...and it's all for this!:
"'The standard est training promises to transform the capacity to experience life so that one is more satisfied with life as it is' (Sayre 1977)."
Above quote from page 11 of the link egoldstein posted on other thread.
That was the whole point of the "choice" (Chocolate or Vanilla) exercise. They wanted you to perceive that as an actual choice, when it realistically was not even a Hobson's choice. In a Hobson's choice, one would have the option of declining. It's a "take it or leave it" choice. In the Landmark exercise, it's just "take it," and don't behave as if you're unhappy or resigned.
Then they go into a whole spiel about resignation, and how you should see things that you can't change or are resigned to as "choices." Then, we had to do an exercise where we picked something we we were unhappy about and "choose" it. That was supposed to feel more "empowered" than resignation. Got breast cancer? Choose it! Husband having an affair? Choose it!
Of course, i had a situation of my own, and saying that I "chose" it did not make me feel any differently about it at all. In fact, I felt nothing but disgust that they wanted me to take responsibility for the reprehensible behavior of others, and disgusted that we had spent the better part of a weekend getting to that.
But that did seem to be pretty much the crux of the Forum, in my humble opinion. Having been raised by a parent who had been telling me that i "chose" everything since i was about 12, it didn't change my view of anything.
"...so that one is more satisfied with life as it is' (Sayre 1977)."
In other words, if you actually want your life to change, don't bother. When they recruit so aggressively, they will throw out, "Well, if you still want to be in the same crappy job..." They don't bother mentioning that you likely will be, whether you sign up for their program or not.
"'The standard est training promises to transform the capacity to experience life so that one is more satisfied with life as it is' (Sayre 1977)."
Above quote from page 11 of the link egoldstein posted on other thread.
That was the whole point of the "choice" (Chocolate or Vanilla) exercise. They wanted you to perceive that as an actual choice, when it realistically was not even a Hobson's choice. In a Hobson's choice, one would have the option of declining. It's a "take it or leave it" choice. In the Landmark exercise, it's just "take it," and don't behave as if you're unhappy or resigned.
Then they go into a whole spiel about resignation, and how you should see things that you can't change or are resigned to as "choices." Then, we had to do an exercise where we picked something we we were unhappy about and "choose" it. That was supposed to feel more "empowered" than resignation. Got breast cancer? Choose it! Husband having an affair? Choose it!
Of course, i had a situation of my own, and saying that I "chose" it did not make me feel any differently about it at all. In fact, I felt nothing but disgust that they wanted me to take responsibility for the reprehensible behavior of others, and disgusted that we had spent the better part of a weekend getting to that.
But that did seem to be pretty much the crux of the Forum, in my humble opinion. Having been raised by a parent who had been telling me that i "chose" everything since i was about 12, it didn't change my view of anything.
"...so that one is more satisfied with life as it is' (Sayre 1977)."
In other words, if you actually want your life to change, don't bother. When they recruit so aggressively, they will throw out, "Well, if you still want to be in the same crappy job..." They don't bother mentioning that you likely will be, whether you sign up for their program or not.