Just had to post this cuz I think it makes egg-cellent points - although I do
wish he would learn to use a spell checker:
On False Invincibility Claims
admin April 7, 2014 MUM Stories
The rumors are true, the claims are false — in my opinion. Maharishi University
of Management has a tricky angle on their promotion of invincibility. They’ve
taken the liberty of redefining the english language, giving rise to a subtle
psudo-language of subliminal suggestion.
This linguistic brinksmanship is, in part and parcel, the keystone of their
efforts to thwart common sense through manipulation of what they considder
‘scientific’ research.
Again, as a U.S. Navy veteran, it’s quite clear how Maharishi University of
Management(MUM) hides a “lie” between two truths when they cite the Journal of
Conflict Resolution 32: 776-812 from 1988 or the Journal of Social Behavior and
Personality 17(1): 285 – 338 from 2005 trying to impress upon the students this
notion of invincibility.
Like so many other dillusional claims made by the university, they seem to be
extorting a fluke — chance — occurance in reality. The punchline of my response
to the invincibility claim was as follows:
Let’s put it this way, I can remove a clock’s batteries and it will still
be right twice a day without a single electron’s flow.
Of course, any time I’d debunk these absurd defense theories the response was
that the university doesn’t ask us (the students) to believe the claims of
their studies. Rather, the aim is for us to understand that the study exists,
and to understand the logic behind the claim.
This is how they, Maharishi University of Management, seems to test the
gullibility of the students. If everyone goes for it, then great! But if
someone shines light on the fallacy, they ammend the lesson on-the-fly with a
flimsy disclaimer.
It’s like handing me a glass of orange juice and telling me it’s a mimosa; when
I discover the lack of champagne in it’s composition, the recourse is a
disclaimer “We didn’t intend for you to believe it’s a mimosa, we just want you
to understand that it’s what academic study suggests a mimosa to be.”
This phenominon is commonly referenced by a word that most four(4) year olds
are familiar with — A “LIE.”
Another angle on this Invincibility theory lies in the construct of circular
reasoning. The suggestion is that: if everyone on the earth is peaceful, then
it will essentially eliminate all war. But yet again, this standpoint is also
equally as flubbed; if everyone is in fact peaceful, then the concept of war
ceases to exist, eliminating the possibility that the peacefulness is
inherently invincible; invincibility requires opposition for which the force of
invincibility can repel. Merriam Websters defines the term invincible as:
: incapable of being conquered, overcome, or subdued ex. a seemingly
invincible army
For obvious reasons, these concepts — and other similarly fictitious concepts —
are presented to students in the first class which is a prerequisite to all
other courses at MUM. Perhaps a procedural method of identifying students who
lack the necessary naivety required for the success of their tactical mind
screw; exploitation; if you don’t speak up, they will let you believe it.
