program I've ever investigated. Which I no longer do, not primarily because it was sometime a little, or more than a little, scary. But I can't say it wasn't a factor. Anyway. What you wrote is pretty close to a textbook iteration of the reflexive Larger Truth that scary-groups-I-have-known use to preemptively insulate their followers from all external challenges. Therefore it was a little unsettling to read it here.

Yet, if you were to read the Buddhist org's site you would probably interpret the "sales-pitch" to be much in the vein of Tolle's site.

If it had a critical mass of the basic shady features I associate with the cults and sects, probably yes. If not, probably no.

The true primary reason I stopped doing work in this area was that I almost never could make myself heard over the din of the Mighty Wurlitzer created by a combination of whatever sensationalist press the big-time alleged cults get and the noise generated by the cults themselves. As a result of which it's just not a generally well understood subject. I put a lot of -- and you all may believe what you will, I do not give a fuck -- open-minded effort into learning about it, and over a fairly long period of time. But eventually I just got tired of having people graft opinions I didn't hold and had never expressed onto me always turn out to be the only result. Plus, it was painful and enervating always to be around either bullies, or the frightened people they had bullied. And double=plus, a few of the latter were very exceptional and admirable people who had been very badly beaten up in one way or another. After a certain point I honestly just wanted to leave in peace, since, in effect, all I was really doing was harassing them further for what was clearly never going to be much more than my own edification. Because almost almost no one ever actually wants to hear anything about "this stuff" that deviates from whatever their personal anecdotal experience happens to have been. So I eventually decided to stop banging my head against that particular wall.

And...Pazzy-D, I actually started that rant aiming at you, which would have been very wrong had I not written myself into realizing that it was I who misread, not you who miswrote. Still. I really do apologize in advance for being so cranky but: Could you please not tell me what you think while calling it something I think? It's not on you that it takes me to a place I'd prefer not to go. But it does. So it would be much appreciated.

[Pazdispenser]

c2w, as you wish.

[vigilant]

At a crisis point in my life I accidentally stumbled onto the Power Of Now CD in a book store. I bought it. I had no idea how to meditate. I read the basic meditation and breathing techniques, turned on the CD and listened to it. I listened to it many, many, many times over a period of months. I found it very relaxing and comforting. I got something out of it every time I listened to it. I like the CD much better than the book. The CD is like a big shot of calm....very relaxing

[Eldritch]

There are important points being made on both sides of this issue.

On the one hand, meditation is a deeply powerful tool for inner peace.

On the other hand, that deeply powerful tool has been used—and is being used—by powerful interests to disempower ordinary people, and lull them into passivity. (Rapists don't often like it when their victims fight back effectively. Similarly, those who use ordinary people each and every day, assaulting them economically, want good servants—not competitors.)

Although I'm a big believer in the power of meditation, I must admit that I knew next to nothing about Eckhart Tolle, before coming to this thread; all I really knew is that his name resembled Meister Eckhart, the Fourteenth Century German philosopher and mystic. Still, after reading some of Eckhart Tolle's material today, I can state pretty confidently that those who say that "all" of Eckhart Tolle's material is "Total Incomprehensible Unequivocal *FOR PROFIT* Bullshit" are making a reductionist and simplistic argument.

In fact, some of his stuff almost certainly can and does help many people learn to meditate and thereby potentially handle many of life's crises more effectively.

Having said that, the so-called "revolutionaries" in this thread make a number of extremely important points. Meditation and inner peace are only half the equation—however profound the conscious states meditation produces may be.

We live here on Earth, and this moment in human history finds us in deep shit, along with many, many other species. Our human impact on this situation is not to be underestimated.

No matter how powerful a meditative tool or philosophy may be for enduring the shit in which one finds oneself, it should never be forgotten that this is only Step One.

Step Two is stepping the hell out of that shit.

If any religion or spiritual philosophy tends actually to lull people into overall passivity, and thereby effectively PREVENT people from taking the necessary steps in their physical lives to improve the collective situation on Earth, then a powerful tool is actually being used AGAINST THEM.

This is a good discussion overall, in my opinion.

[compared2what?]

At a crisis point in my life I accidentally stumbled onto the Power Of Now CD in a book store. I bought it. I had no idea how to meditate. I read the basic meditation and breathing techniques, turned on the CD and listened to it. I listened to it many, many, many times over a period of months. I found it very relaxing and comforting. I got something out of it every time I listened to it. I like the CD much better than the book. The CD is like a big shot of calm....very relaxing

I acknowledge this as substantive negative evidence wrt my hypothesis. And, happily, too. I am not only open to similar statements, I welcome them. So please chime in with Tolle info, anyone who has any. (Unless you're, like, some kind of human Tolle ringer-bot and not good at concealing it. And I say that on your putative behalf, clueless and completely imaginary human Tolle ringer-bots. Aim higher, for god's sake! Later, you'll be glad you did.)

Since I was shooting my mouth off in an authoritative manner earlier, and not backing it up at all, I guess I should make an explicit disclaimer on this subject wrt what is, to me, implicit, but might not be to everyone. And I'll try to do that in the least-favorable-to-me and most qualified terms I can manage. Here we go:

What I know is a pattern, but pattern recognition is only as good as the info that supports or refutes it. In itself, it is, as we know, subject to confirmation bias. And I don't have any supporting info, yet and don't know if I am planning on looking for any. I have absolutely no first-hand knowledge of this guy at all. The superficial material available for review is sufficient for me to be satisfied that a further inquiry would be reasonable, and that people should be cautious about the group, within reasonable parameters. But even I don't think that means I'm right to be satisfied. From my own POV, it's essentially a bet based on odds I feel more than moderately comfortable taking a flier on. (In case it's been too long since I've mentioned confirmation bias, here-s a call-back.)

There is therefore no reason for anybody else to feel either equally satisfied or equally comfortable. Furthermore, it's not like I've never been wrong, or don't ever either wrongly comprehend or mis-classify data. I have and I do. I try my best to be vigilant, as it were, by following procedures designed to minimize lapses in vigilance, as I know those procedures from long experience. But, frankly, fact-checking and sourcing as I learned and practiced them are generally guidelines for avoiding legal liability when practiced professionally, rather than for ensuring accuracy. So I generally did as much more as time allowed. But...

....that suggests a second, more comprehensive disclaimer. So here we go, part two:

The standards for sourcing and fact-checking referred to above are way too low, imo (with the emphasis on "imo" throughout here; in fact, I think I'll just state the basis of what I say, as required, as I go).

Because as those standards are applied in reality, they can (imo) very easily be gamed by both sources and reporters. I hated being (imo) pressured to (imo) game them back when I was media (fact, but anonymously and singly sourced). And I was often very persnickety about it (ibid, plus subjective assessment). That I was considered reputable was in part owing to that (ibid, and furthermore, hearsay), as was that I was considered to be possibly more trouble than I was worth (ibid). From a business standpoint, vis-a-vis ease-of-production and productivity-rate (imo, and assuming prior sourcing deemed adequate and reliable), the latter was totally true. From an editorial perspective (imo), whether the former was my bad or the system's bad, or just two attributes that were neutral per se but didn't assort well with one another, I have no idea.

Because, obviously, I have a conflict-of-interest that automatically puts a question mark over all judgment calls made by me that are about me. According to my own persnickety standards, I am an inherently unreliable source when it comes to the subject of my alleged persnicketiness.

Bearing all that in mind, I'm still pretty much where I have always been on this org. It looks shady to me, and that's on the basis of its apparent conformity to techniques that I've only ever seen among fundamentally dishonest operations (assertion of opinion as fact, singly sourced and anonymous).

I hope that's enough qualification to be applied by analogy without footnoting from here forward.

All I really wanted to say was:.

Thanks, vigilant! First-hand info! Better than abstract assessment! Much appreciated!

[AlicetheKurious]

What Eldritch said.

And, c2w, if I understood what you said, I'm sure I'd agree with you too.

(I'm just being snarky: I think your wariness, in the context of the sinister and predatory times we live in, is well justified).

[Crow]

Does he believe he is enlightened at 29, like the Buddha was enlightened? Or does he just say he had a spiritual awakening?

:: going off to research ::

[Crow]

:: coming back ::

He calls it a spiritual awakening. This is less significant than enlightenment, in the Buddhist sense of the term, and more plausible.

I'm not sure why others here find his teachings negative or offensive. He's repackaging a lot of Eastern wisdom that isn't available here in such an understandable form.

[erosoplier]

I'm not sure why others here find his teachings negative or offensive.

Chlamor's got the shits with liberals, and has embarked upon a campaign.

I can sympathise with it to a certain extent...and then no further. (My pet hate is the utter political ineffectiveness of anything to do with post-modernism, and was aggravated only recently by hearing the story of the menstrual blood artist... ...it's the pretension that anybody having anything positive to do with post-modern think-speak is automatically infinitely more attuned to the political, and the moral, than everybody else including me, which is hugely galling. Occasionally I find myself thinking that if we are to be saved from an endless series of humanitarian disasters, and ultimate catastrophe, then the people in the universities will do much of the saving. And given that post-modernist carry-ons have been assisting in the task of keepin' it unreal in the universities for a few decades now, well let's just say that I rate this issue right up there alongside flakey liberal shenanigans in terms of obstacles which hinder any attempts to un-fuck the world).

Chlamor, you are not alone in feeling scorn for liberals. My question is, does it bother you at all being aligned with the kind of people you align yourself with when you heap scorn upon liberals? People like neoconservatives, for instance?

I saw this Steve Alten interview today. At the 6:25 mark he says "I'm not a liberal democrat, I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I'm a novelist..." He says this in order to make himself sound like a reasonable person, to better convince the people watching to take his story and his book seriously. But if language is to have any meaning, the way I see it, even the most reactionary conservative in the US is a "liberal democrat," or at least pretends to be one. The WOT is, if we are to take it at face value, a fight for freedom (ie liberty) and democracy. Freedom and democracy, liberal and democrat. Same thing. The WOT is supposedly a fight to allow all countries to become liberal democracies. YET, here is this geezer who has to distance himself from the "liberal democrat" assignation in order to make himself more credible to a US audience. And he's far from being alone.

What a confused situation! Long story short, I can only see that it is the elite who benifit from this confusion. People who scoff at liberals are the ones who pushed through with the attack on Iraq. The liberals were the ones protesting in the streets. What is so confusing about that? It's kind of masochistic and self-hating to blame liberals for the world's woes, when it was the fake liberals what caused the woes.

For sure, I think Western culture has become too liberal, as in too self-absorbed, but making the term "liberal" synonymous with the term "self-absorbed" and seeking to eradicate each from the face of the earth would be throwing the baby out with the bath water, I feel. It wouldn't be addressing the real cause of our problems, it would be eliminating that which resisted yet ultimately failed to resist the force which has caused all of the GWOT problems.

[lunarose]

hullo eldritch.

'If any religion or spiritual philosophy tends actually to lull people into overall passivity, and thereby effectively PREVENT people from taking the necessary steps in their physical lives to improve the collective situation on Earth, then a powerful tool is actually being used AGAINST THEM.'

i'd like to comment on this. i think there is a stereotype that spiritual experimentation or mediation mostly makes a person passive and withdrawn. this is possible, but is not a necessary or inevitable effect of meditation. in my experience, meditation and spiritual awareness has made me more effective in helping to calm potentially violent situations. as an example, my mom and i were first on the scene when a teenage motorcyclist was going way too fast and slammed in to the side of a truck and went 15 feet up in the air. he then came down.

the kid was miraculously unharmed, but in shock and itching for a fight. apparently this kid had a habit of racing through this residential neighborhood at 60mph +, and so some neighbors came over to the accident to take this up with him, before the cops got there. i just mirrored the kid, so he would feel there was someone on his side, and manged to convey to the steamed neighbor that this wasn't the time to get into this kid's stupidity. so, things calmed down and the fistfight so many people were spoiling for didn't happen.

if i hadn't spent so much effort in meditation and studying my own emotions and tendencies, i doubt that i would have been of any help in that situation. i could very well have precipitated violence, as i used to do pretty often as a kid, getting into schoolyard fights. being able to avert violent confrontations is a skill that can be learned, but you also have to know your own self well enough that your own prejudices, habits, and weaknesses don't get in the way. it is in this way that i have found spiritual pursuits to be vital in helping to make the world a more humane place.

[teamdaemon]

Eckhart Tolle has helped a lot of people I know. It is pretty absurd to call this person insidious. If you think its better for people to be angry and foaming at the mouth, maybe you should look around at how utterly irrelevant the anti-war left is to most people in this country and think about why that is.

[chlamor]

hullo eldritch.

'If any religion or spiritual philosophy tends actually to lull people into overall passivity, and thereby effectively PREVENT people from taking the necessary steps in their physical lives to improve the collective situation on Earth, then a powerful tool is actually being used AGAINST THEM.'

i'd like to comment on this. i think there is a stereotype that spiritual experimentation or mediation mostly makes a person passive and withdrawn. this is possible, but is not a necessary or inevitable effect of meditation. in my experience, meditation and spiritual awareness has made me more effective in helping to calm potentially violent situations. as an example, my mom and i were first on the scene when a teenage motorcyclist was going way too fast and slammed in to the side of a truck and went 15 feet up in the air. he then came down.

the kid was miraculously unharmed, but in shock and itching for a fight. apparently this kid had a habit of racing through this residential neighborhood at 60mph +, and so some neighbors came over to the accident to take this up with him, before the cops got there. i just mirrored the kid, so he would feel there was someone on his side, and manged to convey to the steamed neighbor that this wasn't the time to get into this kid's stupidity. so, things calmed down and the fistfight so many people were spoiling for didn't happen.

if i hadn't spent so much effort in meditation and studying my own emotions and tendencies, i doubt that i would have been of any help in that situation. i could very well have precipitated violence, as i used to do pretty often as a kid, getting into schoolyard fights. being able to avert violent confrontations is a skill that can be learned, but you also have to know your own self well enough that your own prejudices, habits, and weaknesses don't get in the way. it is in this way that i have found spiritual pursuits to be vital in helping to make the world a more humane place.

The excessive individuality breaks bonds between people on all sorts of levels.

Collective action has always been the greatest potential force for change, and although mostly it gets co opted there are times when it has worked very well.

The new age movement seems to be very focussed on individuality, and ignores the collective side of human life, no man is an island and all that.

Most religious movements (at some point) have an element of social justice about them, even if its only concerned with looking after their own kind. The individualist nature of new ageism doesn't seem to have collective action or social justice as a high priority much of the time. Sure harmonic convergences are good, and doing whatever when they happen probably does have an effect on the planets well being,

BUT

There aren't many new age soup kitchens for example.

It isn't just new age either, there is a massive trend in the west to individualize people and their problems. It seems to me that while therapy became the thing to do in the west, in the east, well Eastern Europe anyway, there was no one telling you about how to pacify your inner child or something.

In Eastern Europe, people were unhappy, and they had a good look around at what was making them unhappy. Hence massive popular uprisings in the late 80s early 90s.

In the west people looked inward and the whole cultures connection with anything other than shopping therapy disappeared. Maybe the reason depression has become such a big deal is because people know the world is fucked up, and their culture is causing it - but prozac and talking about it, or realizing that your worries for the world are negatives you have to overcome, is not doing anything to change that situation.

Really if the state of the world at the moment doesn't bring you down a bit or upset you a bit, then there is probably something wrong with you.

But dealing with yourself to make your feelings about things better doesn't actually make things better. And if you're alright jack...

Any real spirituality connects you to the world, and to people in it, and motivates you to act out of your concerns for what you are connected to.