General Interest > Feed Your Head
What Are You Looking At?
Xelebes:
And all that was lifted from Synanon. Synanon was considered the experiment but it more importantly ran as a program and was allowed to become a profitable enterprise. The Seed and Straight are profitable enterprises - they didn't need the experiments. They already had the experiments done for them.
I never conflated Buchmanism with Attachment therapy. I said that the Seed and Straight are charlatanry, just like attachment therapy - not that they are attachment therapy.
ajax13:
Synanon was considered "the experiment" by whom? As I stated earlier, and you ignored earlier, the Seed was determined to be experimental in a government investigation. The money made available to Art Barker from the Federal Law Enforcement slush fund and NIDA was intended to fund experimentation. I find your claim that the experiments "were already done for them" to be baffling. Modifications to psychological theory appear consistently to this day. Do you suppose that the people who saw Ewen Cameron's experiments go to shit were satisfied and just packed it in when Psychic Driving failed to produce the intended results?
The Seed and Straight were the experiments, being conducted on another party's behalf. Whether or not you feel that the experiments had scientific validity is not really relevant. The techniques used in the Seed, Straight, Kids, AARC and the other clones were derived from those used in Synanon but were not identical. There are elements common to Synanon and the Seed line of institutions, and there are also differences. So "nothing different" means that something is not the same, but is rather "just like" something?
Xelebes:
There is only tenuous evidence that it truly was experimentation. Senator Ervin stipulated that The Seed prove itself to be experimental and issue the forms. The Seed didn't do this and so folded. Now, we could say that it was experimental before it was demanded to be shown to be experimental, but I think that misses the point of the stipulation in the first place. There are two possible states before that: Art Baker was winging an experiment and gathering some data but not enough data to satisfy the experiment stipulations or Art Baker was winging a private enterprise and gathering no data. I find it odd that Ervin felt himself compelled to stipulate it.
Xelebes:
Also, with regards to differences and shifts. Things change, especially when you have new influences. They develop dialects. Especially when we have these things started up by amateurs and participants, it's going to lead to cut corners and some unexpected shifts. The Seed is two steps away from Synanon. AARC is three steps away from The Seed (Straight ? KHK ? AARC.) There is going to be a substantial difference between each one of them. That difference does not to automatically suggest that they were experiments.
ajax13:
--- Quote from: "Xelebes" ---There is only tenuous evidence that it truly was experimentation. Senator Ervin stipulated that The Seed prove itself to be experimental and issue the forms. The Seed didn't do this and so folded. Now, we could say that it was experimental before it was demanded to be shown to be experimental, but I think that misses the point of the stipulation in the first place. There are two possible states before that: Art Baker was winging an experiment and gathering some data but not enough data to satisfy the experiment stipulations or Art Baker was winging a private enterprise and gathering no data. I find it odd that Ervin felt himself compelled to stipulate it.
--- End quote ---
You are very much misinformed, and yet you seem compelled to present yourself as someone with a unique understanding of this phenomenon, or newly discovered information. There is no evidence the Senator Ervin demanded forms to prove that the Seed was experimental. Consent forms were demanded because it had been deemed experimental. The Seed did not fold. AARC did not come from KHK, it is a renamed Kids program, a completely separate stream from KHK. As such, it is only two degrees removed from Straight.
Do you suppose that after thirty years of B-mod research, the US intelligence-backed research just stopped at a time when US society was torn by the unrest of the late sixties? That is rather counterintuitive. So again, what is this evidence that the Thought Reform research stopped in the mid-sixties?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version