“Rational Inquiry” , which is Keith Raniere’s patent-denied “technology” that is the basis for all the modules that are taught at Executive Success Program’s (ESP) training courses, teaches its adherents to get ALL the “data” before they make any decisions.
Frank Report is “data” – especially about Raniere and his various multi-level marketing schemes and the perversions he foists upon his followers. So, the presumption should be that members of ESP should read Frank Report before they make any decisions about their continuing involvement with Raniere or ESP. Notwithstanding that fairly straightforward logic, it is reported that the ESP community has been told NOT to read Frank Report.
How are we to resolve this apparent contradiction?
It is reported that the ESP community has been told to ignore Frank Report because “it is all lies.” But before making your decision about reading Frank Report or not, shouldn’t you, as an ESPian, get the “data” behind the assertion that “it is all lies”?
Ask Vanguard and Prefect, what is the EVIDENCE that Frank Report is “all lies?” Don’t just accept the assertion, get the DATA.
And even if my posts are presumptively invalid, ask Vanguard and Prefect why the comments from readers, who are often current or past members of the ESP community, should not be considered as valid “data.”
It is also reported that the ESP community has been told that reading Frank Report will interfere with their progress toward “integration.” But before making your decision about reading Frank Report or not, shouldn’t you get the “data” behind the assertion that “it will interfere with your integration”?
Ask Vanguard and Prefect, what is the MECHANISM that causes reading Frank Report to interfere with “integration.” One would expect that the more advanced an ESP student is, the more resilient they would be to external disturbances. Yhus, an advanced student would not need to be told NOT to read Frank Report because they would be able to appropriately evaluate the “data” in it as true or false.
If the answer is that somehow the more advanced a student is, the more fragile they are, that implies that ESP weakens students, rather than strengthening them. Ask Vanguard and Prefect why you should spend so much time and money on a program that is weakening you so much that you can’t even read a blog without becoming disintegrated.
A genuine scientific or philosophical enterprise does not fear criticism because it has a firm intellectual foundation. Those who learn the principles properly can recognize the invalidity of the criticisms, and don’t need to be told to ignore them.
Being told to ignore all “data” from certain sources is a sign of weakness of a scientific or philosophical enterprise, not strength. And being told to ignore valid criticism of your belief system is another way of saying that your belief system is weak and indefensible.
Given that Vanguard is weak and indefensible, why should we expect anything more from “Rational Inquiry”?
“Rational Inquiry”. Neither rational, nor inquiring.
