Guest guest Posted January 12, 2004 Report Share Posted January 12, 2004 Nate Mosher Said: " Well said, Keats...well said. This is why it's hard to debate issues of 's teachings with the hard-core followers, because they immediately get angry and parrot 's teachings. Let's hope more people learn to think for themselves for a change. " There is a clinical relationship between intelligence quotient and your in-built ability to question your own beliefs and those of your peers (sorry I can't remember the author(s) ). Those that blindly follow any teacher, be it siff, chek, nasm, tai chi or christianity without validating the claims with their own research/logical intuition or faith are not to blame, it is simply beyond their current capability. There will always be those that make the mistakes we all have made in the past, I just wish I could have been more tolerant of those people (see old supertraining messages ). We all have to learn some times. And remember, in 20 years time, we will be laughing at how ignorant we were. Just because those who question a teaching can do so almost inherently, doesn't mean that everyone else can. Regards, Joe Cole Dunedin, New Zealand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2004 Report Share Posted January 12, 2004 Nate Mosher Said: " Well said, Keats...well said. This is why it's hard to debate issues of 's teachings with the hard-core followers, because they immediately get angry and parrot 's teachings. Let's hope more people learn to think for themselves for a change. " There is a clinical relationship between intelligence quotient and your in-built ability to question your own beliefs and those of your peers (sorry I can't remember the author(s) ). Those that blindly follow any teacher, be it siff, chek, nasm, tai chi or christianity without validating the claims with their own research/logical intuition or faith are not to blame, it is simply beyond their current capability. There will always be those that make the mistakes we all have made in the past, I just wish I could have been more tolerant of those people (see old supertraining messages ). We all have to learn some times. And remember, in 20 years time, we will be laughing at how ignorant we were. Just because those who question a teaching can do so almost inherently, doesn't mean that everyone else can. Regards, Joe Cole Dunedin, New Zealand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2004 Report Share Posted January 21, 2004 Joe Cole says, " Those that blindly follow any teacher, be it siff, chek, nasm, tai chi or christianity without validating the claims with their own research/logical intuition or faith are not to blame, it is simply beyond their current capability. " Joe, I agree entirely. An interesting if not revolutionary way of understanding the popularity and endurance of bad ideas lies within the science of " memetics. " I'd recommend you look at a recent discussion of this in regard to physical therapy at http://www.rehabedge.com/forums/Forum15/HTML/000077.html Click on " Memes and Therapy Practice. " The bottom line in this; our ideas gain a foothold in the brains of others only if they compete successfully for the limited space available. In order to do so they must have sufficiently attractive " hooks " valued by the culture. These hooks typically include emotion, simplicity and drama and have nothing whatsoever to do with reasonableness, truth or usefulness. Sound like some remarkably enduring but senseless practices in training to you? Barrett L. Dorko, P.T. <http://barrettdorko.com> And <http://rehabedge.com> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2004 Report Share Posted January 21, 2004 Joe Cole says, " Those that blindly follow any teacher, be it siff, chek, nasm, tai chi or christianity without validating the claims with their own research/logical intuition or faith are not to blame, it is simply beyond their current capability. " Joe, I agree entirely. An interesting if not revolutionary way of understanding the popularity and endurance of bad ideas lies within the science of " memetics. " I'd recommend you look at a recent discussion of this in regard to physical therapy at http://www.rehabedge.com/forums/Forum15/HTML/000077.html Click on " Memes and Therapy Practice. " The bottom line in this; our ideas gain a foothold in the brains of others only if they compete successfully for the limited space available. In order to do so they must have sufficiently attractive " hooks " valued by the culture. These hooks typically include emotion, simplicity and drama and have nothing whatsoever to do with reasonableness, truth or usefulness. Sound like some remarkably enduring but senseless practices in training to you? Barrett L. Dorko, P.T. <http://barrettdorko.com> And <http://rehabedge.com> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.