
Alchemist's Corporate Ladder
Having moved away to a remote village in the Philippines after being “hit” by Dr. Hawkins’ discovery, I can give help to other students like me. If you feel overwhelmed by the fact that you cannot get through the level of reason and into the higher levels of love without breaking that “glass ceiling,” here is something to think about.
Groupthink is Everywhere
In fact, the phenomenon of ‘groupthink’ and the natural presence of individuals known as “mind guards” set up a virtual impossibility for those of us who wish to move through the level of reason and into the level of love. Dr. Tom Boone, PhD, and director of Exercise Physiology Laboratories at the College of St. Scholastica in Duluth, has written an excellent article about this phenomenon which can be found at this website. In it he explains how friends, groups, teams, and organizations are important in satisfying relationships but that the relationships are easily derailed when conflicts surface. For this reason, group adherence often takes priority over objectivity in dealing with new ideas and possibilities (Boone, 2005). In corporations, when you have a great new discovery but nobody wants to hear about it, its sometimes best to remain silent and hope you don’t get fired. In spiritual groups, you may be surprised to hear that its often just better to leave.
Case in point is the muscle testing method of Dr. David R. Hawkins. Very few people can use the method successfully and this sets up a need for a group mentality in order to preserve the essential ideas given in Dr. Hawkins books. The groupthink mentality soon becomes “I like what Hawkins is saying but I don’t know about his method.” As Boone says, “This kind of conformity is bad for any business or organization that looks to its leaders and/or members for change, creativity, and new ideas.” How is the group supposed to proceed in relation to new calibrations and new discoveries? Hawkins himself claims that his statements are all verifiable through the use of his muscle testing method and, apart from a few references about the Kundalini, this has been the lifeblood of his teaching. When nobody else has the backbone to stand up and use Hawkins’ method, the ideas begin to lose their strength and groupthink begins to replace the Truth.
Boone goes on to discuss how leaders make their decisions. saying “Ninety-nine percent of the time it is an act carried out for the benefit of all employees of a business or the members of an organization.” But what about that other 1%? if the muscle testing method tells us something we don’t want to hear or that we feel “uncomfortable” about, do we call in the mindguards and start setting up our protections? Do we pull the disenter into the fray before he starts saying more things we don’t like? This 1% case is one which Hawkins cites as occurring quite commonly around the levels of “460-540.” Here, the leaders may no longer have a desire to instruct subordinates who cannot use the method and individual members may not want to be part of a “fray” in the first place. A specific example that Hawkins uses is the office of the US President which almost always calibrates around 460. Higher calibrating people would never want to hold such a position and would likely turn it down before they had to put up with all the hatred and criticism (Hawkins lecture, 2003.)
Walkouts
Walkouts happen in both corporate settings and spiritual groups. Dr. David Hawkins talks about the case of a walkout once a person reaches a certain level in the group but no longer sees their payscale as being appropriate. If the leader were to “walk out,” as Hawkins indicates as likely, this could be interpreted as an act of irresponsibility (Hawkins, Eye of the I.) Those choosing to make the lower rungs of the ladder would typically work through the consequences of their condition and stay on. In this sense, they would appear noble and would go on to serve as what Janis referred to as “mindguards” until they reach a higher level (Janis, 1977.) Of course, this may also be a condition which is set up by the fact that they have nowhere else to go. They need to “pay the spiritual bills” and frustrations and envy can certainly become dangerous issues at these levels as well.
The amazing thing about difficulties in spiritual groups is that all of these problems are dealt with in one great tidal wave of energy known as ‘groupthink.’ In fact, the phenomenon of groupthink is so common in spiritual groups that very few people have even considered the simple comparison to the corporate ladder model and the idea of “spiritual currency.” In spiritual groups, we tow the line in order to stay on “at the company.” We don’t express out opinions too loudly because we don’t want to lose that spiritual paycheck that comes all the way down from the “head office.” In fact, the similarity in calibrations between Vice Presidents of corporations and ‘mindguards’ of spiritual groups is astounding. Both tend to calibrate in the 400′s and oftentimes down in the 300′s. They maintain their status through associations with other group members or even with the CEO (For an explanation on the levels of consciousness, read Dr. Hawkins Power vs. Force).
The model I hope to apply today is that members of various spiritual groups take their position in the group not much differently from the way an employee of a corporation takes a position. The only real difference is that the compensation comes in “spiritual currency” rather than actual gold. Alchemists may stand up and cheer now as I present Boone’s eight symptoms of groupthink which have been summarized here for easier reading. If you think you are becoming a victim of these, you might consider going out on your own. Give up that spiritual payroll you’ve been feeding on these past few years! Have you ever heard of a corporate gadfly?
Symptoms of Groupthink
1. Mindguarding. To maintain the status quo of the group, members enforce blind adherence by not allowing alternative views from being presented.
2. Stereotyping. In order to avoid upsetting the established solidarity (and/or comfort zone) of the organization, it is believed necessary to negatively stereotype anyone not a member of the established organization. Why? Because outsiders are believed to be a threat to the way in which they do their business.
3. Self-Censorship. Members of the organization who would like to speak out and share their feelings about the alternative views do not because they believe it is not the right thing to do.
4. Rationalization. Instead of getting some backbone, members rationalize their behavior and interaction with non-members.
5. Direct Pressure. Part of the reason members don’t speak out is the “pressure by other members to conform.” No one wants to be the “one dissenting voice” even if it’s the right thing to do.
6. Illusion of Unanimity. No one is likely to step forward…..out for fear of being laughed at or ridiculed.
7. Illusion of Morality. Again, as part of the feeling of group solidarity, the members believe it is okay to be mean and/or negative to others (or those who are perceived as a threat). They even believe their behavior is ethical and/or appropriate, when it is obvious that isn’t the case at all.
8. Illusion of Invulnerability. “We are the best.” “We were here first.” This kind of thinking is evident of problems within the leadership. Likewise, “The public knows we are credible.” These statements suggest an attitude of invincibility.
Avatars Can’t Prevent Groupthink
The group of Alcoholics Anonymous went through great pains in the early years when they wanted to set up a list of traditions to guide their behavior. Gatewood, Taylor, and Ferrell (1995) point out in their “Management textbook” that groupthink can be prevented by breaking the group into smaller subgroups to discuss issues. However, in the case of spiritual groups, where the attractor field of the “CEO” is so much higher than the employees, this breakup of groups becomes almost impossible to achieve. The members are literally pulled in by the powerful tractor beam of their leader and cannot find the strength to go out on their own. They also take heed of the ‘mindguards’ positionalities for lack of a better solution. Then, if the attractor field is extremely big, they eventually set up idols and worshiping practices for lack of a better solution.
Having the leader withhold his or her opinion about the issues within that group is also cited as an aide by Gatewood. Dr. David Hawkins’ can be congratulated for maintaining this approach in his own “unorganized group” as AA first suggested in their traditions “We ought never be organized but we can create service boards and committees…” (www.aa.org). With groupthink taken care of up through the early stages of love, this still leaves the difficulties up to the smaller group members. Gatewood then suggests bringing in “outside experts” to challenge the group’s thinking. A similar difficulty arises here in terms of how to determine who these outside “experts” really are and how disruptive they are allowed to be.
A case in point is that of Shawn Nevins, who appears to be a “spiritual expert” on his website spiritual teacher dot org. He is brought into a small group at Anlage Publishing but critical testing of his statements remains impossible for the group members. (See case in point in forums at Level of Consciousness dot com. In the forums there, a post was made to “Confirm Calibrations.” Over 60 people visited the post in the first few days but only one person responded to the problem. This person, considered a “moderator” by the group, readily admits that they cannot use the calibration method. They then go on to explain that they are “uncomfortable” with the issue being raised. “Keep quiet,” as Boone explains, is the common sentiment amongst group members. Thus, as Boone states; “…..when it comes to preventing organizational groupthink, the challenges are significantly more complicated.”
Corporate Gadflies
The main point being made in this article is that, if certain members have the strength to be disruptive while also remaining in the loop, there might be hope and the promise of greater spiritual payrolls down the line. Stand up and fight! Show some backbone! Boone goes on to explain that forces that push for change are the disruptive forces. “These forces unfreeze the attitudes and behaviors of the status quo.” Lucy Beal also discusses the issue of a “Frozen tier” at the bottom of a structure. She uses a wedding cake model to discuss the problems in marriage. The lower tiers support and gives cohesion to the rest of the cake but there is no moving beyond the fourth tier with adherence to this groupthink mentality. (Beal, Lucy, M.S., Marriage Under Construction, 2010).
Eventually, the individual must leave the group and it requires disruptive forces at the higher tiers to bring about a crisis. “Til death do we part” is the classic dictum in order to move up the ladder in marriage and this often seems the only solution when we are arguing with our spouse about something we have heard a hundred times already! When it comes time to move to the higher levels, a crisis must ensue and Jung’s individuation comes into play in greater and greater measure.
Returning to Boone’s discussion of the difficulties that exercise physiology has endured, housed within sports medicine, he cites his own disruptive force to be the founding of ASEP in 1997. Of course, he has higher hopes than I do for Dr. Hawkins’ groups. This is because the disruptive force of a group must be equal or at least close in power to the level of the groups leader. This is in order to have any lasting impact that could bring about renewed belief in muscle testing. We can all cause disruptions but who will really take us serious? Since no such person exists on the planet to compare with Dr. Hawkins, we are not likely to see a solution to this problem of ‘groupthink’ in the next several decades. Members will remain held within the tractor beam and disruptive forces will be thrown out or decide to “quit” almost immediately.
Boone explains that the new organization for which he is more hopeful, ASEP, has set exercise physiologists free from the restraining forces of sports medicine. Will Dr. Hawkins’s group members be set free from the mindguards that are already setting themselves up around his work? Other factors that have influenced the unfreezing of Boone’s groups include aspects of the professional infrastructure of the ASEP organization such as a code of ethics, certification, accreditation, standards, and so forth. What will be the factors of Dr. Hawkins’ groups for unfreezing the groupthink that is already starting there? What will be their traditions and their manner of following them?
Taking Leave of the Group
My first spiritual teacher, Richard Rose, wrote an excellent poem which expressed the difficulty of leading a spiritual group into the great beyond. It is entitled “I Will Take Leave of You” and is published in his book Carillon.
I will take leave of you
Not by distinct farewell
But vaguely
As one entering vagueness
For words, symbols of confusion
Would only increase confusion
But silence, seeming to be vagueness,
Shall be my cadence,
Which someday
You will understand.
I doubt that I will be around to see the solution to this problem. If Richard Rose and Dr. Hawkins couldn’t stop it, how could I? Good luck to those more courageous than me and God bless all interested in finding their own answers.
1. Boone, T. (2002). Exercise Physiology of the Future: Thinking Out of the Box. Professionalization of Exercise Physiologyonline. 5:11 [Online]. http://faculty.css.edu/tboone2/asep/ThinkingOutsideTheBoxExercisePhysiology.html
2. Boone, T. (2004). Show Some Backbone! Professionalization of Exercise Physiologyonline. 7:11 [Online]. http://faculty.css.edu/tboone2/asep/ShowSomeBackbone.html
3. Gatewood, R.D., Taylor, R.R., and Ferrell, O.C. (1995). Management: Comprehension, Analysis, and Application. Chicago, IL: Austen Press.