happytown,
you are right consent is very important,
and it is clear that some people have not been aware of what they signed up for,
I have just read through the guidelines and FAQ that are provided to you if you sign up for a retreat
[mooji.org]
which do state that there can be adverse effects if you suffer from preexisting mental conditions,
but not so much that you can experience altered states of consciousness by attending or following "the invitation".
You are asked to watch a video of "the invitation" so you know what you can expect.
I find it too harsh too call this malpractice.
also, you bring forward a very interesting case of coercion through indoctrination by double binds.
You describe a potential scenario of how this process could play out,
and rightly stress the danger of overemphasizing the absolute (god,truth,freedom) in a relative world (of the mind),
nobody will ever be able to shed the relative completely.
Does this mean, however, that this tension is ACTUALLY used by Moo's group
to create anxiety in order to coerce followers.
I think it is only still a potential problem, and I don't think there is evidence for actual exploitation.
Sahara71, You do feel that Moo is a destructive cult,
what form of exploitation do you feel is most problematic?
Also, sahara71, I agree with you that the organization of Moo should be held accountable and that (financial) transparency is warranted.
I feel that engaging in though reform or spiritual transformation processes is such a delicate business
that it should require even more accountability and checks and balances
so as to prevent the organization from causing any harm whatsoever.
The examples of harm done that you mention are in the category of thought reform,
although I feel that if people are intentionally confused (gaslighting) that crosses a line,
but rather than gaslighting, what I would argue happens is
that the radical worldview of Moo's ideal is so different from ours
that it is just by it's nature confusing to many people.
Again, I want to be true and fair.
I think we shouldn't be all negative and suspicious and jump to conclusions.
Actual reports of coercion and exploitation remain exceedingly scarce,
so as to suggest that it is not a systemic malady of Moo's group.
as a sidenote, I am bombarding you with messages from my computer
because I am at home, fallen ill with a minor flu,
I feel a little sad, you are my warmth and solace
you are right consent is very important,
and it is clear that some people have not been aware of what they signed up for,
I have just read through the guidelines and FAQ that are provided to you if you sign up for a retreat
[mooji.org]
which do state that there can be adverse effects if you suffer from preexisting mental conditions,
but not so much that you can experience altered states of consciousness by attending or following "the invitation".
You are asked to watch a video of "the invitation" so you know what you can expect.
I find it too harsh too call this malpractice.
also, you bring forward a very interesting case of coercion through indoctrination by double binds.
You describe a potential scenario of how this process could play out,
and rightly stress the danger of overemphasizing the absolute (god,truth,freedom) in a relative world (of the mind),
nobody will ever be able to shed the relative completely.
Does this mean, however, that this tension is ACTUALLY used by Moo's group
to create anxiety in order to coerce followers.
I think it is only still a potential problem, and I don't think there is evidence for actual exploitation.
Sahara71, You do feel that Moo is a destructive cult,
what form of exploitation do you feel is most problematic?
Also, sahara71, I agree with you that the organization of Moo should be held accountable and that (financial) transparency is warranted.
I feel that engaging in though reform or spiritual transformation processes is such a delicate business
that it should require even more accountability and checks and balances
so as to prevent the organization from causing any harm whatsoever.
The examples of harm done that you mention are in the category of thought reform,
although I feel that if people are intentionally confused (gaslighting) that crosses a line,
but rather than gaslighting, what I would argue happens is
that the radical worldview of Moo's ideal is so different from ours
that it is just by it's nature confusing to many people.
Again, I want to be true and fair.
I think we shouldn't be all negative and suspicious and jump to conclusions.
Actual reports of coercion and exploitation remain exceedingly scarce,
so as to suggest that it is not a systemic malady of Moo's group.
as a sidenote, I am bombarding you with messages from my computer
because I am at home, fallen ill with a minor flu,
I feel a little sad, you are my warmth and solace