[extropy-chat] You must be willing to give up everything (2ndtry)

[Jef Allbright]

Michael M. Butler wrote:
> On 11/2/06, Keith Henson <hkhenson at rogers.com> wrote:
> > At 09:59 AM 10/31/2006 -0800, Jef wrote:
> > >While Scientology and Avatar promise (and deliver) growth 
> > >within a limited, internal, context, they are dangerous
> > >because they restrict growth beyond their own context.
> > >[I know, they have polished and emotionally persuasive
> > >arguments to the contrary.]
> 
> I guess I should de-lurk about this. A while back, I did the 
> Avatar materials, got benefit from them, and didn't cult out.

I see that my statement might appear to lump the two organizations
together as equals, while my intention was only to show certain
similarities.

My knowledge of Scientology comes from personal experience in my
twenties and what I know of the experiences of others.  I had read
Dianetics and found L Ron's engram theory interesting but an overly
simplified model of cognitive processing.  [I did take away and still
use one practice from that book, which is to minimize verbal stimulus
when the other person is feeling highly emotional because of their
increased susceptibility to imprinting.] So one day in a shopping mall I
was approached by a pretty girl who invited me to attend a
"communications course."  Intrigued (for various reasons), I went inside
and spent a few months observing a fairly well-organized process of mind
control and identification of susceptible individuals.  Having seen
enough, I left, but a quarter century later postal mail from the COS
still arrives at my old mailing address.

Incidentally, a year or so later while walking in San Francisco I was
approached and invited to visit the Moonies.  That was a different sort
of experience, with food and singing and showering of love from everyone
there.  By the end of the evening I was invited to take the bus to their
farm, which I declined.

My knowledge of Avatar is close but second-hand through the experiences
of my SO, who spent many thousands of dollars on their ladder of
programs. She found great benefit from the initial Resurfacing program,
followed it with the main Avatar program, and then two sessions of the
weeklong Masters program in Florida.  She came under a lot of pressure
for many months to enroll in the next level, called Wizards, with
promises of (secret) advanced knowledge of how to modify reality, but
she declined. It took her a few years after leaving before she was able
to look back and see the web of influence that had held her.

>From my reading and conversations on Avatar, I observed the key
Scientology tactic of using arcane terminology for common concepts in
philosophy and psychology.  This has the direct effect of building a
strong in-group/out-group mentality.  I observed that their teachings
(which do indeed provide growth for many people) consisted of
repackaging the same teachings that can be found in eastern religion,
psychology, philosophy, and self-help books, but without references,
attribution or rigor, and all with the implication of deriving from the
wisdom of Harry Palmer, who of course acknowledged studying in all these
areas before he came to his grand realization.

I see more commonalities than differences, but I do agree that Avatar
(Star's Edge) appears to be more benign than Scientology.


> 
> YMMV, of course. I'm not going to argue or try to persuade. 
> I'll simply state: no one associated with Avatar has ever 
> done anything to restrict my growth. Believe it or don't.

Michael, I don't know how many steps up the ladder you paid for and
took, but I meant restricted in the sense of a path turning inward with
the wisdom of Harry Palmer always at its center, as opposed to a path
growing outward among many competing and evolving sources of knowledge.
The first steps of any path to self-knowledge are similar, with
increasing realization of the nature of attention, self, and ones
relationship with the surrounding world.


> My "context" does not particularly include those folks today, 
> so I don't see how my context can be "internal" by Jef's 
> meaning. Maybe they have really _sophisticated_ orbital mind 
> control lasers?

THAT was supposed to be kept secret!

 
> I used to say that Avatar was the least-fscked-up 
> human-potential thingy I'd checked out so far -- *but* that I 
> could say nothing about the "Wizards" ("advanced" Avatar) 
> material but was/am concerned about it being somehow 
> doctrinaire or inflexible or bogus.
> 
> Recently, I appear to have info that it is-was. Too bad.

So you are supporting my point that there is initial growth, but it
turns increasingly inward?


> The (re)directed attention stuff I learned to practice still 
> works for me. Am I kidding myself? Well, isn't everyone, 
> where belief systems are concerned? _And_ attention? Remember 
> all that Psych 101 stuff about seeing what is expected?

Again it seems that you are supporting my point about the early growth
provided by all such paths to self-awareness.


> > I don't know that much about Avatar except it is a scientology 
> > splinter like EST/Landmark.
> 
> Splinter or squirrel den, it's all how you look at it.
> 
> > But I do know scientology and a *long* list of former 
> scientologists.
> >
> > The main psychological mechanism used by scientology and 
> (as far as I 
> > know,
> > *all* cults) is a perversion of attention reward.
> 
> Welp. The Avatar stuff I did was mostly about (re)directing 
> attention and I didn't get Moonie-style-love-bombed (*or* 
> Stockholm-syndromed) AFAIK. So, not a lot of cult function in 
> evidence, as such things go.
> And I could run down (sorry!) a list as long as my arm of 
> more-cultish groups than that that I have direct experience 
> with. Checked 'em out, didn't drain the cup of Kool-Aid; am 
> still standing.

Sounds like we have a fair amount in common here.  Probably my initial
statement comparing the two groups gave the wrong impression.


> WRT Avatar, I didn't get a big-assed flaming letters "CULT" 
> readout at any point. Nobody was vying for the honor of 
> polishing the brightwork on anyone's yacht (and yes, people 
> did that for Elron and Werner, too).
> 
> Maybe a hint of a "Stairway to Florida" with "cult?" in 
> cursive on a sign next to it.
> 
> When I studied, and when I reviewed, the Avatar materials, I 
> paid close attention to (and was annoyed by) some of the 
> residual terminology reminiscent of the Co$, but can report 
> that what I did was not dissimilar to some stuff written 
> about by, e.g., Tarthang Tulku (and, oddly enough, 
> Nietzche!); and I did *not* get handed _any_ of the Co$ hooey 
> (based on my extensive readings regarding same, both before 
> and after).
> 
> The good news about Avatar's upper level seems to be that they're
> *not* funneling money to the Co$, even though they're not far 
> away in Florida. The bad news seems to be that Harry and his 
> close asociates are? were? not as enlightened as they put 
> forth. Sigh. 'Twas ever thus. To some degree, whether due to 
> better ethics or less-extreme megalomania, Harry Palmer is 
> not Elron, not by a long chalk. Does he wish he were? Quien sabe?
> 
> I'm not gonna tell anyone else how to spend their money. And 
> I don't know what is *really* up with Star's Edge 
> International, in the US, France or elsewhere.
> 
> As someone said, the lotus growing in the sewage is still a lotus.


Very true, but one might still ask "why all this sewage?"

 
> *shrug*