It’s been helpful for me to think of three signs of a cult:
1. Transformational experiences that can only be gotten through The Way.
2. Leader has Ring of Power that gives access to The Way.
3. Clear In-Group vs. Out-Group dynamics to achieve The Way.
Leverage 1.0 seems to have all three:
1. Transformational experiences through charting and bodywork.
2. Geoff as Powerful Theorist.
3. In-group with Leverage as “only powerful group”.
Given this, I’m most curious about what Geoff has done to reflect/improve and what the ~rationalist community would want to see from him in order to “trust” him again.
Fwiw, I know very little about Leverage. I’ve never met Geoff but I have heard a few negative stories about emotional ~trauma from some folks there.
Just because an organization provides transformational experiences doesn’t necessarily mean that there’s a belief that only the techniques of the organization can provide those experiences.
If you for example ask the Dalei Lama about Christianity, the Dalei Lama will grant that it provides transformational experiences for some people and might be good for some people. That’s very different then Scientology which claims that everything that Hubert didn’t develop doesn’t really provide transformational change.
The narrative within the group was that they were the only organization with a plan that could possibly work, and the only real shot at saving the world; that there could be no possibility of success at one’s goal of saving the world outside the organization.
Many in the group felt that Geoff was among the best and most powerful “theorists” in the world. Geoff’s power and prowess as leader was a central theme.
In high-level Scientology saving the world means auditing a lot of thetans in your body so that all Thetans can be free. Generally, there’s a belief that saving the world can only achieved via Scientologies method because it’s inherently about doing auditing on a lot of people.
Leverage on the other hand does not advocate that everyone has to do Leverage techniques to be saved and I expect that I would find the outcome that Geoff wants to bring about a desirable outcome.
The is a huge difference between claiming that someone is the best and someone is the only person who understands how things work and thus everything else is foreign tech that is to be shunned. If you say someone is among the best, that acknowledges that there are other people worth learning from.
The strategy of Leverage involved doing things like holding EA Global which is about Leverage having part of it’s impact through helping other organizations. There’s no “you are either with us or against us”-vibe but willingness to help without needing to buy all the beliefs of Geoff but willingness to interact freely with other organizations.
It’s been helpful for me to think of three signs of a cult:
1. Transformational experiences that can only be gotten through The Way.
2. Leader has Ring of Power that gives access to The Way.
3. Clear In-Group vs. Out-Group dynamics to achieve The Way.
Leverage 1.0 seems to have all three:
1. Transformational experiences through charting and bodywork.
2. Geoff as Powerful Theorist.
3. In-group with Leverage as “only powerful group”.
Given this, I’m most curious about what Geoff has done to reflect/improve and what the ~rationalist community would want to see from him in order to “trust” him again.
Fwiw, I know very little about Leverage. I’ve never met Geoff but I have heard a few negative stories about emotional ~trauma from some folks there.
Cult Checklist taken from here: https://rebelwisdom.co.uk/18-film-content/general/605-how-to-spot-a-cult-jamie-wheal
Just because an organization provides transformational experiences doesn’t necessarily mean that there’s a belief that only the techniques of the organization can provide those experiences.
If you for example ask the Dalei Lama about Christianity, the Dalei Lama will grant that it provides transformational experiences for some people and might be good for some people. That’s very different then Scientology which claims that everything that Hubert didn’t develop doesn’t really provide transformational change.
Is this also very different from Scientology?
In high-level Scientology saving the world means auditing a lot of thetans in your body so that all Thetans can be free. Generally, there’s a belief that saving the world can only achieved via Scientologies method because it’s inherently about doing auditing on a lot of people.
Leverage on the other hand does not advocate that everyone has to do Leverage techniques to be saved and I expect that I would find the outcome that Geoff wants to bring about a desirable outcome.
The is a huge difference between claiming that someone is the best and someone is the only person who understands how things work and thus everything else is foreign tech that is to be shunned. If you say someone is among the best, that acknowledges that there are other people worth learning from.
The strategy of Leverage involved doing things like holding EA Global which is about Leverage having part of it’s impact through helping other organizations. There’s no “you are either with us or against us”-vibe but willingness to help without needing to buy all the beliefs of Geoff but willingness to interact freely with other organizations.