I'd Love To Hear What You Guys Have To Say About This

[ddilulo_06]

I've all but made up my mind that I want to go there in a few years... and I just found this website an hour ago. Looks like EXACTLY what I've been looking for in a school.

 

http://www.universityofsantamonica.edu/

 

Have any of you heard about this place before? Do you know of anyone who is going there now, or has graduated from there?

[Stigweard]

I have never heard of them before but it does look good doesn't it. Have booked marked it myself so thanks for the link. Let us know how it goes if you follow through on it.

 

Cheers,

[ddilulo_06]

I'm already making plans.

[Pietro]

I've all but made up my mind that I want to go there in a few years... and I just found this website an hour ago. Looks like EXACTLY what I've been looking for in a school.

 

http://www.universityofsantamonica.edu/

 

Have any of you heard about this place before? Do you know of anyone who is going there now, or has graduated from there?

 

I am sorry, but it doesn't convince me. It sounds like a course in newage-ism. If you want to follow it for yourself, by all means, do it. But I would not trust someone because she has graduated there, the way I would trust someone because she has graduated in a more traditional course (say psychology, or eastern-philosophy, or Buddhist anthropology).

 

I don't expect someone who comes out of there to know anything about psychology, about statistics (which in psychology, and in general in sciences where you are collecting massive amount of data to find out if something is real or not, is really important), about more in general science, nor to have a deep understanding about any spiritual school.

 

I would put this school at the level of christians selling genesis as an acceptable scientific theory.

 

In science there is a procedure which is called peer-review. This is to ensure quality of the results. Only results that have been peer reviewed eventually make it to text books. So students know they are getting quality. New age in general has no peer review. And the fact that they use the term "psychology", is misleading.

 

More than that,

there is a new age myth that al religions ultimately are the same.

Another that every population on the earth believed in God, and that every religion has to do with God. Anthropologically speaking this is false. Taoism is an example which for hundreds of years (at the very least), had no God or pantheon.

 

Yet, I am ready to bet a consistent amount of money that if you take three faculty members in this school, and ask them if all religions at their core are the same, at least two will tell you that "yes indeed they are".

 

I am sorry if I sound negative, but there is a hardship that people go through when they study at a master or doctoral degree (but also at a bachelor degree). This comes from tackling not easy problems, and getting at the bottom of them. The final piece of paper represent the fact that you actually did challenge those problems and went to the other side. It is just a visible sign of a change that must have happened.

 

I generally find people in newage to take interesting problems, take away any discipline and hardship, and keep the rest. I would be very worried that such a school might have similar standards.

 

Personally I think the phrase:

"Approved by the Bureau for Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education"

sais it all.

 

There are wonderful courses in Taoism, in Buddhism, in the study of mind.

Look at Upaya, for example, they would know where to study some serious buddhism.

Or, if you are interested in Taoism, look at Livia Kohn, and in general at the Mind and Life institute. Ask them where to study what you want to study. Those are all serious researchers, who went deep in their field, and are world wide recognised.

 

Good luck with your decision.

Pietro

[ddilulo_06]

I have quite a bit to say in response, but I don't have the time to get deep into this right now. You gave me a lot of leads though. I'll get back to this soon.

 

Thanks a lot Pietro... now I'm off to write a PSYCHOLOGY paper for college.

[h.uriahr]

Looks like they take your money and give you a mediocre degree.

There are way too many good schools in the area like UC Davis and Sac State.

[ddilulo_06]

It sounds like a course in newage-ism.

 

What's that? BTW, I took a religion test and it said my beliefs are in 99% accordance with "New Age" I don't even know what that means.

 

I don't expect someone who comes out of there to know anything about psychology, about statistics (which in psychology, and in general in sciences where you are collecting massive amount of data to find out if something is real or not, is really important), about more in general science, nor to have a deep understanding about any spiritual school.

 

They don't intend on teaching that stuff, so it would make sense you would expect that:

 

"The purpose of USM's education in Spiritual Psychology is for people to develop greater awareness of themselves as spiritual beings who have a body but are not their body, who have a mind but are not their mind, and who have emotions but are not their emotions."

 

I would put this school at the level of christians selling genesis as an acceptable scientific theory.

 

Wanna give me the cliff notes or a link please?

 

In science there is a procedure which is called peer-review. This is to ensure quality of the results. Only results that have been peer reviewed eventually make it to text books. So students know they are getting quality. New age in general has no peer review. And the fact that they use the term "psychology", is misleading.

 

Thanks for the heads up about the peer review thing. Before I ever slap down $20, you can be damn sure I'm going to make sure what I'll be learning is valid.

 

About the Psychology thing - did you see this page?:

 

http://www.universityofsantamonica.edu/What/index.html

 

What's so misleading about how they use the word Psychology? Makes sense to me.

 

More than that,

there is a new age myth that al religions ultimately are the same.

Another that every population on the earth believed in God, and that every religion has to do with God. Anthropologically speaking this is false. Taoism is an example which for hundreds of years (at the very least), had no God or pantheon.

 

Yet, I am ready to bet a consistent amount of money that if you take three faculty members in this school, and ask them if all religions at their core are the same, at least two will tell you that "yes indeed they are".

 

They make no mention about this and you're pulling this out, I'm guessing, because you're not a fan of "New Age"... whatever that is. I agree that religions aren't all the same. Are you talking about all religions ultimately pointing to the same truth... call it Tao, God, Spirit, Consciousness, Allness, Holy Spirit... whatever?

 

I am sorry if I sound negative, but there is a hardship that people go through when they study at a master or doctoral degree (but also at a bachelor degree). This comes from tackling not easy problems, and getting at the bottom of them. The final piece of paper represent the fact that you actually did challenge those problems and went to the other side. It is just a visible sign of a change that must have happened.

 

I generally find people in newage to take interesting problems, take away any discipline and hardship, and keep the rest. I would be very worried that such a school might have similar standards.

 

What makes you think it all airy-fairy-lets-hug-and-sing-all-day over there? I didn't get the impression that they are a diploma Mill, being that Neal Donald Walsh endorsed them:

 

http://www.universityofsantamonica.edu/Abo..._educators.html

 

Have you checked out a couple of these schools before? If I'm reading your message right, it sounds like you're cynical about the whole thing. The whole thing just rubs you the wrong way eh?

 

Personally I think the phrase:

"Approved by the Bureau for Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education"

sais it all.

 

Are vocational bureaus supposed to be sub-par or something? Gimme a break... I'm young. (20)

 

There are wonderful courses in Taoism, in Buddhism, in the study of mind.

Look at Upaya, for example, they would know where to study some serious buddhism.

Or, if you are interested in Taoism, look at Livia Kohn, and in general at the Mind and Life institute. Ask them where to study what you want to study. Those are all serious researchers, who went deep in their field, and are world wide recognised.

 

The Buddhism school's mission statement didn't jive with me.

 

Your saying the other two schools I can just ask about what they think about other spiritual schools? Why would they pump up their competition?

 

All the above said, I wonder what students learn over TWO YEARS. Most spiritual retreats are around 2 weeks at the most... how much is there really to learn? I'm gonna go hunt for their curriculum now...

 

Looks like they take your money and give you a mediocre degree.

There are way too many good schools in the area like UC Davis and Sac State.

 

I agree, there's a lot of good schools around, but what schools offer majors in methphysics/spirituality stuff? USM hits dead on what I'm fascinated about.

 

BTW... I came across this school through her:

 

http://www.holisticsinger.com/8.html

 

A friend of mine met her in person, and she told him about it. My friend said she had nothing but great things to say about the place.

 

EDIT: Found the 2-year spiritual psychology curriculum:

 

http://www.universityofsantamonica.edu/Pdf...M_Catalogue.pdf

 

Starts on page 24.

 

"The two-year Program, which consists of

55 quarter units of coursework, is conducted

in a supportive educational environment.

During both years, classes

meet one weekend a month for nine

months and for one week during the

summer quarter."

Edited November 9, 2008 by ddilulo_06

[Gerard]

[Seth Ananda]

I Loved doing Transpersonal Counselling at a School Like this.

Awesome, healing, and highly practical.

Most of the students were Psyche graduates already working in the field as psychologists and councilors and most were blown away at the effectiveness of the processes.

A number said it completely transformed their work Lives as they had always felt drained after listening to peoples problems all day, and after learning the Transpersonal perspectives found the work with each client Exhilarating.

Also many said that they had feared they were not really helping anyone much with anything deep until they came to a course like this and learned some of this usless new age stuff

 

I would like to know what the amazing truth 'is' that psychologists supposedly have after doing all that hard work?

 

To me, if a study of the human system doesn't Include an understanding of the Spiritual how can it Offer much of value? It makes it just more Mainstream indoctrination into meaningless scientific materialism. Just my point of view.

 

And I don't think it matters if the mainstream only considers it a pseudo-degree work wise, as this field is becoming more and more popular and you can do very well for yourself in this career.

 

Have fun if you go there ddilulo.

Seth Ananda

 

Just now seeing durkrhods price analysis I think you maybe able to find a much cheaper course offering similar stuff. I might add just doing Vippassna wont make you a good therapist

Edited November 9, 2008 by Seth Ananda

[ddilulo_06]

Which is offered by the Pali Canon for free and directly from the source: Gautama Buddha.

 

Here:

 

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/index.html

 

That website layout is an absolute nightmare. How the heck am I supposed to find anything? And there isn't any community to learn this stuff with and bounce ideas off of. That's a BIG part for me.

 

Please don't throw your hard earned money away.

Enrol in a TCM course of you want to make a career in this area. If you need further advice I would suggest you asking for help in this reputable page:

 

http://gancao.net/

Good luck.

 

I don't want to be an acupuncturist or an herbalist.

 

Thank you for you response.

 

I Loved doing Transpersonal Counselling at a School Like this.

Awesome, healing, and highly practical.

Most of the students were Psyche graduates already working in the field as psychologists and councilors and most were blown away at the effectiveness of the processes.

A number said it completely transformed their work Lives as they had always felt drained after listening to peoples problems all day, and after learning the Transpersonal perspectives found the work with each client Exhilarating.

Also many said that they had feared they were not really helping anyone much with anything deep until they came to a course like this and learned some of this usless new age stuff

 

I would like to know what the amazing truth 'is' that psychologists supposedly have after doing all that hard work?

 

To me, if a study of the human system doesn't Include an understanding of the Spiritual how can it Offer much of value? It makes it just more Mainstream indoctrination into meaningless scientific materialism. Just my point of view.

 

And I don't think it matters if the mainstream only considers it a pseudo-degree work wise, as this field is becoming more and more popular and you can do very well for yourself in this career.

 

Have fun if you go there ddilulo.

Seth Ananda

 

Thanks Seth.

 

What School was it?

Edited November 9, 2008 by ddilulo_06

[Seth Ananda]

That website layout is an absolute nightmare. How the heck am I supposed to find anything? And there isn't any community to learn this stuff with and bounce ideas off of. That's a BIG part for me.

I don't want to be an acupuncturist or an herbalist.

 

Thank you for you response.

Thanks Seth.

 

What School was it?

Phoenix Institute. Its well known all around the world (in transpersonal psych circles) for its courses and has a very good reputation for this sort of thing. Costs about 10 grand (AUD)

 

Seth Ananda

[ddilulo_06]

This One?

 

http://www.phoenixinstitute.com.au/

[Gerard]

I might add just doing Vippassna wont make you a good therapist

 

Vipassana is one of the foundations of Buddhist practice in the Theravada tradition but the underlying system of all Buddhist schools.

 

Well, let me disagree. For example:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robina_Courtin

 

 

She is a well-known counselor of prisoners on the death row.

 

 

 

 

That website layout is an absolute nightmare. How the heck am I supposed to find anything? And there isn't any community to learn this stuff with and bounce ideas off of. That's a BIG part for me.

 

 

Nightmare? Well, it contains most of the required sutras to understand Buddha's teachings. I don't understand. Are you after bells and whistles?

 

 

Community to learn this stuff? Try here:

 

http://www.buddhachat.org/forum/index.php

 

or here:

 

http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index.php

 

 

Good luck.

Edited November 10, 2008 by durkhrod chogori

[Seth Ananda]

I know one guy that has done over 30, 10 day vipassana retreats as well as a couple of the extended ones, 40 days I think, as well as served at many, and he is a terrible counselor.

 

Seth Ananda.

[Pietro]

Sounds like you asked what we thought about it, we answered, and you now cannot stand the answer. In any case you have raised some questions, I'll try to answer them by this evening. Stay tuned. Pietro

[ddilulo_06]

Nightmare? Well, it contains most of the required sutras to understand Buddha's teachings. I don't understand. Are you after bells and whistles?

Community to learn this stuff? Try here:

 

http://www.buddhachat.org/forum/index.php

 

or here:

 

http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index.php

Good luck.

 

I don't know what I'm looking for, so thanks for asking... it's dumb to be looking for something, but you don't know what it is!

 

When I came across that school, I know I wanted to do something in the field of metaphysics/spirituality in my life. That's the first metaphysics school I came across besides typical retreats. I jumped at this because here is something that marries 3 of my biggest interests: Knowing myself, Psychology, and finding out what my calling in life is... complete with a seemingly great group of people to help me out with the process.

 

Looking at traditional majors, psychology is kinda interesting on it's own, spirituality seems like it is vague in how to apply it to daily life. I know I'm still new to the scene, so maybe I just haven't come across the right stuff yet. But, having a community to support me in discovering my purpose, metaphysics, and psychology... that's what I want. Perhaps I'm just looking to narrowly and wanting to jump in the first one I came across?

 

After I get out of whatever program I do, I want to have strong interpersonal skills, I want to be at peace with myself, and I want a better understanding of the world so I am more apt to knowing what I want to do with my life.

 

Nightmare? Well, it contains most of the required sutras to understand Buddha's teachings. I don't understand. Are you after bells and whistles?

Community to learn this stuff? Try here:

 

http://www.buddhachat.org/forum/index.php

 

or here:

 

http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index.php

Good luck.

 

I looked at that website and saw a maze of quotes, conduct rules of "bhikkhus and bhikkhunis"... what are those?

 

The whole thing turns me off because I don't want to hack it alone... or online. I want to be around people learning this stuff. I talked to my history teacher last week @ college and she is going to hook me up with some sort of consciousness church. She said it's a bunch of people into the same kind of thing that I am. Maybe that's all I need???

 

About The TCM Course and making a career "in this area"... Are you just talking about the healing careers only? I feel I jumped to conclusion too soon last time. I don't want to be a healer. I don't know what I want to do with the deeper understanding I'm getting everyday of mySelf. According to USM, it doesn't matter what one does... the only thing that matters is one's way of being... what one is. Maybe I'm seeking to first let go of more karma, and then do something completely different than anything that would be under the umbrella of metaphysical professions - like maybe an enlightened racecar driver or something. That's still kinda up in the air for me, and USM said one of the biggest reasons students enroll at USM is to find their calling.

 

Sounds like you asked what we thought about it, we answered, and you now cannot stand the answer. In any case you have raised some questions, I'll try to answer them by this evening. Stay tuned. Pietro

 

You're right Pietro... sorry you guys. This has been one of my patterns. Looking back, it's almost like I want to debate this stuff with you guys... like I was picking a side and arguing so I could be right. Thanks for that.

[Pietro]

Hi ddilulo,

as promised I'll try to answer some of the question you raised.

Let start by saying that I agree that if you could clarify better what you would liek to achieve with this degree, it would be easier for us to help you. One thing is to say that we don't feel an institution is giving good education, in general, but suggesting someting else is a different ball game, and you need to tell us a bit more. You might need to do a bit of soul searching on this.

 

I also appreciate that you admitted that you were unable to take the critics. I know it take courage, so kudos on that!

 

Now let's get back to business

 

 

What's that? BTW, I took a religion test and it said my beliefs are in 99% accordance with "New Age" I don't even know what that means.

 

What is new age?

 

Hmm. Is a millenarian social movement of people that believe that in the near future some great changes are going to happen.

 

It is the culture developed by those people.

 

It is very criticised by many many religions, as being overly simplisitc. The general critic is that new age people tend to

a) assume that all religions are the same

assume that all religions are going in the same direction, to the same goal, and are in some ways equivalent.

 

And as such people tend to

pick and chose from many traditions, often taking the more cool stuff, and leaving aside parts that require real dedication, effort and discipline. As such their spirituality is seen as being superficial.

 

Imagine the difference between a taoist who has lived 30 years in a cave to explore the tao, and then leaves it, and a chi gung teacher who after having followed a week end workshop starts teaching, and you are on the right track. Imagine that the chi gung teacher also mixes material from other disciplines, and calls himself enlightened, and you have the new age archetypal teacher. Many of those people have done a lot of study, but due to their eclectic nature never went deep enough inside a single tradition to really make a real, recognisable from teachers of that traditions, breakthrough.

 

So yes, I am critic of the new age movement. I am not surprised that you came out as 99$ new age. But this is not bad. It just means that you have absorbed a lot of the pop spiritual culture that is around. This is where you start, not necessarily where you will go.

 

Wanna give me the cliff notes or a link please?

 

hmm, I am very perplexed from this request. You are asking for a link where I explain how christians are pretending that genesis should be taught in scientific class? If this is what you are asking please confirm it. It is so obvious, that I will need to find a good reference (it is like someone saying: will you give me a link that really a black man was elected president of the US? Some news are so big you do not have a single link) But you probably mean something else, so please could you clarify.

 

About the Psychology thing - did you see this page?:

 

http://www.universityofsantamonica.edu/What/index.html

 

What's so misleading about how they use the word Psychology? Makes sense to me.

 

Have you seen the talk I posted on the other thread? This one?

 

This is a psychological study that proved some real, counter intuitive research done in Harvard. To do this the researchers had to come out with an hypothesis, some tests, and take the statistical data, and find out if their hypothesis was right. This is an amazing scientific work on psychology. It will have ripple effects on the whole psychological community. A good master and phd education on any scientific subject, MUST teach you how to do a work at this level.

 

It is very different from the approach taken by a researcher who just takes a single case and makes a whole theory out of that. This kind of amatorial research is important, and has it's place. But the results are way less authoritative than the kind of research we are talking here. You want to be able to write papers, and read papers, and dialogue with the real academic community. In other words, as the father of a friend of mine who at the time was interested in new age (Castaneda), "yes, but this is sub-culture, not culture". My friend gave up his castaneda books, and instead went for the books of Castaneda professor in Anthropology: Erving Goffman. Now guess what, Goffmann books are a really hard read. I could not read them. My friend could, but he is now getting a degree in psychology! And if you are used to Castaneda, Goffman titles will ring a bell: "The presentation of self in everyday life;";"Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience;"; "Strategic Interaction".

 

Ok, so castaneda is sub culture, Goffmann is culture. New age is subculture. Buddhism, and Taoism, and acupuncture are culture. I simpathise with your hunger and research, but if you are going to pay with money and time to get an advanced education get the best!

 

They make no mention about this and you're pulling this out, I'm guessing, because you're not a fan of "New Age"... whatever that is. I agree that religions aren't all the same. Are you talking about all religions ultimately pointing to the same truth... call it Tao, God, Spirit, Consciousness, Allness, Holy Spirit... whatever?

 

Yes, exactly. This is not a fact, is an hypothesis, which has never been proven, has been suggested some time in the 19th century (I suppose), and has gained ground as a global myth. I heavily question a school that would not question this idea, and I strongly suspect this school would embrace this idea wholeheartedly.

 

What makes you think it all airy-fairy-lets-hug-and-sing-all-day over there? I didn't get the impression that they are a diploma Mill, being that Neal Donald Walsh endorsed them:

 

http://www.universityofsantamonica.edu/Abo..._educators.html

I don't think they are a diploma mill. I question the quality of their teaching, not that they will teach you something. Is not IF they teach you, is WHAT they teach.

 

Have you checked out a couple of these schools before? If I'm reading your message right, it sounds like you're cynical about the whole thing. The whole thing just rubs you the wrong way eh?

Are vocational bureaus supposed to be sub-par or something? Gimme a break... I'm young. (20)

The Buddhism school's mission statement didn't jive with me.

 

Your saying the other two schools I can just ask about what they think about other spiritual schools? Why would they pump up their competition?

 

No, I am saying you should ask them where you should study.

You should NOT mention this school. Especially before they gave you their answer.

 

They might tell you about a school which is related with them. This is ok. Just get the info, and cross it with other info. Those are serious academic institutions. You can trust them enough not to send you to some really bad place.

 

The Upaya site does give some sort of one year training to become a Buddist priest. And they have a course I think working with dying. The Abbot is an amazing woman who is miles ahead of any other woman, terms of maturity, I have ever seen. She WILL know where is the best place to study. And I am not suggesting that you study with her/them. Just that you ask them.

 

All the above said, I wonder what students learn over TWO YEARS. Most spiritual retreats are around 2 weeks at the most... how much is there really to learn? I'm gonna go hunt for their curriculum now...

 

I think durkhrod chogori answered to this better than I could.

 

In any case two weeks is a ridiculously short time to study anything. It only works because you are supposed to work hard at home, between a retreat and another. In a university they should look over your shoulder to make sure that everything progresses as it should. After the end you will have a piece of paper stating that you have gone through it. In spiritual retreats work because you are doing it for yourself, so sometimes it works great, often it doesn't. You see, I would have nothing against this training if it was not calling itself "master or phd level education".

 

Call it vocational study for the new age priesthood and you have done a better service.

But who would pay 83000$ for that??

 

I hope this answered all your questions.

And to all of those who have been offended by my stance on Castaneda, New Age, and similar.

Relax, life goes on.

[ddilulo_06]

if you could clarify better what you would liek to achieve with this degree, it would be easier for us to help you. One thing is to say that we don't feel an institution is giving good education, in general, but suggesting someting else is a different ball game, and you need to tell us a bit more. You might need to do a bit of soul searching on this.

 

In a nutshell, I want help with my path of enlightenment and I want help in finding out my life's work. I don't know if it's a simple decision, or somehow karmically, we stumble upon it when the time is right. Some people know @ 5 years old and some never know. There has got to be something to this... I hear it's locked away in the 5th (throat) chakra...

 

What is new age?

 

Hmm. Is a millenarian social movement of people that believe that in the near future some great changes are going to happen.

 

It is the culture developed by those people.

 

It is very criticised by many many religions, as being overly simplisitc. The general critic is that new age people tend to

a) assume that all religions are the same

assume that all religions are going in the same direction, to the same goal, and are in some ways equivalent.

 

And as such people tend to

pick and chose from many traditions, often taking the more cool stuff, and leaving aside parts that require real dedication, effort and discipline. As such their spirituality is seen as being superficial.

 

I know exactly what you mean... "light and love" is their mantra, but many of these people are about as deep as a puddle of water. I started to fall into this mentality, but then I started to see that it's just a pop-spirituality culture... kinda like the "cool spirituality people"

 

hmm, I am very perplexed from this request. You are asking for a link where I explain how christians are pretending that genesis should be taught in scientific class? If this is what you are asking please confirm it. It is so obvious, that I will need to find a good reference (it is like someone saying: will you give me a link that really a black man was elected president of the US? Some news are so big you do not have a single link) But you probably mean something else, so please could you clarify.

 

I don't know what Genesis is, but I just Googled it. I don't really care about Genesis - I'm just trying to understand what you meant. So the parallel you're making is that USM isn't scientific? Sorry about the vagueness.

 

Have you seen the talk I posted on the other thread? This one?

 

This is a psychological study that proved some real, counter intuitive research done in Harvard. To do this the researchers had to come out with an hypothesis, some tests, and take the statistical data, and find out if their hypothesis was right. This is an amazing scientific work on psychology. It will have ripple effects on the whole psychological community. A good master and phd education on any scientific subject, MUST teach you how to do a work at this level.

 

It is very different from the approach taken by a researcher who just takes a single case and makes a whole theory out of that. This kind of amatorial research is important, and has it's place. But the results are way less authoritative than the kind of research we are talking here. You want to be able to write papers, and read papers, and dialogue with the real academic community. In other words, as the father of a friend of mine who at the time was interested in new age (Castaneda), "yes, but this is sub-culture, not culture". My friend gave up his castaneda books, and instead went for the books of Castaneda professor in Anthropology: Erving Goffman. Now guess what, Goffmann books are a really hard read. I could not read them. My friend could, but he is now getting a degree in psychology! And if you are used to Castaneda, Goffman titles will ring a bell: "The presentation of self in everyday life;";"Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience;"; "Strategic Interaction".

 

So you're saying the psychology theyre teaching @ USM is based on the research where they pick out a few case studies and make a theory? I didn't see that. Are you saying their reading material isn't as difficult, so I won't be able to relate with the shrink community? I don't think I'm following you. What are you saying?

 

Ok, so castaneda is sub culture, Goffmann is culture. New age is subculture. Buddhism, and Taoism, and acupuncture are culture. I simpathise with your hunger and research, but if you are going to pay with money and time to get an advanced education get the best!

 

The "best" schools leave out the metaphysical component. I tell counselors about some of the metaphysics stuff, and then they point me to schools that let you make your own curriculum and get it approved. I am talking about UC and CSU Universities by the way.

 

Yes, exactly. This is not a fact, is an hypothesis, which has never been proven, has been suggested some time in the 19th century (I suppose), and has gained ground as a global myth. I heavily question a school that would not question this idea, and I strongly suspect this school would embrace this idea wholeheartedly.

I don't think they are a diploma mill. I question the quality of their teaching, not that they will teach you something. Is not IF they teach you, is WHAT they teach.

 

I'm not sure about that idea as I haven't studied religion in much depth, nor do I care to.

 

Thanks Pietro. I hope this one didn't sound like I'm in the debate club.

Edited November 10, 2008 by ddilulo_06

[Pietro]

In a nutshell, I want help with my path of enlightenment and I want help in finding out my life's work. I don't know if it's a simple decision, or somehow karmically, we stumble upon it when the time is right. Some people know @ 5 years old and some never know. There has got to be something to this... I hear it's locked away in the 5th (throat) chakra...

 

Yes, most people find out in their thirties what is that they really love.

I doubt that is something 'locked' in some place. I also doubt that there is something we are here to do. Just something that we really enjoy doing, something we feel a call and an excitment in doing, and something that we are really good in doing. (those three things are not usually the same, and this is where trouble starts, hehe)

 

Unfortunately a degree will not, in my experience, help you to find what you want to do. That is a personal spiritual quest that does not need to pay anyone any money. But they can put you in touch with stuff, and some of that resonates.

I don't know what Genesis is, but I just Googled it. I don't really care about Genesis - I'm just trying to understand what you meant. So the parallel you're making is that USM isn't scientific? Sorry about the vagueness.

 

Yes, Genesis, the first book of the bible. There are those people in the bible belt (a part of the US) that claim that since the theory of evolution is just a theory, than they have the right to explain a different theory along side of it in science class. So they call it intelligent design, and they ARE actually teaching it in classes in Texas. It's kind of scary. Mostly because while on the one side you have a 'scientific theory' which can be disproven, on the other you have a series of claims, coming out of a book, that cannot be disproven. So not a scietific theory. If you really want to have fun, google spaghetti monster, and read the home page of the Pastafarian. What I was saying is that like those people are taking a religious belief, and pretending it was a scientific theory, the people at this school give me the idea they will essentially do the same, and take a bunch of myths, and unproven facts, and call it spiritual psychology. I might be wrong. But I don't think I am.

 

So you're saying the psychology theyre teaching @ USM is based on the research where they pick out a few case studies and make a theory? I didn't see that. Are you saying their reading material isn't as difficult, so I won't be able to relate with the shrink community? I don't think I'm following you. What are you saying?

 

I am saying you will not be able to relate to any academic community. And that I doubt they will give you the tool to be able to write papers, do research, and read papers of the academic community. And then you will hit a glass wall. Where essentially if you want to go further you will need to go back and study in another university. But at that point it might be late, you might not have the money, and so on.

 

The "best" schools leave out the metaphysical component. I tell counselors about some of the metaphysics stuff, and then they point me to schools that let you make your own curriculum and get it approved. I am talking about UC and CSU Universities by the way.

I'm not sure about that idea as I haven't studied religion in much depth, nor do I care to.

 

Thanks Pietro. I hope this one didn't sound like I'm in the debate club.

 

Indeed they do. And with good reason.

 

The metaphisical component is taught inside religious teachings, which in general cost far far less.

 

What in the academia you can find are teachings about the metaphisical component, and teachings of the material side.

Like in Italy there was this professor (Corrado Pensa) he was professor of history of buddhism. He knew the buddhist sutra and the buddhist history inside out. He also was practicing Vipassana meditation. When he retired he became a teacher in meditation. What the academic community can give you are the foundation that make sure that whatever you learn in the spiritual community is placed in the right place.

 

So you dont just learn a technique, but learn where it is coming from, what variation there can be, what where its significance. Can you understand how this will make you reach a deeper understanding not just of buddhism (or taoism) but of yourself. As you stop taking techniques at face value, but relativise them, in an historical context.

 

Take this book:

Daoist Body Cultivation: Traditional Models And Contemporary Practices

by livia kohn. This is an academic research on contemporary taoist practices. Only someone with a good academic understanding of taoism could write it.

 

If you are going to get an advanced education you deserve this standard.

If you are interested in the metaphisical component, alone, you should pay much less, and go to a buddhist or taoist training.

 

Thanks Pietro. I hope this one didn't sound like I'm in the debate club.

No, not at all.

Thanks to you, at least for caring enough to explore deeply what I meant.

 

Now the decision is yours and yours only.

 

Pietro

[Mal]

[hyok]

You should look into what the past graduates are doing now.

• Have they found high-paying employment to justify the cost?
  
• What was the background of many graduates and do they feel they've learned something profound?
  

Try to find someone with a similar background as you and see what the pos/negs are, because I agree with some of the other posters -- it can very easily be a lot of money that could have been used towards far more productive things.

 

Most important is whether or not graduates can find employment to justify tuition. If anything near half of them went back to their old jobs, or if most are in social/psychiatric work and are supplementing it with these courses, I would gather it is a supplemental program for established counselors, not a program that has an employment base already.

 

But who knows. This could be the future. Find out who supports them and what academics thinks of them.

Edited November 11, 2008 by hyok