Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => Hyde Schools => Topic started by: Anonymous on April 01, 2007, 12:36:27 PM
-
April Fools!
-
April Fools!
Ha, ha! Very funny! Too bad it isn't true. You had me all excited!!
-
No Way! :rofl: He'll go to his grave spitting about what a difference he has made!
I AM THE DIFFERENCE
Speech given by Founder Joe Gauld during Hyde Schools' Fall Family Weekends, 2006
I am the difference. It sounds like an arrogant statement.
We live on a planet that is only a speck in infinite space. Our time here is only a brief moment in eternity. In the scheme of things, each human life appears to be incredibly insignificant.
Yet we are unique; there has never been anyone like us before, and never will be again. And something deep inside tells every one of us that our own life is vitally important.
As Goethe observed, "Life is the childhood of our immortality." In his eyes, our life is clearly meant to determine our place in the larger scheme of things.
This explains Hyde's founding premise: Every individual is gifted with a unique potential that defines a destiny. Every thing we do at Hyde is built on this founding purpose. Our commitment to your children begins and ends with the development of their unique potential--over their lifetime...
-
It is an egocentric universe with a destiny that is determined by the uniqueness of the individual potential.
I like Garrison Keillor's take on individualism: Don't go thinking that you are special because you aren't. You are just like everyone else. So don't start getting a big head. Of course it would be hard to charge people 45k/year for that kind of common sense.
-
It is an egocentric universe with a destiny that is determined by the uniqueness of the individual potential.
I like Garrison Keillor's take on individualism: Don't go thinking that you are special because you aren't. You are just like everyone else. So don't start getting a big head. Of course it would be hard to charge people 45k/year for that kind of common sense.
Is Hyde $45,000 a year now?
-
Our commitment to your children begins and ends with the development of their unique potential--over their lifetime...
Indeed! Does this translate into a promise of paying for a lifetime's worth of therapy for some of us? ::bangin::
-
It is an egocentric universe with a destiny that is determined by the uniqueness of the individual potential.
I like Garrison Keillor's take on individualism: Don't go thinking that you are special because you aren't. You are just like everyone else. So don't start getting a big head. Of course it would be hard to charge people 45k/year for that kind of common sense.
Is Hyde $45,000 a year now?
That is the number I have seen. I could be wrong. I am a gadfly former student, not a current parent.
-
No Way! :rofl: He'll go to his grave spitting about what a difference he has made!
I AM THE DIFFERENCE
Speech given by Founder Joe Gauld during Hyde Schools' Fall Family Weekends, 2006
I am the difference. It sounds like an arrogant statement.
We live on a planet that is only a speck in infinite space. Our time here is only a brief moment in eternity. In the scheme of things, each human life appears to be incredibly insignificant.
Yet we are unique; there has never been anyone like us before, and never will be again. And something deep inside tells every one of us that our own life is vitally important.
As Goethe observed, "Life is the childhood of our immortality." In his eyes, our life is clearly meant to determine our place in the larger scheme of things.
This explains Hyde's founding premise: Every individual is gifted with a unique potential that defines a destiny. Every thing we do at Hyde is built on this founding purpose. Our commitment to your children begins and ends with the development of their unique potential--over their lifetime...
Here's the unedited Joe Gauld version:
I am the difference. It sounds like an arrogant statement, and it is. I am Joe Gauld, and I am the difference.
We live on a planet that only one person truly understands: Joe Gauld. My time here is eternal. In the scheme of things, my life is incredibly significant.
I am unique; there has never been anyone like me before, and never will be again. And something deep inside tells every one of us that my own life is vitally important.
As Goethe observed, "Life is the childhood of our immortality." In his eyes, my life is clearly meant to determine your place in the larger scheme of things.
This explains Hyde's founding premise: Joe Gauld is gifted with a unique potential that defines a destiny. Every thing I do at Hyde is built on this founding purpose. My commitment to your children begins and ends with me and my unique potential--over my lifetime...
-
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
Here is the full text, as taken from Hyde's website:
I AM THE DIFFERENCE
Speech given by Founder Joe Gauld during Hyde Schools' Fall Family Weekends, 2006
I am the difference. It sounds like an arrogant statement.
We live on a planet that is only a speck in infinite space. Our time here is only a brief moment in eternity. In the scheme of things, each human life appears to be incredibly insignificant.
Yet we are unique; there has never been anyone like us before, and never will be again. And something deep inside tells every one of us that our own life is vitally important.
As Goethe observed, "Life is the childhood of our immortality." In his eyes, our life is clearly meant to determine our place in the larger scheme of things.
This explains Hyde's founding premise: Every individual is gifted with a unique potential that defines a destiny. Every thing we do at Hyde is built on this founding purpose. Our commitment to your children begins and ends with the development of their unique potential--over their lifetime.
But given the enormity of space and time and the billions of people who have lived here on earth, this inner voice calling us to a larger purpose can easily get drowned out by our lesser self-gratification, self-protection, and self-centered instincts. These instincts seduce us into ignoring our deep inner calling, and instead, lead us to simply seek pleasure and enjoy life.
2300 years ago, Aristotle observed, "It is the nature of desire not to be satisfied, yet most men live only for the gratification of it." His wisdom is still painfully true today--most of us primarily live to gratify ourselves.
We can understand the pursuit of gratification in those who are fighting just to survive on earth, but not in those living in our land of plenty. Like that insightful verse from the Porgy and Bess song, I got plenty of nothing:
Folks with plenty of plenty... got a lock on the door.
Afraid somebody's gonna rob 'em... While they're out (a) making more... what for?
Today we see a parade of business executives with plenty of plenty going to jail. What for? For trying to get even more of a plenty they cannot possibly use in their lifetimes.
And this preoccupation with self, this spiritual sickness, extends to our entire society. How many Americans continually pursue the dream of winning the lottery, totally ignoring the sad stories of those who did win? In the words of one winner, "I wish it never happened. It was a total nightmare."
This spiritual sickness also invades Hyde. Both boarding campuses have learned that some Hyde graduates last year had broken ethics before they made their speeches.
These are good kids. We saw their deeper potentials. But in spite of all our efforts, we have as yet failed to help them transcend their lesser self-centered and self-indulgent instincts in order to transform into the great individuals and leaders they were meant to be.
A basic truth of life is that we humans flounder in prosperity, but flourish in adversity. Life is meant to be difficult, because we need the challenge of adversity to draw out the deeper creative power of our unique potential.
The caterpillar's mighty struggle to break out of the cocoon develops wings strong enough to fly. Hyde is a human cocoon where our mighty struggles develop our unique potential. So as we view where these Hyde graduates presently are, the lesson is clear:
You as Hyde parents and families, and we as Hyde teachers and classmates, must together work harder and more effectively to help all students, parents, and teachers achieve this very difficult, but life-changing, human transformation.
First, we must dedicate ourselves to helping both our children and ourselves transcend our lesser instincts:- Self-gratification--how well are we learning to delay gratification--an absolutely essential trait we need in order to prevail in life. Do we put work before play, hard before easy, even vegetables before dessert? Our ability to delay gratification measures our grit as individuals. And we certainly will need grit to realize our unique potential.
- Self-protection--how eagerly are we seeking challenges? How willing are we to take risks? How dedicated are we to facing our fears? As Franklin Roosevelt told us in dark days of the depression: "The only thing we have to fear--is fear itself." Courage is the foundation of our individuality.
- Self-centeredness--how deeply have we developed our empathy and compassion for others? How actively have we expressed our concern for helping others discover their best? Our emotions of compassion and concern empower us to understand and appreciate the deeper spiritual power of Brother's Keeper.
Since Brother's Keeper is the least understood and least respected of all the 10 Hyde Words and Principles, let me add something here.
In the Book of Genesis, after Cain murdered his brother Abel, God asked him where his brother was. Cain answered, "I know not; am I my brother's keeper?"
Cain's words have come to symbolize people's unwillingness to accept responsibility for the welfare of others--their brothers in the extended sense of the term.
It is perhaps the uglier side of American individuality how much of our relationships are really self-serving, or at least based on the lesser morality: I'll scratch your back, and you scratch mine.
Ask yourself how much of your relationships are based on gaining approval or acceptance for yourself, or at least seeking to avoid rejection?
Yet at the same time, I think most of us--if not all--would be shocked to realize how much the pure and unselfish brother's keeper efforts of others have contributed to the best in the selves that we are today.
I had such a life-changing Brother's Keeper experience at age 17. While driving home late at night, I saw glass in the road. Imagining some driver getting a flat, I stopped and picked up the glass.
When I returned to the wheel, I just sat there, stunned. Never in my life could I recall expressing an unselfish concern for others, at least when no one was looking. I remember saying to myself, "Joe, maybe you don't know who you really are."
The experience gave me real hope for myself. I certainly didn't change overnight, but today I gain real confidence from knowing I try to make the other's best my first concern in all my relationships. It isn't always appreciated and sometimes even resented, but even then I still get the feeling that some people up there above approve of what I am doing.
I believe until we truly understand and fully appreciate the power of Brother's Keeper, we will never become a leader. We may gain power over others, but we will never truly lead them.
Practicing Brother's Keeper requires real courage, faith, and humility. All of us at Hyde have a golden opportunity to internalize its power, because we are part of a community where all individuals have made a commitment to this principle.
And, we at Hyde need to feel a sense of urgency, because if we are unable to internalize Brother's Keeper under our more ideal conditions, we are unlikely to practice it in life.
Our second concern should be: how well are we helping both students and ourselves transcend the unproductive emotional dispositions that we developed in our childhood and family of origin?
Our work to address dispositions--like anger, resentment, guilt, criticalness, lack of confidence, lack of purpose, pessimism, depression, alcoholism, neuroses, trauma--is the most difficult and painful challenge in the discovery of our deepest selves. But our work frees us to fully realize the even greater power of the positive emotional dispositions our parents also instilled in us--the true foundation for becoming all we were meant to be in life.
So, as we liberate ourselves from the inner control of both our lesser instincts and our emotional dispositions, we enable ourselves to develop our deepest character and spiritual potentials. This work creates our higher self, and empowers our conscience to lead us on the path of our true destiny.
All of us chosen to be here at Hyde, although some reluctantly so. However, how some of last year's graduates handled their Hyde experience should remind us that each of us still has a crucial choice to make, which I would express like this:
Am I going to continue to follow the conventional path of success in our society, but this time fortified with Hyde values? Or am I going to prepare myself to take the leap of faith needed to trust my unique potential and follow my destiny?
The poet, Robert Frost, expressed this choice in the following way:
"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference."
I am the difference. This is not arrogance. It expresses a deep belief in life, profound humility, a strong spirit, real courage, and a commitment to be the best I can be, to help others, and to leave the world a better place.
I earnestly hope you will share this spirit with family throughout the new year, because family is where the journey of our unique potential begins. Good Luck.
-
Folks with plenty of plenty... got a lock on the door.
Afraid somebody's gonna rob 'em... While they're out (a) making more... what for?
He misses the irony of the song. Porgy losses Bess to Sportin, Life.
-
had such a life-changing Brother's Keeper experience at age 17. While driving home late at night, I saw glass in the road. Imagining some driver getting a flat, I stopped and picked up the glass.
Reminds me of the story of Honest John, another such tale of great personal sacrifice for the good of mankind:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEIUW5Rslrc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEIUW5Rslrc)
-
For someone who is chastising us for "preoccupation with self, ...spiritual sickness," not to mention focusing too much on self-gratification (speaking of "inner control of ...our lesser instincts," ha!), he sure isn't someone who should be throwing stones. It certainly puts the 990's in an even uglier light. Talk about someone "trying to get even more of a plenty they cannot possibly use in their lifetime."
And if I hear one more friggin' reference to the insufferable butterfly struggling out of the cocoon story, I'm gonna add those wretched little buggers to my diet!
-
I had such a life-changing Brother's Keeper experience at age 17. While driving home late at night, I saw glass in the road. Imagining some driver getting a flat, I stopped and picked up the glass.
When I returned to the wheel, I just sat there, stunned. Never in my life could I recall expressing an unselfish concern for others, at least when no one was looking. I remember saying to myself, "Joe, maybe you don't know who you really are."
The experience gave me real hope for myself. I certainly didn't change overnight, but today I gain real confidence from knowing I try to make the other's best my first concern in all my relationships.
Reminds me of the story of Honest John, another such tale of great personal sacrifice for the good of mankind:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEIUW5Rslrc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEIUW5Rslrc)
Just unbelievable. I almost feel embarrassed for him.
-
IT is a false dichotomy: Character and sacrifice or hedonism and indulgence. IF you are in the right place, doing the right thing is a joy not a sacrifice.
What is wrong with relationships of mutual benefit? Assuming that you need to be in a relationship where you are BK'ing the other person is predicated on an arrogance that you know better than the other. It is like the implicit arrogance of the Covey principle "seek to understand before being understood" The implication is that you are functioning on a higher level that the person you are in the relation with i.e. this person is not your peer.
I think this is why you see the Animal Farm syndrome at Hyde. All the animals are equal to start but at the end some are more equal then others. The whole this is based on stratification, social class i.e those on trace vs those off track, where one class (the former) gets to rank on the latter. This is not a sign of character. It is the priggism that lead the puritans to pillar sinner for wearing purple buttons on their coats. When I was wittiness to this dynamic it reminded me more of Shirley Jackson's, the Lottery then any society I wanted to live in. In this respect Hyde is SSDS (same shit different shovel). It is a system that can be gamed, by Joes own admission, that creates winners and losers, where the winners own nothing to the losers except a waging finger, that is to say not true community.
-
Forgive me for disagreeing, but I have a different take on this speech. Although he is unable to think out of the context of inflated self-importance (and of course, its flip side, despair) and thus is completely incapable of true irony, I have no doubt that Joe is sincere in his desire to be of service.
In my judgment, there's nothing wrong with these remarks, though, or course, they are hardly earth shaking or deeply insightful.
Just my take.
GE
-
In the Book of Genesis, after Cain murdered his brother Abel, God asked him where his brother was. Cain answered, "I know not; am I my brother's keeper?"
Cain's words have come to symbolize people's unwillingness to accept responsibility for the welfare of others--their brothers in the extended sense of the term.
Cain's words have come to symbolize that for Joe Gauld. For me, they still mean that Cain was NOT appointed his brother's keeper; i.e., he was NOT entitled to impose his will on another man's. God himself was not entitled to impose his will on Adam and Eve.
-
Forgive me for disagreeing, but I have a different take on this speech. Although he is unable to think out of the context of inflated self-importance (and of course, its flip side, despair) and thus is completely incapable of true irony, I have no doubt that Joe is sincere in his desire to be of service.
In my judgment, there's nothing wrong with these remarks, though, or course, they are hardly earth shaking or deeply insightful.
Just my take.
GE
What do you disagree with? The point you made has nothing to do with what I said.
My point is that there is an implicit arrogance in the notion of BK. And that Hyde is built on that social stratification. It a system that can be gamed, creates arbitrary winners and loses and thus is no different that the system that it proports to be better than. To quote "meet the new boss, same as the old boss"
-
In the Book of Genesis, after Cain murdered his brother Abel, God asked him where his brother was. Cain answered, "I know not; am I my brother's keeper?"
Cain's words have come to symbolize people's unwillingness to accept responsibility for the welfare of others--their brothers in the extended sense of the term.
Cain's words have come to symbolize that for Joe Gauld. For me, they still mean that Cain was NOT appointed his brother's keeper; i.e., he was NOT entitled to impose his will on another man's. God himself was not entitled to impose his will on Adam and Eve.
"Cain caught Able rollin' loaded dice"
http://arts.ucsc.edu/Gdead/AGDL/halfstep.html (http://arts.ucsc.edu/Gdead/AGDL/halfstep.html)
-
Forgive me for disagreeing, but I have a different take on this speech. Although he is unable to think out of the context of inflated self-importance (and of course, its flip side, despair) and thus is completely incapable of true irony, I have no doubt that Joe is sincere in his desire to be of service.
In my judgment, there's nothing wrong with these remarks, though, or course, they are hardly earth shaking or deeply insightful.
Just my take.
GE
What do you disagree with? The point you made has nothing to do with what I said.
My point is that there is an implicit arrogance in the notion of BK. And that Hyde is built on that social stratification. It a system that can be gamed, creates arbitrary winners and loses and thus is no different that the system that it proports to be better than. To quote "meet the new boss, same as the old boss"
I agree about the stratification. Gauld has harnessed the natural energy of all nasty little high school cliques and subsumed them under just two monolithic pro- and anti-Hyde groups. And, you've got to give the devil his due, he was shrewd enough to do away with the usual high school setup of students versus adults and instead create a you versus all setup. That's the beauty of brother's keeper. Opposition is crushed by peers as well as by administration. But I disagree that the game creates arbitrary winners and losers; it creates arbitrary rules. If you play by them, you'll win. If not, or if you try to change them, or even if you ask why the hell am I playing, you'll lose.
-
Forgive me for disagreeing, but I have a different take on this speech. Although he is unable to think out of the context of inflated self-importance (and of course, its flip side, despair) and thus is completely incapable of true irony, I have no doubt that Joe is sincere in his desire to be of service.
In my judgment, there's nothing wrong with these remarks, though, or course, they are hardly earth shaking or deeply insightful.
Just my take.
GE
What do you disagree with? The point you made has nothing to do with what I said.
My point is that there is an implicit arrogance in the notion of BK. And that Hyde is built on that social stratification. It a system that can be gamed, creates arbitrary winners and loses and thus is no different that the system that it proports to be better than. To quote "meet the new boss, same as the old boss"
I agree about the stratification. Gauld has harnessed the natural energy of all nasty little high school cliques and subsumed them under just two monolithic pro- and anti-Hyde groups. And, you've got to give the devil his due, he was shrewd enough to do away with the usual high school setup of students versus adults and instead create a you versus all setup. That's the beauty of brother's keeper. Opposition is crushed by peers as well as by administration. But I disagree that the game creates arbitrary winners and losers; it creates arbitrary rules. If you play by them, you'll win. If not, or if you try to change them, or even if you ask why the hell am I playing, you'll lose.
Since the rules are themselves are arbitrary the bifurcation thus created is arbitrary. There is no way to say group A is good, group B is bad, since we clearly have evidence of those in group A who fake the requirements to be in group A. Also we have evident of members of group B that have the characteristics that group A supposes to represent, Since the system proports to differentiate based on an absolute value system, but clearly fails at least in some cases it is arbitrary. Similar result could occur from a random process like a coin toss.
Q.E.D
-
Forgive me for disagreeing, but I have a different take on this speech. Although he is unable to think out of the context of inflated self-importance (and of course, its flip side, despair) and thus is completely incapable of true irony, I have no doubt that Joe is sincere in his desire to be of service.
In my judgment, there's nothing wrong with these remarks, though, or course, they are hardly earth shaking or deeply insightful.
Just my take.
GE
What do you disagree with? The point you made has nothing to do with what I said.
My point is that there is an implicit arrogance in the notion of BK. And that Hyde is built on that social stratification. It a system that can be gamed, creates arbitrary winners and loses and thus is no different that the system that it proports to be better than. To quote "meet the new boss, same as the old boss"
I agree about the stratification. Gauld has harnessed the natural energy of all nasty little high school cliques and subsumed them under just two monolithic pro- and anti-Hyde groups. And, you've got to give the devil his due, he was shrewd enough to do away with the usual high school setup of students versus adults and instead create a you versus all setup. That's the beauty of brother's keeper. Opposition is crushed by peers as well as by administration. But I disagree that the game creates arbitrary winners and losers; it creates arbitrary rules. If you play by them, you'll win. If not, or if you try to change them, or even if you ask why the hell am I playing, you'll lose.
Since the rules are themselves are arbitrary the bifurcation thus created is arbitrary. There is no way to say group A is good, group B is bad, since we clearly have evidence of those in group A who fake the requirements to be in group A. Also we have evident of members of group B that have the characteristics that group A supposes to represent, Since the system proports to differentiate based on an absolute value system, but clearly fails at least in some cases it is arbitrary. Similar result could occur from a random process like a coin toss.
Q.E.D
Q.E.D. my eye. You are using the terms "winner" and "loser" indiscriminately in two very different senses, namely, winner and loser as defined by Hyde and winner and loser as defined by the world at large. I maintain that if you play the Hyde game you will win big time at Hyde and there is indeed a payoff: peace, praise, power, Paris, Hyde diploma, and more. The fact that outside of Hyde the term "winner" may be synonymous with "loser" (hypocrite, Nazi, dog turd, etc.) is incontrovertible but does not detract from the fact that a payoff can be had by playing the game at Hyde.
-
"What do you disagree with? The point you made has nothing to do with what I said."
Hard to know who you are, and therefore what you said, since, like many "guests" you seem to have a problem identifying yourself to the community.
Sharp elbows are ok, but since we're all on the same side- trying to discover the truth about human nature, and how best to help kids in crises and their families- tact might also be worth considering.
GE
-
Q.E.D. my eye. You are using the terms "winner" and "loser" indiscriminately
I am not using the term indiscriminately. I am however referring implicitly to the definition of the terms in the Hyde sense.
Winner = Hyde graduate
Loser = {drop out, runaway, banished, walked with a certificate}
I am evaluating the system on the terms of the system. The system claims to differentiate based on "Character" To prove that this does not happen and assignment is random or arbitrary, I need only to show that the system fails and the same result could occur via another process. I have done this.
I do not accept the Hyde definitions, in fact by proving my chain of reasoning, I render those definitions without value. BTW "my eye" is not a valid argument.
-
"What do you disagree with? The point you made has nothing to do with what I said."
Hard to know who you are, and therefore what you said, since, like many "guests" you seem to have a problem identifying yourself to the community.
Sharp elbows are ok, but since we're all on the same side- trying to discover the truth about human nature, and how best to help kids in crises and their families- tact might also be worth considering.
GE
Hey just a little good natured dialectic. This is the kind of talk you can't get at Hyde. I suppose I could get an account but I am not a joiner or a bricklayer.
Emil Nightrate
-
Hey just a little good natured dialectic. This is the kind of talk you can't get at Hyde. I suppose I could get an account but I am not a joiner or a bricklayer.
Emil Nightrate[/quote]
Understood! I have read your posts and it's clear you have a lot of insight to offer... would you care to be interviewed?
If you'd like to see samples of my interviews before answering, they can be found on my website, www.garyeskow.com (http://www.garyeskow.com)
Peace,
GE
-
Q.E.D. my eye. You are using the terms "winner" and "loser" indiscriminately
I am not using the term indiscriminately. I am however referring implicitly to the definition of the terms in the Hyde sense.
Winner = Hyde graduate
Loser = {drop out, runaway, banished, walked with a certificate}
I am evaluating the system on the terms of the system. The system claims to differentiate based on "Character" To prove that this does not happen and assignment is random or arbitrary, I need only to show that the system fails and the same result could occur via another process. I have done this.
I do not accept the Hyde definitions, in fact by proving my chain of reasoning, I render those definitions without value. BTW "my eye" is not a valid argument.
We're starting to converge. I say that the assignment of winner-loser status is not random (e.g., coin toss) because it is made on the basis of character evaluation. You maintain that the assignment is random because of the margin of error inherent in character evaluation. I think that we can both agree that character evaluation is performance-based and hence "inaccurate" rather than "random."
The margin of error in the long run for a random coin toss is 50 percent, while the margin of error in the long run for character evaluations may well be greater than 50 percent.
-
Hey just a little good natured dialectic. This is the kind of talk you can't get at Hyde. I suppose I could get an account but I am not a joiner or a bricklayer.
Emil Nightrate
Understood! I have read your posts and it's clear you have a lot of insight to offer... would you care to be interviewed?
If you'd like to see samples of my interviews before answering, they can be found on my website, www.garyeskow.com (http://www.garyeskow.com)
Peace,
GE[/quote]
Flattery may work GE. Have any live Elliot Sharp CDs? I have some of him playing with John Zorn ... I think.
-
Q.E.D. my eye. You are using the terms "winner" and "loser" indiscriminately
I am not using the term indiscriminately. I am however referring implicitly to the definition of the terms in the Hyde sense.
Winner = Hyde graduate
Loser = {drop out, runaway, banished, walked with a certificate}
I am evaluating the system on the terms of the system. The system claims to differentiate based on "Character" To prove that this does not happen and assignment is random or arbitrary, I need only to show that the system fails and the same result could occur via another process. I have done this.
I do not accept the Hyde definitions, in fact by proving my chain of reasoning, I render those definitions without value. BTW "my eye" is not a valid argument.
We're starting to converge. I say that the assignment of winner-loser status is not random (e.g., coin toss) because it is made on the basis of character evaluation. You maintain that the assignment is random because of the margin of error inherent in character evaluation. I think that we can both agree that character evaluation is performance-based and hence "inaccurate" rather than "random."
The margin of error in the long run for a random coin toss is 50 percent, while the margin of error in the long run for character evaluations may well be greater than 50 percent.
That is a much better argument that "my eye." Actually I maintain that it is not an evaluation process with a known average defect rate with variations but rather completely ineffective. The system is like a person with color blindness sorting colored sheets of construction paper on the basis of color. If the person gets a red sheet in the red bin it wholly a coincident.
If you went to Hyde, you know that some of the tests are like the medieval practices of determining if a person is a practitioner of witchcraft. "If she floats she's a witch" "If the sore festers he's a warlock" Substitute: If he is a start Varsity Athlete , if her parent's are large donors. Then add the A list people that are faking it and the fact that the sincere folk that are accepted just because they fit the system, which IMHO is a contra indication of character, you have a system that is more or less heads or tails.
Emil
-
mr. eskow...i assume you have been interviewing people who have been through hyde, both middle, extremes, and leaning experiences at hyde.
no attitude behind the comment. just asking. because i see a lot of the anti-hyde people on here get asked to be interviewed. just wondering.
- bill procida '07
-
mr. eskow...i assume you have been interviewing people who have been through hyde, both middle, extremes, and leaning experiences at hyde.
no attitude behind the comment. just asking. because i see a lot of the anti-hyde people on here get asked to be interviewed. just wondering.
- bill procida '07
GE,
I will not talk to you unless you talk to Bill too.
Emil
P.S.
Bill I think you are alright.
-
Okay, two things before I start putting my two cents in...
1.) Billy, Gary is trying his damdest to solicit pro-Hyde voices, but it is very difficult when they always blow him off. Perhaps you can be the exception and give him your POV?
2.) I have been having computer problems due to installing a new program, and thus haven't been able to view or follow this thread since posting last night. Coming onto it cold, with lots having posted, and essentially few or no ID as to poster, makes it really difficult and a royal pain in the buttocks to follow.
I totally understand how some wish to retain their anonymity, but taking on a username will not compromise that. You don't even have to give your name, just an email address! Plus there is a whole 'nother level to Fornits, available only to the avatars, which is being able to private mail someone re. issues perhaps too private to warrant discussion even here.
That said, if you still want to stay out of that loop, please try to note your chosen identity along with your posts, especially in an exchange like this, so that others can follow the development of your thought processes and possibly learn something from your rhetoric. I, for one, would greatly appreciate it! :lol:
...okay, I have to go repair something else, and it might take a few minutes to return... -Urs
-
Please try to note your chosen identity along with your posts, especially in an exchange like this, so that others can follow the development of your thought processes and possibly learn something from your rhetoric. I, for one, would greatly appreciate it! :lol:
Just Emil and I goofing off again, with Mr. Eskow and Bill joining in.
Mike
-
Please try to note your chosen identity along with your posts, especially in an exchange like this, so that others can follow the development of your thought processes and possibly learn something from your rhetoric. I, for one, would greatly appreciate it! :lol:
Just Emil and I goofing off again, with Mr. Eskow and Bill joining in.
Mike
Mike
So I take it you were satisfied with the color blind person sorting colored paper analogy.
Emil
-
"Flattery may work GE. Have any live Elliot Sharp CDs?"
Emil, you must be joking--- or you may be a soul relative of Joe's. Not only would I not flatter you, or hand you any of the CDs of Elliot's that have been sent to me over the years, but I think I'll pass on the interview.
Thanks for your interest!
Peace,
GE
-
"Flattery may work GE. Have any live Elliot Sharp CDs?"
Emil, you must be joking--- or you may be a soul relative of Joe's. Not only would I not flatter you, or hand you any of the CDs of Elliot's that have been sent to me over the years, but I think I'll pass on the interview.
Thanks for your interest!
Peace,
GE
That was insulting.
Emil
-
Mike
So I take it you were satisfied with the color blind person sorting colored paper analogy.
Emil
Emil,
Let's just agree to disagree.
Mike
P.S. Analogies belong in rhetoric, not logic.
-
mr. eskow...i assume you have been interviewing people who have been through hyde, both middle, extremes, and leaning experiences at hyde.
no attitude behind the comment. just asking. because i see a lot of the anti-hyde people on here get asked to be interviewed. just wondering.
- bill procida '07
Billy- Frankly, I have plenty of interviews with those who view Hyde in the harshest terms. Unfortunately, I haven't been contacted by a single person in his or her 30's, for example, who has said that he/she has lived by the five words and principles (does anyone remember these poorly written constructs years later?) and that the Hyde experience has materially shaped their adult life positively.
In a recent conversation I had with Laura Gauld I mentioned this fact to her, and said that I'd like to interview her and anyone she might wish to have contact me. So far, nada. Ethically, I don't feel comfortable proceeding with an article of my own, or even turning over my files to an indy reporter, without waiting as long as possible to hear from adults who have graduated with Hyde and maintain a positive perspective.
At some point, however, I will have to proceed. A few other issues need to explored fully, particularly with regard to the ethos that Hyde brings to underprivileged areas of the country through its charter school program. The moral standards that the school holds its adult community to have to be analyzed and presented- fairly and dispassionately- to the public. I'm sure that you, and every caring member of the Hyde community would agree that no child should ever be placed in an environment that puts him or her at risk.
You're in the stretch run. Good luck!
GE
-
Mike
So I take it you were satisfied with the color blind person sorting colored paper analogy.
Emil
Emil,
Let's just agree to disagree.
Mike
P.S. Analogies belong in rhetoric, not logic.
I was using rhetoric to explain the logic.
-
I maintain that if you play the Hyde game you will win big time at Hyde and there is indeed a payoff: peace, praise, power, Paris, Hyde diploma, and more. The fact that outside of Hyde the term "winner" may be synonymous with "loser" (hypocrite, Nazi, dog turd, etc.) is incontrovertible but does not detract from the fact that a payoff can be had by playing the game at Hyde.
I am not using the term indiscriminately. I am however referring implicitly to the definition of the terms in the Hyde sense.
Winner = Hyde graduate
Loser = {drop out, runaway, banished, walked with a certificate}
I say that the assignment of winner-loser status is not random (e.g., coin toss) because it is made on the basis of character evaluation. You maintain that the assignment is random because of the margin of error inherent in character evaluation. I think that we can both agree that character evaluation is performance-based and hence "inaccurate" rather than "random."
If you went to Hyde, you know that some of the tests are like the medieval practices of determining if a person is a practitioner of witchcraft. "If she floats she's a witch" "If the sore festers he's a warlock" Substitute: If he is a start Varsity Athlete , if her parent's are large donors. Then add the A list people that are faking it and the fact that the sincere folk that are accepted just because they fit the system, which IMHO is a contra indication of character, you have a system that is more or less heads or tails.
Okay, please forgive me if I have misattributed identities in the above... and sorry if I haven't picked the quotes in the best possible fashion; I'm having trouble with my "previews"...
To me, the whole issue of how it is determined whether someone does well at Hyde or not is somewhat academic... I hear all of the above, and I agree with sentiments stated... said differences seem to be far smaller than notable similarities. I think Hyde tries to follow something analogous to a formula of performance and character evaluation, but the reality is that many other factors enter the picture:
- athletic prowess or lack thereof
- social adroitness/graces or lack thereof
- family financials or lack thereof
- family fame or lack thereof
- family input (Family Weekends and recruitment activity) or lack thereof
- the mallability of your mind or the impression thereof
- whether someone in a position of power really likes you or really dislikes you
There are cases of kids who do all that is required--who fervently believe, and to whom it is not a game, but the real thing--and the school still brands them a loser and ostracizes them. And that is horrible, given the consequences of not fitting in at Hyde. This is hardly a democratic or pluralistic society, none but those who socially conform to the Hyde status quo--be it by effort or be it by luck--can possibly truly succeed in this system. It is, as someone else brought up here not too long ago (?maybe not someone else, but I have no way of knowing or remembering)... a real Lord of The Flies scenario.
Just my thoughts, the usual piss and vinegar...
::bigmouth:: ::bigmouth::
-
Hi Mike, thought it might be you! Hmmm... 'MyEye Mike' might be a cool moniker?
:rofl:
-Urs
Thanks, guys, for adding the IDs!
-
I maintain that if you play the Hyde game you will win big time at Hyde and there is indeed a payoff: peace, praise, power, Paris, Hyde diploma, and more. The fact that outside of Hyde the term "winner" may be synonymous with "loser" (hypocrite, Nazi, dog turd, etc.) is incontrovertible but does not detract from the fact that a payoff can be had by playing the game at Hyde.
I am not using the term indiscriminately. I am however referring implicitly to the definition of the terms in the Hyde sense.
Winner = Hyde graduate
Loser = {drop out, runaway, banished, walked with a certificate}
I say that the assignment of winner-loser status is not random (e.g., coin toss) because it is made on the basis of character evaluation. You maintain that the assignment is random because of the margin of error inherent in character evaluation. I think that we can both agree that character evaluation is performance-based and hence "inaccurate" rather than "random."
If you went to Hyde, you know that some of the tests are like the medieval practices of determining if a person is a practitioner of witchcraft. "If she floats she's a witch" "If the sore festers he's a warlock" Substitute: If he is a start Varsity Athlete , if her parent's are large donors. Then add the A list people that are faking it and the fact that the sincere folk that are accepted just because they fit the system, which IMHO is a contra indication of character, you have a system that is more or less heads or tails.
Okay, please forgive me if I have misattributed identities in the above... and sorry if I haven't picked the quotes in the best possible fashion; I'm having trouble with my "previews"...
To me, the whole issue of how it is determined whether someone does well at Hyde or not is somewhat academic... I hear all of the above, and I agree with sentiments stated... said differences seem to be far smaller than notable similarities. I think Hyde tries to follow something analogous to a formula of performance and character evaluation, but the reality is that many other factors enter the picture:
- athletic prowess or lack thereof
- social adroitness/graces or lack thereof
- family financials or lack thereof
- family fame or lack thereof
- family input (Family Weekends and recruitment activity) or lack thereof
- the mallability of your mind or the impression thereof
- whether someone in a position of power really likes you or really dislikes you
There are cases of kids who do all that is required--who fervently believe, and to whom it is not a game, but the real thing--and the school still brands them a loser and ostracizes them. And that is horrible, given the consequences of not fitting in at Hyde. This is hardly a democratic or pluralistic society, none but those who socially conform to the Hyde status quo--be it by effort or be it by luck--can possibly truly succeed in this system. It is, as someone else brought up here not too long ago (?maybe not someone else, but I have no way of knowing or remembering)... a real Lord of The Flies scenario.
Just my thoughts, the usual piss and vinegar...
::bigmouth:: ::bigmouth::
That is why I think the color blind person sorting colored paper is a great analogy. What is character, and how do you judge it? I don't think Hyde has a clue. I think they use some external indications that have little bearing on character, like introversion vs extroversion. Why is extroversion a character indicator.
Emil N
-
Hi Mike, thought it might be you! Hmmm... 'My Eye Mike' might be a cool moniker?
I think Hyde tries to follow something analogous to a formula of performance and character evaluation, but the reality is that many other factors enter the picture:
- athletic prowess or lack thereof
- social adroitness/graces or lack thereof
- family financials or lack thereof
- family fame or lack thereof
- family input (Family Weekends and recruitment activity) or lack thereof
- the mallability of your mind or the impression thereof
- whether someone in a position of power really likes you or really dislikes you
Urs,
An eye for an eye. Why do you believe that the non-character-based factors listed above are taken into account during an evaluation? For my part, I'm willing to give Hyde the benefit of the doubt that every character evaluation is made in good faith.
Mike
-
...speaking strictly from personal experience, Mike, and from what I have observed and remembered...
There were quite a few things that I remembered, perhaps not the same things some one else might have, and perhaps not even the most important ones, to be sure... And why I remembered these, and not some else, is a mixed bag in and of itself. But the adult perspective I have now, as opposed to the malleable plate I was then, has lent a change to the wind of perception.
I'm sure that an earnest Hyde rookie can spew out a "good faith character evaluation" that could pass muster at Hyde. The key descriptive here is "earnest Hyde rookie," which, by definition, involves a mindset incapable of authentic objectivity, however well-intentioned.
-
Let us not forget the realities of continued existence. No money? No sunny school.
-
Let us not forget the realities of continued existence. No money? No sunny school.
Well lets take an example from the time Mike and I were there. A couple caught in flagrante delicto. Male graduates. Female is scrubed. Both were leadership seniors tracked to graduate with diploma's. Could there have been money involved?
Say it ain't so Joe! It must be that having a cock in your mouth is a sign on bad character, having your cock in some ones mouth is smart.
Emil
-
Well lets take an example from the time Mike and I were there. A couple caught in flagrante delicto. Male graduates. Female is scrubed. Both were leadership seniors tracked to graduate with diploma's. Could there have been money involved?
Say it ain't so Joe! It must be that having a cock in your mouth is a sign on bad character, having your cock in some ones mouth is smart.
Considering Joe's own activities on that front, from carrying on with former graduates to propositioning then current students' widowed mothers, I hardly think he is the one to ask.
-
This couple wouldn't happen to be GW/NC, would it? I heard but rumors of how that turned out whilst still at Hyde...
-
i'm not trying to invalidate what you've said, but it IS a lot different now in 2007 than it was in the late 60s and 70s. hyde has been figuring this out by trial and error and still are. because you're right: how do you teach character education? we're still in the process of figuring out the BEST way to do it. so back then, i can imagine them not having any sort of clue if you just have joey g-string getting into people one-on-one. he can be very stubborn and so can a teenager. so that's not a great set-up for EVERY situation. i get that. but it is different now ursus.
- bill procida '07
ps....when exactly did you graduate? were you part of the first class with paul hurd? or were you more towards malcolm's time? just trying to get a time frame...hope that doesnt' make you feel too old ;) lol
-
i'm not trying to invalidate what you've said, but it IS a lot different now in 2007 than it was in the late 60s and 70s. hyde has been figuring this out by trial and error and still are. because you're right: how do you teach character education? we're still in the process of figuring out the BEST way to do it. so back then, i can imagine them not having any sort of clue if you just have joey g-string getting into people one-on-one. he can be very stubborn and so can a teenager. so that's not a great set-up for EVERY situation. i get that. but it is different now ursus.
- bill procida '07
ps....when exactly did you graduate? were you part of the first class with paul hurd? or were you more towards malcolm's time? just trying to get a time frame...hope that doesnt' make you feel too old ;) lol
I broke Paul and Mal in.
-
This couple wouldn't happen to be GW/NC, would it? I heard but rumors of how that turned out whilst still at Hyde...
nope
-
i'm not trying to invalidate what you've said, but it IS a lot different now in 2007 than it was in the late 60s and 70s. hyde has been figuring this out by trial and error and still are. because you're right: how do you teach character education? we're still in the process of figuring out the BEST way to do it. so back then, i can imagine them not having any sort of clue if you just have joey g-string getting into people one-on-one. he can be very stubborn and so can a teenager. so that's not a great set-up for EVERY situation. i get that. but it is different now ursus.
- bill procida '07
ps....when exactly did you graduate? were you part of the first class with paul hurd? or were you more towards malcolm's time? just trying to get a time frame...hope that doesnt' make you feel too old ;) lol
I never graduated. I am some what younger then the two aforementioned Hydites. I have something in common with both of them. Where I differ is I figured it out at much younger age than either of the two, even though this is a thing that according to Joe takes character to figure out about yourself.
I like Mal and Paul. I have some great memories of them at Hyde,
Emil Nightrate
-
This couple wouldn't happen to be GW/NC, would it? I heard but rumors of how that turned out whilst still at Hyde...
nope
gw never graduated. Well he went back and got a diploma. I did not realize that was his character short coming. nc was a sweet girl. IMHO it would have been a short coming to turn her down. You know those were the ones that got caught. The ones that didn't were the ones that sat in judgment at the seminars. The NC office was a well known tryst destination. IF memory serves that is where mg got busted.
-
i'm not trying to invalidate what you've said, but it IS a lot different now in 2007 than it was in the late 60s and 70s. hyde has been figuring this out by trial and error and still are. because you're right: how do you teach character education? we're still in the process of figuring out the BEST way to do it. so back then, i can imagine them not having any sort of clue if you just have joey g-string getting into people one-on-one. he can be very stubborn and so can a teenager. so that's not a great set-up for EVERY situation. i get that. but it is different now ursus.
- bill procida '07
ps....when exactly did you graduate? were you part of the first class with paul hurd? or were you more towards malcolm's time? just trying to get a time frame...hope that doesnt' make you feel too old ;) lol
The school is 30 years old and they are still trying to figure it out by trial and error????
-
i'm not trying to invalidate what you've said, but it IS a lot different now in 2007 than it was in the late 60s and 70s. hyde has been figuring this out by trial and error and still are. because you're right: how do you teach character education? we're still in the process of figuring out the BEST way to do it. so back then, i can imagine them not having any sort of clue if you just have joey g-string getting into people one-on-one. he can be very stubborn and so can a teenager. so that's not a great set-up for EVERY situation. i get that. but it is different now ursus.
- bill procida '07
Hey Bill... sorry, don't buy it. If the leopard changed its spots, you wouldn't still hear about fiascos like that sicko pedophile Dubinsky hanging around the place. I don't care whether his family is still involved in the school, he shouldn't be anywhere near there! Hyde does not do the right thing because they don't know how to do the right thing because their focus is NOT on what's best for the kids, but on what's best for the cause. To their minds, the so-called laudable ends more than justify what they deem but few resultant emotional carcasses along the way.
ps....when exactly did you graduate? were you part of the first class with paul hurd? or were you more towards malcolm's time? just trying to get a time frame...hope that doesnt' make you feel too old ;) lol
I'm going to refrain from answering this question, not because I feel "old," but because I don't even think it is you that is asking it. In fact, I don't really believe the above-quoted post is from "Billy Procida" at all. Nice try, Hyde... NOT!!!
::fu::
-
i'm not trying to invalidate what you've said, but it IS a lot different now in 2007 than it was in the late 60s and 70s. hyde has been figuring this out by trial and error and still are. because you're right: how do you teach character education? we're still in the process of figuring out the BEST way to do it. so back then, i can imagine them not having any sort of clue if you just have joey g-string getting into people one-on-one. he can be very stubborn and so can a teenager. so that's not a great set-up for EVERY situation. i get that. but it is different now ursus.
- bill procida '07
ps....when exactly did you graduate? were you part of the first class with paul hurd? or were you more towards malcolm's time? just trying to get a time frame...hope that doesnt' make you feel too old ;) lol
The school is 30 years old and they are still trying to figure it out by trial and error????
40 years. go figure.
-
i'm not trying to invalidate what you've said, but it IS a lot different now in 2007 than it was in the late 60s and 70s. hyde has been figuring this out by trial and error and still are. because you're right: how do you teach character education? we're still in the process of figuring out the BEST way to do it. so back then, i can imagine them not having any sort of clue if you just have joey g-string getting into people one-on-one. he can be very stubborn and so can a teenager. so that's not a great set-up for EVERY situation. i get that. but it is different now ursus.
- bill procida '07
Hey Bill... sorry, don't buy it. If the leopard changed its spots, you wouldn't still hear about fiascos like that sicko pedophile Dubinsky hanging around the place. I don't care whether his family is still involved in the school, he shouldn't be anywhere near there! Hyde does not do the right thing because they don't know how to do the right thing because their focus is NOT on what's best for the kids, but on what's best for the cause. To their minds, the so-called laudable ends more than justify what they deem but few resultant emotional carcasses along the way.
ps....when exactly did you graduate? were you part of the first class with paul hurd? or were you more towards malcolm's time? just trying to get a time frame...hope that doesnt' make you feel too old ;) lol
I'm going to refrain from answering this question, not because I feel "old," but because I don't even think it is you that is asking it. In fact, I don't really believe the above-quoted post is from "Billy Procida" at all. Nice try, Hyde... NOT!!!
::fu::
Pretend you are a student by making spelling mistakes and pretending you don't like Hyde or "Joey G." Gain the posters trust over a period of time, and finally once you hook the suckers, ask them questions that will help you find out who they are!
This my friends is a description of Mr Billy Procida! My guess is that he is a fraud and could even be Gauld himself!!
Emil Nitrate, I don't know what your story is. You change your tune as often as I change underwear! The cutsy names don't impress me. You like Hyde, you don't like Hyde. You agree with them, you don't agree with them. No offense meant, but please make up your mind.
-
i'm not trying to invalidate what you've said, but it IS a lot different now in 2007 than it was in the late 60s and 70s. hyde has been figuring this out by trial and error and still are. because you're right: how do you teach character education? we're still in the process of figuring out the BEST way to do it. so back then, i can imagine them not having any sort of clue if you just have joey g-string getting into people one-on-one. he can be very stubborn and so can a teenager. so that's not a great set-up for EVERY situation. i get that. but it is different now ursus.
- bill procida '07
Hey Bill... sorry, don't buy it. If the leopard changed its spots, you wouldn't still hear about fiascos like that sicko pedophile Dubinsky hanging around the place. I don't care whether his family is still involved in the school, he shouldn't be anywhere near there! Hyde does not do the right thing because they don't know how to do the right thing because their focus is NOT on what's best for the kids, but on what's best for the cause. To their minds, the so-called laudable ends more than justify what they deem but few resultant emotional carcasses along the way.
ps....when exactly did you graduate? were you part of the first class with paul hurd? or were you more towards malcolm's time? just trying to get a time frame...hope that doesnt' make you feel too old ;) lol
I'm going to refrain from answering this question, not because I feel "old," but because I don't even think it is you that is asking it. In fact, I don't really believe the above-quoted post is from "Billy Procida" at all. Nice try, Hyde... NOT!!!
::fu::
Pretend you are a student by making spelling mistakes and pretending you don't like Hyde or "Joey G." Gain the posters trust over a period of time, and finally once you hook the suckers, ask them questions that will help you find out who they are!
This my friends is a description of Mr Billy Procida! My guess is that he is a fraud and could even be Gauld himself!!
Emil Nitrate, I don't know what your story is. You change your tune as often as I change underwear! The cutsy names don't impress me. You like Hyde, you don't like Hyde. You agree with them, you don't agree with them. No offense meant, but please make up your mind.
Oh, great. Another Looney Tunes.
-
Oh, great. Another Looney Tunes.
Don't even go there, my friend, it's d&c on another front and you're falling right in line with them. For God's sake, join the Bricklayers Union if you want to be informed...
-
Emil Nitrate, I don't know what your story is. You change your tune as often as I change underwear! The cutsy names don't impress me. You like Hyde, you don't like Hyde. You agree with them, you don't agree with them. No offense meant, but please make up your mind.
My mind constantly changes, my opinions change. Said I like two people. IF you can like people you disagree with you don't belong in a Republic with democratic elements. Go to North Korea. My view of Hyde is pretty settled. It could change ... again. What are you doing? Picking sides for dodgeball?
As far a Identification I have said enough to identify myself to Hyde or any one else with a half decent memory of the time I was there. It doesn't really matter to me. My concern is that when people google my name they see press about my current life and not that I went to a bizarre school in Maine with a bunch of crazy kids.
Emil
-
s c h o o l ?
the kids were not so crazy...
-
s c h o o l ?
the kids were not so crazy...
crazy school with bizarre kids
-
Emil Nitrate, I don't know what your story is. You change your tune as often as I change underwear! The cutsy names don't impress me. You like Hyde, you don't like Hyde. You agree with them, you don't agree with them. No offense meant, but please make up your mind.
My mind constantly changes, my opinions change. Said I like two people. IF you can like people you disagree with you don't belong in a Republic with democratic elements. Go to North Korea. My view of Hyde is pretty settled. It could change ... again. What are you doing? Picking sides for dodgeball?
As far a Identification I have said enough to identify myself to Hyde or any one else with a half decent memory of the time I was there. It doesn't really matter to me. My concern is that when people google my name they see press about my current life and not that I went to a bizarre school in Maine with a bunch of crazy kids.
Emil
No problem calling yourself Emil. I completely understand this, but stick to Emil rather than signing other names to your posts.
Not picking sides for dodgeball. I know what Hyde is and I stand by the fact that it is a dangerous place that should only exist if there was a change of the guard/gauld. Hyde certainly should not house children.
-
Emil Nitrate, I don't know what your story is. You change your tune as often as I change underwear! The cutsy names don't impress me. You like Hyde, you don't like Hyde. You agree with them, you don't agree with them. No offense meant, but please make up your mind.
My mind constantly changes, my opinions change. Said I like two people. IF you can like people you disagree with you don't belong in a Republic with democratic elements. Go to North Korea. My view of Hyde is pretty settled. It could change ... again. What are 1)you doing? Picking sides for dodgeball?
As far a Identification I have said enough to identify myself to Hyde or any one else with a half decent memory of the time I was there. It doesn't really matter to me. My concern is that when people google my name they see press about my current life and not that I went to a bizarre school in Maine with a bunch of crazy kids.
Emil
No problem calling yourself Emil. I completely understand this, but stick to Emil rather than signing other names to your posts.
Not picking sides for dodgeball. I know what Hyde is and I stand by the fact that it is a dangerous place that should only exist if there was a change of the guard/gauld. Hyde certainly should not house children.
I think one of the most dangerous things at Hyde was Joe. Under certain conditions he could be very damaging. He had no compunction ripping a family apart to prove a point, or back handing people for random things like "lack of personality" or screeching at emotionally vulnerable children. I think Billy P stipulated to that point in a recent post. At this point he is mostly a titular figure.
With out some psychological professionals on staff they are playing with fire. They clearly have the funds for it. It is just dumb luck they have not had another incident like the summer of '75
Emil
-
With out some psychological professionals on staff they are playing with fire. They clearly have the funds for it. It is just dumb luck they have not had another incident like the summer of '75
Emil
Emil,
Or is it JoeSoulBro now? Things are getting bi-polar. Bear with me. The hiring of psychologists would create a conflict of interest between the staff psychologists and school. The school's methods would put them in an ethical bind.
Mike
-
Mike, Emil appears "not to be himself" anymore.
-
Mike, Emil appears "not be to himself" anymore.
It's Emil, alright. He's running out of puns.
Mike
-
The Absurdity of Evil
This novella is, above all, an exploration of hypocrisy, ambiguity, and moral confusion. It explodes the idea of the proverbial choice between the lesser of two evils. As the idealistic Marlow is forced to align himself with either the hypocritical and malicious colonial bureaucracy or the openly malevolent, rule-defying Kurtz, it becomes increasingly clear that to try to judge either alternative is an act of folly: how can moral standards or social values be relevant in judging evil? Is there such thing as insanity in a world that has already gone insane? The number of ridiculous situations Marlow witnesses act as reflections of the larger issue: at one station, for instance, he sees a man trying to carry water in a bucket with a large hole in it. At the Outer Station, he watches native laborers blast away at a hillside with no particular goal in mind. The absurd involves both insignificant silliness and life-or-death issues, often simultaneously. That the serious and the mundane are treated similarly suggests a profound moral confusion and a tremendous hypocrisy: it is terrifying that Kurtz’s homicidal megalomania and a leaky bucket provoke essentially the same reaction from Marlow.
-
Emil Nitrate, I don't know what your story is. You change your tune as often as I change underwear! The cutsy names don't impress me. You like Hyde, you don't like Hyde. You agree with them, you don't agree with them. No offense meant, but please make up your mind.
My mind constantly changes, my opinions change. Said I like two people. IF you can like people you disagree with you don't belong in a Republic with democratic elements. Go to North Korea. My view of Hyde is pretty settled. It could change ... again. What are 1)you doing? Picking sides for dodgeball?
As far a Identification I have said enough to identify myself to Hyde or any one else with a half decent memory of the time I was there. It doesn't really matter to me. My concern is that when people google my name they see press about my current life and not that I went to a bizarre school in Maine with a bunch of crazy kids.
Emil
No problem calling yourself Emil. I completely understand this, but stick to Emil rather than signing other names to your posts.
Not picking sides for dodgeball. I know what Hyde is and I stand by the fact that it is a dangerous place that should only exist if there was a change of the guard/gauld. Hyde certainly should not house children.
I think one of the most dangerous things at Hyde was Joe. Under certain conditions he could be very damaging. He had no compunction ripping a family apart to prove a point, or back handing people for random things like "lack of personality" or screeching at emotionally vulnerable children. I think Billy P stipulated to that point in a recent post. At this point he is mostly a titular figure.
With out some psychological professionals on staff they are playing with fire. They clearly have the funds for it. It is just dumb luck they have not had another incident like the summer of '75
Emil
Yes it does seem they have the funds for better teachers and professional counselors, but no ethical professional would work at Hyde. It would go against most everything they were taught and would probably be an ethics problem
Why do you think Hyde has not had another incident like summer of 75? Just because it is not public knowledge does not mean they haven't had more incidences. Hyde is great at settling many of these cases so they go away and no one will know about them
-
Mike, Emil appears "not be to himself" anymore.
It's Emil, alright. He's running out of puns.
Mike
I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together.
How am I not myself?
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/I_Heart_Huckabees (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/I_Heart_Huckabees)
Emil Nightrate
You want more pun?
AKA
Hugh Jardin
-
Emil Nitrate, I don't know what your story is. You change your tune as often as I change underwear! The cutsy names don't impress me. You like Hyde, you don't like Hyde. You agree with them, you don't agree with them. No offense meant, but please make up your mind.
My mind constantly changes, my opinions change. Said I like two people. IF you can like people you disagree with you don't belong in a Republic with democratic elements. Go to North Korea. My view of Hyde is pretty settled. It could change ... again. What are 1)you doing? Picking sides for dodgeball?
As far a Identification I have said enough to identify myself to Hyde or any one else with a half decent memory of the time I was there. It doesn't really matter to me. My concern is that when people google my name they see press about my current life and not that I went to a bizarre school in Maine with a bunch of crazy kids.
Emil
No problem calling yourself Emil. I completely understand this, but stick to Emil rather than signing other names to your posts.
Not picking sides for dodgeball. I know what Hyde is and I stand by the fact that it is a dangerous place that should only exist if there was a change of the guard/gauld. Hyde certainly should not house children.
I think one of the most dangerous things at Hyde was Joe. Under certain conditions he could be very damaging. He had no compunction ripping a family apart to prove a point, or back handing people for random things like "lack of personality" or screeching at emotionally vulnerable children. I think Billy P stipulated to that point in a recent post. At this point he is mostly a titular figure.
With out some psychological professionals on staff they are playing with fire. They clearly have the funds for it. It is just dumb luck they have not had another incident like the summer of '75
Emil
Yes it does seem they have the funds for better teachers and professional counselors, but no ethical professional would work at Hyde. It would go against most everything they were taught and would probably be an ethics problem
Why do you think Hyde has not had another incident like summer of 75? Just because it is not public knowledge does not mean they haven't had more incidences. Hyde is great at settling many of these cases so they go away and no one will know about them
Frankly I have been expecting something dramatic like a shooting to make the AP wire service.
Emil
-
no ethical professional would work at Hyde
They would not have to be ethical , just competent. Some at intake to screen for things that Hyde is not capable to handle. Gee would they have any students if they did that? ROFL
Emil
-
no ethical professional would work at Hyde
They would not have to be ethical , just competent. Some at intake to screen for things that Hyde is not capable to handle. Gee would they have any students if they did that? ROFL
Emil
If psychologists are under oath to report psychologically harmful practices by their employers, then it is not in Hyde's best interests to hire them.
Mike
-
no ethical professional would work at Hyde
They would not have to be ethical , just competent. Some at intake to screen for things that Hyde is not capable to handle. Gee would they have any students if they did that? ROFL
Emil
If psychologists are under oath to report psychologically harmful practices by their employers, then it is not in Hyde's best interests to hire them.
Mike
they could hire a guy like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Leary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Leary)
-
..or like this:
http://wwf.fornits.com/profile.php?mode ... file&u=970 (http://wwf.fornits.com/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=970)
-
..or like this:
http://wwf.fornits.com/profile.php?mode ... file&u=970 (http://wwf.fornits.com/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=970)
Very funny. I actually laughed out loud. Thank you.
Emil
-
Yes it does seem they have the funds for better teachers and professional counselors, but no ethical professional would work at Hyde. It would go against most everything they were taught and would probably be an ethics problem.
They would not have to be ethical , just competent. Some at intake to screen for things that Hyde is not capable to handle. Gee would they have any students if they did that? ROFL
If psychologists are under oath to report psychologically harmful practices by their employers, then it is not in Hyde's best interests to hire them.
Many fine, well-intentioned, decent faculty get attracted to the place by virtue of Hyde's stated goals. It is not until they have been there a while that they realize it is actually an LGAT for teens and their parents. That's also partly why, the parsimonious salary aside, the faculty tend to be young. The older ones are hipper to that fishy fishy smell.
Not all psychologists are ethical ones. Moreover, treatment of brainwashing and thought coercion victims is still sadly under-recognized in the mental health field. Hence, many will not see "the Hyde experience" for what it is until they've been there awhile, and have had opportunity to witness scenarios such as the one detailed in the Burnside piece on Mr. W. The real kicker on this issue, however, is probably one of salary expectations! Ha!
-
i'm not trying to invalidate what you've said, but it IS a lot different now in 2007 than it was in the late 60s and 70s. hyde has been figuring this out by trial and error and still are. because you're right: how do you teach character education? we're still in the process of figuring out the BEST way to do it. so back then, i can imagine them not having any sort of clue if you just have joey g-string getting into people one-on-one. he can be very stubborn and so can a teenager. so that's not a great set-up for EVERY situation. i get that. but it is different now ursus.
- bill procida '07
Hey Bill... sorry, don't buy it. If the leopard changed its spots, you wouldn't still hear about fiascos like that sicko pedophile Dubinsky hanging around the place. I don't care whether his family is still involved in the school, he shouldn't be anywhere near there! Hyde does not do the right thing because they don't know how to do the right thing because their focus is NOT on what's best for the kids, but on what's best for the cause. To their minds, the so-called laudable ends more than justify what they deem but few resultant emotional carcasses along the way.
ps....when exactly did you graduate? were you part of the first class with paul hurd? or were you more towards malcolm's time? just trying to get a time frame...hope that doesnt' make you feel too old ;) lol
I'm going to refrain from answering this question, not because I feel "old," but because I don't even think it is you that is asking it. In fact, I don't really believe the above-quoted post is from "Billy Procida" at all. Nice try, Hyde... NOT!!!
::fu::
Pretend you are a student by making spelling mistakes and pretending you don't like Hyde or "Joey G." Gain the posters trust over a period of time, and finally once you hook the suckers, ask them questions that will help you find out who they are!
This my friends is a description of Mr Billy Procida! My guess is that he is a fraud and could even be Gauld himself!!
Emil Nitrate, I don't know what your story is. You change your tune as often as I change underwear! The cutsy names don't impress me. You like Hyde, you don't like Hyde. You agree with them, you don't agree with them. No offense meant, but please make up your mind.
Emil, bet you didn't know the "guest" ragging on you here is your pal Ursus.
Watch out for him and watch out for the supportive follow up posts by "guests" like the above that are really from Ursus. They still smell like bear shit. Or should I say mole shit.
-
Yes it does seem they have the funds for better teachers and professional counselors, but no ethical professional would work at Hyde. It would go against most everything they were taught and would probably be an ethics problem.
They would not have to be ethical , just competent. Some at intake to screen for things that Hyde is not capable to handle. Gee would they have any students if they did that? ROFL
If psychologists are under oath to report psychologically harmful practices by their employers, then it is not in Hyde's best interests to hire them.
Many fine, well-intentioned, decent faculty get attracted to the place by virtue of Hyde's stated goals. It is not until they have been there a while that they realize it is actually an LGAT for teens and their parents. That's also partly why, the parsimonious salary aside, the faculty tend to be young. The older ones are hipper to that fishy fishy smell.
Not all psychologists are ethical ones. Moreover, treatment of brainwashing and thought coercion victims is still sadly under-recognized in the mental health field. Hence, many will not see "the Hyde experience" for what it is until they've been there awhile, and have had opportunity to witness scenarios such as the one detailed in the Burnside piece on Mr. W. The real kicker on this issue, however, is probably one of salary expectations! Ha!
I've seen a number of young faculty start out being rather earnest about Hyde but then, once they figure out how much pollution is there, head for the hills. Some speak up and some get out of town quietly, realizing that Hyde is not a healthy place.
Like you, I can't imagine a truly honorable, ethical therapist working at Hyde. It would be like offering to be a therapist for the Jim Jones cult or some other emotionally abusive outfit. Who could do that in good conscience? Oh excuse me, Hyde is supposed to be about conscience. I guess that would take care of that little problem.
-
Emil, bet you didn't know the "guest" ragging on you here is your pal Ursus.
Watch out for him and watch out for the supportive follow up posts by "guests" like the above that are really from Ursus. They still smell like bear shit. Or should I say mole shit.
Zounds!! There may well be some quotable material I can extract from there...
But... is that the best you can do?
Come on, fellas! Let me immortalize you in ways you nevah dreamed possible!!
::roflmao:: ::roflmao:: ::roflmao:: ::roflmao:: ::roflmao::
-
Emil Nitrate, I don't know what your story is. You change your tune as often as I change underwear! The cutsy names don't impress me. You like Hyde, you don't like Hyde. You agree with them, you don't agree with them. No offense meant, but please make up your mind.
My mind constantly changes, my opinions change. Said I like two people. IF you can like people you disagree with you don't belong in a Republic with democratic elements. Go to North Korea. My view of Hyde is pretty settled. It could change ... again. What are 1)you doing? Picking sides for dodgeball?
As far a Identification I have said enough to identify myself to Hyde or any one else with a half decent memory of the time I was there. It doesn't really matter to me. My concern is that when people google my name they see press about my current life and not that I went to a bizarre school in Maine with a bunch of crazy kids.
Emil
No problem calling yourself Emil. I completely understand this, but stick to Emil rather than signing other names to your posts.
Not picking sides for dodgeball. I know what Hyde is and I stand by the fact that it is a dangerous place that should only exist if there was a change of the guard/gauld. Hyde certainly should not house children.
I think one of the most dangerous things at Hyde was Joe. Under certain conditions he could be very damaging. He had no compunction ripping a family apart to prove a point, or back handing people for random things like "lack of personality" or screeching at emotionally vulnerable children. I think Billy P stipulated to that point in a recent post. At this point he is mostly a titular figure.
With out some psychological professionals on staff they are playing with fire. They clearly have the funds for it. It is just dumb luck they have not had another incident like the summer of '75
Emil
Yes it does seem they have the funds for better teachers and professional counselors, but no ethical professional would work at Hyde. It would go against most everything they were taught and would probably be an ethics problem
Why do you think Hyde has not had another incident like summer of 75? Just because it is not public knowledge does not mean they haven't had more incidences. Hyde is great at settling many of these cases so they go away and no one will know about them
Frankly I have been expecting something dramatic like a shooting to make the AP wire service.
Emil
Good guess. Wrong school.