The 7 Life Energies

[BHelmet]

There is an obsession with categorization schemes in this modern world. I think it’s a zero sum equation: for every approximate generalization made, there is a loss of particular individual detail.

But I have to chuckle. Back in the day, “Dynamic Aggressive” was simply “A-hole.”

 

[Amor]

I was in the behaviour models my self, zodiac signs, personality colours etc. In my experience the practicing or getting too deep into behaviour models can easily become manipulitive or the person can be perceived as weird. What I noticed those type of systems usually abuses the brains pattern recognition ability because the person may begin to look for something in the other person, or to fit the other person in to the frame and look for the qualities of the system, or project his own traits without even realizing, so he could make the system workin his own mind. It reminds me a little bit of gypsy scamming people, by talking about general things like relationships, health, finance etc which is hard to disagree with because every person is involved in those areas to certain degree. The same with those systems. Ofcourse it depends what it is based on. Most people are adaptive to certain degree depending on their life phase and the people they are dealing with. I think everyone has a little bit of everything, and that which dominant trait at the time may change depending on the awareness when it comes to normal people. There can be period in people lives where they are damaged and someone can classify them as "green" personality type. After some time the person can get up, become more assertive with some form of self respect. Now the same person can be labeled "yellow". I may be missing something but I know for sure, in the end, we will know them by their fruits.

 

[Jones]

The purpose would not have been to call into question the Life Energy model

You don't seem open to the model being questioned so far.

I love this model because it has become an integral part of me. It's almost like an additional "sensing organ", like sight or taste. The way I see humanity, and how I interacted with people has changed a great deal since I encountered this knowledge more than 2 decades ago.

Another entry to check in the Cass Wiki is 'Sacred Cow' and see how you feel about the model being questioned or flaws being found and pointed out.

I have never really studied classical psychology, as my interest in human nature began with Gary's Natural Life Energy model. I do not know what a cognitive model is, nor have I ever heard of the Big 5.

Models and theories are useful to the degree that they teach something objective that we didn't know and we learn to see things that we didn't before. They can be limiting because they are also quite often incomplete (there is the known, the unknown and the unknowable) and if studied long enough can form limiting neural pathways so characteristics that aren't there are projected onto a subject - if the only tool you have is a hammer everything starts to look like a nail. It would probably be a good idea for you to read some of the recommended psychology books and follow the discussion topics on them if you are interested in human nature.

Dynamic Assertives, of which I am one, are highly opinionated and often self-righteous.

If this is true for you, you may find those characteristics problematic here. Check out this thread on opinions.

 

[Michael B-C]

Neither my views nor the views of Gary Null on the consumption of meat have any relevance to this discussion and only create unnecessary noise.

NOISE

Noise as used by the FotCM refers to any information which is irrelevant to a discussion, does not
contribute meaningfully; detracts from the topic and/or confuses the issue.

Noise can be thrown into a discussion in numerous ways such as derailing the main topic by
introducing side issues or counter arguments that cloud rather than clarify; keeping the discussion
at a superficial level using only black or white contrasts - refusing to see the gray areas.

See also

• Signal-to-noise ratio

The subject of Gary Null and his views is indeed central to this subject Tindaro as you yourself have stated that Mr Null's 7 Energies program came to him in an epiphany/moment and from that moment all else follows. He also is very happy to confirm this in his presentations on the matter. So the issue of Mr Null's credibility should be of great interest. You see, members of this forum have good reason to be very wary of those like Mr Null who claim to have had a single blinding light of illumination and then go on to build upon this to for example end up with a $9.5 million dollar mansion they look to sell, presumably for a nice tidy profit in 2021.



That's not a matter of jealously or bias against success but we have a long experience of watch New Age grifters and snake oil salesmen take advantage of the vulnerable and the injudicious as part of what I mentioned before, a form of COINTELPRO designed to gate-keep and siphon off from the gullible and the needy. Please note I am not saying this is who Mr Null is - just that there are certain hallmarks of his life that raise my suspicions.

I have now watched the entire video link you gave us. In terms of your comment regarding my making noise by daring to suggest that his views on meat consumption were somehow relevant, we here tend to regard the inherent views and promoted beliefs as being essential guides to the nature and veracity of the character we are dealing with as well as to their ability to provide evidence based work that stands up to critical scrutiny. So many members here will not find it noise that Mr Null is also a vegan/vegetarian (I have found it difficult to be exact on this but I lean towards the first as being his life preference) and is also happy to promote anti smoking propaganda. For example in the video link you provide he also states:

4:09
the cigarette companies knew the consequences for 100 Years of emphysema and bronchitis COPD and lung cancer heart attacks and strokes you would have for smoking.

Many members of this forum would regard this as a serious factual error - in that there is no proven cause and effect that smoking tobacco specifically produces these illnesses - and therefore is everything but noise. It is what he claims. I am merely questioning this with regard to his capacity for overall reliability.

As you no doubt know Mr Null is a figure of significant controversy and his Wikipedia page goes full out to claim he is a proponent of pseudoscience and conspiracy theories. Normally such an assault would be seen here as a possible sign that he is on the right path - and indeed if you search for Gary Null on this forum as well as our news page SOTT you will see that his articles and documentaries on health have indeed been previously promoted.

However for me there is one significant red flag, namely his claims concerning the quality of his educational background and most importantly his claims surrounding his PHD status which he uses to underpin many elements of his business.

A Critical Look at Gary Null’s Activities and Credentials

Stephen Barrett, M.D.
May 10, 2019

Curious Credentials​

Null says he holds an associate degree in business administration from Mountain State College in West Virginia, a bachelor’s degree from Thomas A. Edison State College in New Jersey, and a PhD in human nutrition and public health sciences from The Union Institute in Cincinnati, Ohio. Two papers he co-authored during the early 1980s identified him as Gary Null, M.S,” but I have seen no information about the source of that credential.

Edison State (renamed Thomas Edison State University in 2015) is a nontraditional school that now operates primarily through the Internet. It is accredited, but at the time Null “attended,” it awarded bachelor’s degrees based on career experience, equivalency exams, and courses taken at other schools. In the late 1980s, a prominent college guidebook described it this way:

Thomas A. Edison State College, established in 1972, administers an external degree program that enables qualified students to earn or work toward a college degree without attending college in the usual way. There is no resident faculty, no campus, no classrooms, and no library. Administrative officers in Trenton evaluate college-level learning achieved through work or life experiences, self-study, college courses taken previously, industry-sponsored education programs, military instruction, etc. The college administers its own examinations in the liberal arts and sciences, business, and radiologic technology under the Thomas Edison College Examination Program [7].​

The Union Institute (now called the Union Institute and University) is also accredited, but during Null’s exposure, its degree requirements and standards for health-related doctoral degrees differed greatly from those of most traditional universities. Students designed their own program, formed and chaired their own doctoral committee, and were required to attend only an introductory colloquium and a few interdisciplinary seminars. Null’s thesis, entitled “A Study of Psychological and Physiological Effects of Caffeine on Human Health,” was approved in August 1989. The approval document states that his PhD committee was composed of a “core faculty member,” three “adjunct professors,” two “peers,” and a “second core reader.” The “core faculty member,” Peter Fenner, was a well-credentialed academician whose expertise (in geologic sciences) was not related to Null’s topic. One of the three “adjunct professors” was Martin Feldman, MD, a “complementary” physician (and “clinical ecologist”) who has pinch-hit for Null as a radio host, and helped develop some of Null’s books and supplement formulations. The other two were Philip J. Hodes and Elayne Kahn. When I asked a school official about their background or location, he replied that information was in storage and was too difficult to obtain. In 2005, I located mention of “Dr. Philip Jay Hodes, Ph.D, Ed.D., Practitioner Holistic, Health Detoxification & Orthomolecular Nutritionist, Consultant” on a Web site that sold “natural tropical herbal medicines.” [8] I also discovered that Elayne Kahn, who died in 2013, was a psychologist in New York City who coauthored a book with Null that was published in 1976 [9].

Traditional universities require that research for a doctoral degree in a scientific discipline make a genuine contribution to the scientific literature. Null’s thesis made no such contribution. The stated purpose of his project was to evaluate (a) caffeine’s effects on “adrenal function determined by a medical examination,” (b) “its perceived psychological effects as recorded in a questionnaire and daily diary, and (c) “the anabolic effect of caffeine according to a theory proposed by Dr. E. Revici.” (Emanuel Revici, MD, was a physician in New York City whose methods were disparaged by the American Cancer Society. State licensing authorities placed Revici on probation in 1988 and revoked his license in 1993 after concluding that he had violated the terms of his probation.)

The first part of Null’s thesis summarized information about caffeine published mainly in scientific journals. The data for the report of his study were obtained by observing two groups of volunteers. One group contained eleven chronic caffeine users who stopped their caffeine intake for a week and then took caffeinated tea for a week. The other group contained six nonusers who drank caffeinated tea for one week and then drank decaffeinated tea. The total number of participants is unclear. Null’s thesis states that six others who began in the first group and five others who began in the second group dropped out of the study because they were uncomfortable. It also states that “at least thirteen” other users were disqualified for noncompliance.

The “medical evaluation” included two tests. One compared each volunteer’s blood pressure when lying down and when standing up. The other was a chemical test for the amount of sodium and chloride in the urine. Null claims that these tests can detect “diminished adrenal function.” Unfortunately for his thesis, they have no practical value for this purpose. The method Null used to determine “the anabolic effect of caffeine” involved measurement of the specific gravity, pH (acidity), and surface tension of single samples of the urine—a test used by Revici. Null noted that the theory behind the test “is still the subject of debate and has not yet gained wide scientific support”—which is a rather strange way to describe a test that is utterly worthless for any medical purpose and could never gain widespread scientific acceptance. The specific gravity of urine reflects the concentration of dissolved substances and depends largely on the amount of fluid a person consumes. The acidity depends mainly on diet, but varies considerably throughout the day. Thus, even when these values are useful for a metabolic determination, information from a single urine sample would be meaningless. The surface tension of urine has no medically recognized diagnostic value.

Following 41 pages of findings, calculations, tables, and graphs, Null concluded that “chronic caffeine users tend to have diminished adrenal function, which he blamed on “exhaustion” of the glands. “Fortunately,” he added, “there are non-drug nutritional programs which have the ability to repair or rebalance weakening adrenal glands toward normal.” The program consisted of “diminishing stressors,” implementing strategies to diminish anxiety, and taking doses of five vitamins and three other products.

In January 2005, I received a threatening letter from attorney David Slater, General Counsel for Gary Null & Associates, Inc., who demanded that I remove a previous version of this article from Quackwatch. One part of the letter complained:

You also attack Mr. Null’s Ph.D. thesis, written over 25 years ago, on the negative effects of caffeine on human health. You say that it “contributes nothing.” Despite your assertion that the thesis was meritless, two updated versions of the paper were accepted for publication in the Journal of Applied Nutrition (Volume 33, No.1, 1981) and the Journal of Orthomolecular Psychiatry (Vol. 13 1st Quarter 1984). We understand that only a small percentage of Ph.D. theses are actually accepted for publication in a peer reviewed scientific journal, and Mr. Null’s thesis was published in two different ones. Moreover, Mr. Null’s original clinical and laboratory work demonstrating the deleterious effects of caffeine on the human body became a catalyst for subsequent research on the topic by other scientists. Based on his original findings about caffeine, Null’s advocacy against caffeine has now become a major public health position. Accordingly, it is inaccurate for you to state that Mr. Null’s Ph.D. thesis about caffeine contributed “nothing.” [2]​

After comparing the articles to Null’s PhD thesis, I made the following observations:

• Since Null’s thesis was published in 1989, I don’t see how “updated versions” of it could have been published in 1981 and 1984.
• The 1981 and 1984 articles have multiple authors [10,11]. Null is not listed as lead author of either one. The papers give no indication of who contributed what to the paper.
• The 1981 article was a summary of published information about caffeine that was similar to the summary in Null’s thesis.
• The 1984 article reported a study of 11 volunteers which is similar to the one reported in Null’s thesis. It is not clear whether the thesis was based on the same data or whether Null did a second study.
• Neither journal has much of a reputation. As far as I can tell, neither one is indexed by MEDLINE.
• My MEDLINE search for “Null G” found only one article that was coauthored by Null and appeared in a pharmacy magazine [12].

When I asked Slater to clarify the time frames and to tell me where Null got the “M.S.” degree listed after his name in the articles, he replied: “My client has instructed me to cease all further communications with you. He repeats his demand that you remove the offensive and libelous material from your website or face legal action.” [13]

Additional questions remain. Has Null completed any science-based courses related to nutrition and public health? If so, (a) what did he take, (b) when did he take them, (c) did any of them involve classroom attendance, and (d) were any of them related to his degrees? I also wonder when he enrolled in The Union Institute. In response to these questions, Slater replied that Null will not provide further information about his transcripts, coursework, or other details related to his degrees and that he regarded my request as intrusive and an invasion of his privacy [14]. Why do you suppose he said that?

In 2002, after a thorough review, the Ohio Board of Regents severely criticized the Union Institute’s Ph.D. program. The review team’s conclusions—which were similar to mine—included:

• Curricular areas appeared somewhat nebulous and undefined.
• Demonstration of research competencies, and comprehensive demonstrations of learning were not evidenced.
• Learning events required of or actually taken by doctoral level learners may be substantively different in content from what is specified in a learners’ program of study. The relevance of these learner activities for learners’ academic development may be questionable.
• The assessment of the learner’s research competency in the admissions process often seems inadequate.
• Provisions for learning the techniques and methods of research and analysts during the program seems insufficient.
• Expectations for student scholarship at the doctoral level were not as rigorous as is common for doctoral work.
• Interviews with faculty and students did not provide sufficient evidence that the Learner Committees were capable of meeting doctoral level learner needs.
• There was evidence of committee members without appropriate expertise in the learner’s field of study [15].

As a result, the Ohio Board of Regents placed Union on provisional authorization and Ph.D. program was restructured so that it would no longer issue substandard health-related Ph.D. degrees. In 2004, the Cincinnati Courier reported that the U.S. Department of Education had refused to pay at least $8 million in financial aid to Union over concerns about the academic rigor of its doctoral program and that Union had signed a compliance agreement to raise certain standards [16].

Now this critique is by a mainstream MD and so of course his own institutional bias on the matter should be taken into account. However his research on the matter is sound - I have double checked it - and it does raise certain questions about Mr Null who has made no bones about promoting himself as Dr. Null as if he has an accredited and significant medical background upon which to base his various health related theories and products.

To my mind there is no evidence that he does. What I do detect is that his principle activity is business and entrepreneurship. He has a number of different business interests including the production of supplements which for example, he has been repeatedly called out on for the quality and efficacy of the same.

When it comes to Mr Null the man and the message they appear to be one and the same. He is the sole proponent and beneficiary of them. I for one am at this moment unconvinced as to his reliability and hence my skepticism about his reliability as a source with regard to the particular topic you have brought forward for discussion.

I listened to the full video - well for 1hour 50 mins, until to be honest I couldn't take anymore. I used the word glib, which you seem not to appreciate, but I am more than ever convinced it is accurate - Glib meaning 'fluent but insincere and shallow'. That was my overall impression of his 7 personality types, which more than anything seem to be related to an economic determinant of the human personality type and as such - well, shallow as a definer of our essential nature.

But that's just me. It's your business to believe whatever you like.

EDIT:

I found the following quite illuminating by the way. On the critique of Mr Null as posted above there is but a single reader response.

Reader Response​

From a devoted Null fan:

How dare you call Gary null a quack!! he cares about peoples health! he helped my dying mother she had Parkinson’s and fibro mialga, when doctors for years made her worse! all they did was give her pain medication and other things that turned her in to a vegetable… my self – I have suffered a life time of asthma allergies emotial dysfunction and pain.. and he has succeeded where you all have failed.. I can not believe the ignorance here.. its highly clear who the quacks are…I am appalled at this article.

GARY NULL IS GOD !

I cannot of course prove it but my suspicion is that this may have been posted by one of Mr. Null's devoted acolytes. The last line is somewhat telling.

 

[benkostka]

The subject of Gary Null and his views is indeed central to this subject Tindaro as you yourself have stated that Mr Null's 7 Energies program came to him in an epiphany/moment and from that moment all else follows. He also is very happy to confirm this in his presentations on the matter. So the issue of Mr Null's credibility should be of great interest. You see, members of this forum have good reason to be very wary of those like Mr Null who claim to have had a single blinding light of illumination and then go on to build upon this to for example end up with a $9.5 million dollar mansion they look to sell, presumably for a nice tidy profit in 2021.

View attachment 71902

That's not a matter of jealously or bias against success but we have a long experience of watch New Age grifters and snake oil salesmen take advantage of the vulnerable and the injudicious as part of what I mentioned before, a form of COINTELPRO designed to gate-keep and siphon off from the gullible and the needy. Please note I am not saying this is who Mr Null is - just that there are certain hallmarks of his life that raise my suspicions.

I have now watched the entire video link you gave us. In terms of your comment regarding my making noise by daring to suggest that his views on meat consumption were somehow relevant, we here tend to regard the inherent views and promoted beliefs as being essential guides to the nature and veracity of the character we are dealing with as well as to their ability to provide evidence based work that stands up to critical scrutiny. So many members here will not find it noise that Mr Null is also a vegan/vegetarian (I have found it difficult to be exact on this but I lean towards the first as being his life preference) and is also happy to promote anti smoking propaganda. For example in the video link you provide he also states:



Many members of this forum would regard this as a serious factual error - in that there is no proven cause and effect that smoking tobacco specifically produces these illnesses - and therefore is everything but noise. It is what he claims. I am merely questioning this with regard to his capacity for overall reliability.

As you no doubt know Mr Null is a figure of significant controversy and his Wikipedia page goes full out to claim he is a proponent of pseudoscience and conspiracy theories. Normally such an assault would be seen here as a possible sign that he is on the right path - and indeed if you search for Gary Null on this forum as well as our news page SOTT you will see that his articles and documentaries on health have indeed been previously promoted.

However for me there is one significant red flag, namely his claims concerning the quality of his educational background and most importantly his claims surrounding his PHD status which he uses to underpin many elements of his business.

A Critical Look at Gary Null’s Activities and Credentials



Now this critique is by a mainstream MD and so of course his own institutional bias on the matter should be taken into account. However his research on the matter is sound - I have double checked it - and it does raise certain questions about Mr Null who has made no bones about promoting himself as Dr. Null as if he has an accredited and significant medical background upon which to base his various health related theories and products.

To my mind there is no evidence that he does. What I do detect is that his principle activity is business and entrepreneurship. He has a number of different business interests including the production of supplements which for example, he has been repeatedly called out on for the quality and efficacy of the same.

When it comes to Mr Null the man and the message they appear to be one and the same. He is the sole proponent and beneficiary of them. I for one am at this moment unconvinced as to his reliability and hence my skepticism about his reliability as a source with regard to the particular topic you have brought forward for discussion.

I listened to the full video - well for 1hour 50 mins, until to be honest I couldn't take anymore. I used the word glib, which you seem not to appreciate, but I am more than ever convinced it is accurate - Glib meaning 'fluent but insincere and shallow'. That was my overall impression of his 7 personality types, which more than anything seem to be related to an economic determinant of the human personality type and as such - well, shallow as a definer of our essential nature.

But that's just me. It's your business to believe whatever you like.

I second this analysis and didn’t dive as deep into Gary Null because it gets tedious and painful.

Something I was thinking about though when pondering the guy is this. Is Gary Null an example of STS downloading as mentioned in the Ukraine portal. The reason I say that is because he came to this supposed knowledge all at once, sort of like Neo learning kung fu in the Matrix. Then in STS fashion, he promotes said knowledge and perpetuates the system.

The STO way is to gather information, organize it with a truth which then makes it knowledge. I definitely didn’t see Gary Null doing that, he’s a bit of a robotoid.

 

[Alejo]

Models and theories are useful to the degree that they teach something objective that we didn't know and we learn to see things that we didn't before. They can be limiting because they are also quite often incomplete (there is the known, the unknown and the unknowable) and if studied long enough can form limiting neural pathways so characteristics that aren't there are projected onto a subject - if the only tool you have is a hammer everything starts to look like a nail. It would probably be a good idea for you to read some of the recommended psychology books and follow the discussion topics on them if you are interested in human nature.

This is a good point, and it's bound to happen.

One of the things that keeps coming up, no matter how long and how hard one studies, is that one single person cannot hold the entire truth about any given subject, and we have found several examples of individuals who have an amazing track record, and then they have a few, very glaring, blindspots, which could have been addressed if they had a network of individuals to discuss things with. In those cases it's ok to see the individual as another human being with the same tendencies we all have, Mr. Null would probably be one of those dynamic aggressive or assertive, setting trends and making others see the world his own way (if I understood correctly)

From what has been shared, this 7 energies model seems to me to be a variation of the big 5, or the zodiac as was pointed out before, a system to categorize people based on their observed behavior, at which point.. I don't see why it is so special, it seems to me to be relabeled, but relabeling isn't aways a bad thing. But it seems incomplete, and adhering to it emotionally, in my opinion, runs the risk of making its adherents stop observing life as it is, to develop a model or paradigm, and instead making life fit the model.

Does that make sense?

And while I agree that certain individuals are beyond redemption, I also know that most people I've ever met do not fit in one category all their lives in all situations, people tend to swing back and forth and fall somewhere in between, depending on the context. I have met people who are assertive leaders, at work.. but once they leave the office, they're calm and shy introverts, until they're with friends, in which case they become extroverts, have no trouble talking to strangers, until they meet an attractive person... or a figure of authority. Do you see what I mean?

 

[Tindaro Martino Curione]

I just want to quickly interject and say that I really appreciate all of the responses, feedback, suggestions and challenges that have been offered thus far! Thank you!

 

[T.C.]

I just want to quickly interject and say that I really appreciate all of the responses, feedback, suggestions and challenges that have been offered thus far! Thank you!

This to me looks like a good example of what Wandering Star said here:

So it seems that it is a technique that you use to manipulate people and so that no person with whom you interact knows who you really are.

Firstly, the fact that you 'wanted to quickly interject' shows an emotionally prompted post based on a worry that you will be rejected by the forum. "I really appreciate all of the responses, feedback, suggestions and challenges that have been offered thus far" is an example of what Michael B-C pointed out to you about the glibness of the model you've been using to navigate the world for the last 20 years: "Fluent, but insincere and shallow".

It's an attempt at manipulation, to use words to vector the forum members' opinions of you, probably crafted with care by you based on what you assess as the personality types of the members who have responded so far.

So you have internalised this 7 energies model to the point that it controls you: you are its puppet. Your response is automatically generated by the model.

Now, understand, all of the critical feedback you've been given about this model has not been given to 'catch you out', it has been given to try to wake you up. So you don't need to 'panic'. However, since you are entrenched in this model, you're bound to panic, since your interactions with other people have been based on getting what you want for so long, and now you're seeing that the model is not going to get you what you want from us here on this forum.

The only thing that's REALLY going to enable you to think critically about this 7 energies model is how much you believe that you are a good person, and how much you want to be a good person, and to think about what being a good person means to you. For us here on this forum, being a good person means not attempting to manipulate others for any reason. If you are able to look back at your life for the last 20 years and see how many times you have manipulated others based on a shallow categorisation of their personality type, and you can be horrified by the fact that that means you're not a good person, then you may have a chance to snap out of this attachment you have to Gary Null and his ideas.

 

[Tindaro Martino Curione]

In particular I am wondering how these mini summaries - which seem to boil down to assessments of what economic and social walk of life people in general follow - are fleshed out into something meaningful and valuable by a deeper understanding and study of them?

Take for example the very first:

Dynamic Aggressives
These people are the charismatic natural leaders of society. Think of presidents, prime ministers, generals, corporate CEOs, authority figures - they’re all Dynamic Aggressives. For these self-made men and women, being goal-oriented and entrepreneurial, as well as controlling others, comes naturally. You can just about feel their drive to direct things.

Are you aware yet of the research on this forum of the deviant role that Cluster B types such as psychopaths, acute narcissists and the personalty disordered play in rising to the top of such organizations? In reading the above I detect more than a hint of admiration and pedestal making concerning these 'Dynamic Aggressives' when in truth - as even the paragraph states - their ultimate purpose is to seek control over others as a natural primary drive. How and in what sense is that to be admired or emulated?

Since red flags seem to be en vogue around here, I'll throw a couple on the table myself. Psychiatry is a pseudoscience, a dangerous one at that, which profits off of wanting to convince the world that behavior can be reduced to some brain chemical imbalance; and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, also known as the bible of psychiatry, is a scam. That does not, however, mean that the observation of behavior is not real. It just means that we are all observing the same phenomenon, and trying to understand it, describe it and even label it.

I had never heard of Cluster B types, so thank you for sharing that. I am not aware of the research that has been done to connect these groups to an ability to rise to top positions, like the ones mentioned in the description of Dynamic Aggressives, but it seems overboard to lump all of these people into what are said to be mental disorders. Is Elon Musk, CEO of multiple companies, Cluster B? Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland? Vladimir Putin, current President of Russia? Giorgia Meloni, current Prime Minister of Italy? All Cluster B?

Although I do believe that some particular quality does exist that allows these kinds of people to rise to the top, I would not attribute it to a psychiatric mental disorder, or the traits described in these disorders. Rather, I believe it is the Life Energy they were born with that gives them the drive and vision to even consider aiming for these positions. And yes, there are horrible examples of these people throughout history that show how destructive they can be: Stalin, Hitler, Khan, etc. I do believe that evil exists, but I don't believe humans are born evil; rather, they are influenced either by the environment or society that they are raised in, or they are influenced by unseen forces or entities that cause them to manifest the dark side of their nature.

As mentioned previously, I do not know how or why humanity is organized into these 7 groups, but I am convinced that they are, and that conviction is based on observational experience, whether in my personal life, the study of history or current times. So far, this model has been for the most part unanimously rejected by the members who have responded to this thread, but I do not take this to mean that all members have come to the same conclusion. And since I'm the only one standing on the affirmative team in what has turned into a debate, the opposing team will hopefully have patience with my snail's pace in responding.

I would also like to ask for some patience in my inability to live up to certain expectations that I have yet to understand when presenting this topic. I never made it to High School (dropped out in 7th grade), although I did obtain a GED (a high school equivalency diploma) when I was 16. Wasn't worth much as when I turned 18 and attempted to sign up at my Community College to major in Computer Science and Mathematics, I didn't even know algebra. Was pretty embarrassing! So for most of my adult life, I have been an autodidact.

Sorry for the digression. When thinking of Dynamic Aggressives and Cluster B, this is what I hypothesize: either a) the 7 Life Energies naturally evolved within humanity, or b) extraterrestrials programmed the 7 Life Energies into humans. Whichever the case, higher density beings would be able to know this, and hence the more nefarious ones would know to manipulate Dynamic Aggressives in order to control the direction of humanity towards a dystopian totalitarian world. I'm not excusing nor justifying their behavior, as all humans have the free will to choose what decisions they need to make in life. But in an uneven playing field, Dynamic Aggressives would not be as smart or cunning as they believe themselves to be. I'm reminded of a book I read by William Bramley, Gods of Eden. For me it was like the who's who of Dynamic Aggressives, all being manipulated, according to the author, by nefarious otherworldly entities. I also have a copy of Jim Marrs' Rule by Secrecy: The Hidden History that Connects the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons & the Great Pyramids which I haven't had a chance to read yet, but when I saw the table of content, it looked very much like Bamley's idea.

Each Life Energy has a high side and a low side, and knowing how to get Dynamic Aggressives to operate on their low side means all of humanity suffers. It also means that we who are not Dynamic Aggressive start to look at them like there's something wrong with them, and come to ideas like psychopathy or Cluster B or political ponerology; all having merit because they are all observing the same phenomenon. I'm just adding the Life Energy perspective.

As for

admiration and pedestal making

I don't see that in the above description of Dynamic Aggressives, but rather it seems that you are projecting society's misguided tendency to admire these top echelons of government, religion, industry and military. In fact, you even pointed to something that was in the description that for many people would be quite the opposite of admiration:

controlling others, comes naturally.

It's interesting that you asked:

How and in what sense is that to be admired or emulated?

I agree, it's not. But what's fascinating is all of these "how to get rich" books out there, all based on the traits and behaviors of Dynamic Aggressives, yet only they continue to get richer and richer. Why? Because other Life Energies don't have the energy they have.

 

[benkostka]

Since red flags seem to be en vogue around here, I'll throw a couple on the table myself. Psychiatry is a pseudoscience, a dangerous one at that, which profits off of wanting to convince the world that behavior can be reduced to some brain chemical imbalance; and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, also known as the bible of psychiatry, is a scam. That does not, however, mean that the observation of behavior is not real. It just means that we are all observing the same phenomenon, and trying to understand it, describe it and even label it.

I had never heard of Cluster B types, so thank you for sharing that. I am not aware of the research that has been done to connect these groups to an ability to rise to top positions, like the ones mentioned in the description of Dynamic Aggressives, but it seems overboard to lump all of these people into what are said to be mental disorders. Is Elon Musk, CEO of multiple companies, Cluster B? Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland? Vladimir Putin, current President of Russia? Giorgia Meloni, current Prime Minister of Italy? All Cluster B?

Although I do believe that some particular quality does exist that allows these kinds of people to rise to the top, I would not attribute it to a psychiatric mental disorder, or the traits described in these disorders. Rather, I believe it is the Life Energy they were born with that gives them the drive and vision to even consider aiming for these positions. And yes, there are horrible examples of these people throughout history that show how destructive they can be: Stalin, Hitler, Khan, etc. I do believe that evil exists, but I don't believe humans are born evil; rather, they are influenced either by the environment or society that they are raised in, or they are influenced by unseen forces or entities that cause them to manifest the dark side of their nature.

As mentioned previously, I do not know how or why humanity is organized into these 7 groups, but I am convinced that they are, and that conviction is based on observational experience, whether in my personal life, the study of history or current times. So far, this model has been for the most part unanimously rejected by the members who have responded to this thread, but I do not take this to mean that all members have come to the same conclusion. And since I'm the only one standing on the affirmative team in what has turned into a debate, the opposing team will hopefully have patience with my snail's pace in responding.

I would also like to ask for some patience in my inability to live up to certain expectations that I have yet to understand when presenting this topic. I never made it to High School (dropped out in 7th grade), although I did obtain a GED (a high school equivalency diploma) when I was 16. Wasn't worth much as when I turned 18 and attempted to sign up at my Community College to major in Computer Science and Mathematics, I didn't even know algebra. Was pretty embarrassing! So for most of my adult life, I have been an autodidact.

Sorry for the digression. When thinking of Dynamic Aggressives and Cluster B, this is what I hypothesize: either a) the 7 Life Energies naturally evolved within humanity, or b) extraterrestrials programmed the 7 Life Energies into humans. Whichever the case, higher density beings would be able to know this, and hence the more nefarious ones would know to manipulate Dynamic Aggressives in order to control the direction of humanity towards a dystopian totalitarian world. I'm not excusing nor justifying their behavior, as all humans have the free will to choose what decisions they need to make in life. But in an uneven playing field, Dynamic Aggressives would not be as smart or cunning as they believe themselves to be. I'm reminded of a book I read by William Bramley, Gods of Eden. For me it was like the who's who of Dynamic Aggressives, all being manipulated, according to the author, by nefarious otherworldly entities. I also have a copy of Jim Marrs' Rule by Secrecy: The Hidden History that Connects the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons & the Great Pyramids which I haven't had a chance to read yet, but when I saw the table of content, it looked very much like Bamley's idea.

Each Life Energy has a high side and a low side, and knowing how to get Dynamic Aggressives to operate on their low side means all of humanity suffers. It also means that we who are not Dynamic Aggressive start to look at them like there's something wrong with them, and come to ideas like psychopathy or Cluster B or political ponerology; all having merit because they are all observing the same phenomenon. I'm just adding the Life Energy perspective.

As for

I don't see that in the above description of Dynamic Aggressives, but rather it seems that you are projecting society's misguided tendency to admire these top echelons of government, religion, industry and military. In fact, you even pointed to something that was in the description that for many people would be quite the opposite of admiration:


It's interesting that you asked:

I agree, it's not. But what's fascinating is all of these "how to get rich" books out there, all based on the traits and behaviors of Dynamic Aggressives, yet only they continue to get richer and richer. Why? Because other Life Energies don't have the energy they have.

Tindaro,

It’s amazing to me that you can even write about Cluster B types without going to do the research about what they actually are.

It’s unlikely you’ll find anyone here who’s as enamored with the Life Energy model as you are, why not find a group on the internet who likes the model and discuss it with them? Can you understand it’s definitely STS behavior to be “convinced” of something and then try to force that on everyone else?

 

[Tindaro Martino Curione]

This to me looks like a good example of what Wandering Star said here:



Firstly, the fact that you 'wanted to quickly interject' shows an emotionally prompted post based on a worry that you will be rejected by the forum. "I really appreciate all of the responses, feedback, suggestions and challenges that have been offered thus far" is an example of what Michael B-C pointed out to you about the glibness of the model you've been using to navigate the world for the last 20 years: "Fluent, but insincere and shallow".

It's an attempt at manipulation, to use words to vector the forum members' opinions of you, probably crafted with care by you based on what you assess as the personality types of the members who have responded so far.

So you have internalised this 7 energies model to the point that it controls you: you are its puppet. Your response is automatically generated by the model.

Now, understand, all of the critical feedback you've been given about this model has not been given to 'catch you out', it has been given to try to wake you up. So you don't need to 'panic'. However, since you are entrenched in this model, you're bound to panic, since your interactions with other people have been based on getting what you want for so long, and now you're seeing that the model is not going to get you what you want from us here on this forum.

The only thing that's REALLY going to enable you to think critically about this 7 energies model is how much you believe that you are a good person, and how much you want to be a good person, and to think about what being a good person means to you. For us here on this forum, being a good person means not attempting to manipulate others for any reason. If you are able to look back at your life for the last 20 years and see how many times you have manipulated others based on a shallow categorisation of their personality type, and you can be horrified by the fact that that means you're not a good person, then you may have a chance to snap out of this attachment you have to Gary Null and his ideas.

Everything you said is true. I suppose the frightening thing about waking up is the fear of waking up to something worse, so it becomes easier to stay asleep.

 

[Ben]

As mentioned previously, I do not know how or why humanity is organized into these 7 groups, but I am convinced that they are, and that conviction is based on observational experience, whether in my personal life, the study of history or current times.

You are convinced that they are, but you can't explain how, but the conviction is based on observational experience. This doesn't make sense to me. All you need to do is to explain how the observational experience led you to this conviction. If that can't be done then the model is of limited use, as it can't be applied to actual experience in the real world. It is a theoretical construct which has difficulty dealing with the details and complexity of real human behaviour. This abstraction is a problem with models generally, as has already been pointed out. It also very much brings to mind left hemisphere dominant thinking patterns, and their limitations, as discussed by McGilchrist. A very interesting subject altogether, if psychology is your thing.

 

[MatiaS]

I was going to post here yesterday to jump in to defend Tindaro but decided to give the thread some time to develop and see where it goes. When I say "defend", I don't mean to support this 7 Energies model, but more just to give the underdog some support. The exchanges in this thread evoked feelings of pity towards him, as he seems to be so oblivious to what the others are saying. I recognize that this is a trap, and a big one for me that I keep wandering into.

I've seen this on a number of occasions throughout the forum with (mostly new) members who can't seem to take a hint and keep defending their stance or even becoming combative (the South American users who were obsessed with the Grail for instance).

Everything you said is true. I suppose the frightening thing about waking up is the fear of waking up to something worse, so it becomes easier to stay asleep.

If this is actually a sincere response it seems like you've achieved to administer yourself (with the help of the forum of course) a quite significant shock which has the potential to help you see things in a more balanced way, provided you don't choose the easy option of staying asleep.

 

[Tindaro Martino Curione]

I was going to post here yesterday to jump in to defend Tindaro but decided to give the thread some time to develop and see where it goes. When I say "defend", I don't mean to support this 7 Energies model, but more just to give the underdog some support. The exchanges in this thread evoked feelings of pity towards him, as he seems to be so oblivious to what the others are saying. I recognize that this is a trap, and a big one for me that I keep wandering into.

I've seen this on a number of occasions throughout the forum with (mostly new) members who can't seem to take a hint and keep defending their stance or even becoming combative (the South American users who were obsessed with the Grail for instance).


If this is actually a sincere response it seems like you've achieved to administer yourself (with the help of the forum of course) a quite significant shock which has the potential to help you see things in a more balanced way, provided you don't choose the easy option of staying asleep.

It's true. In hindsight, I'd say I was pretty naive in my intentions. As I had mentioned in a response in my introductory thread, I wanted to put something on the table that I felt wasn't there, thinking someone may find it useful. My intention wasn't to force the subject on anyone, but rather, in all humility, it's all I have. Perhaps I wrongly thought that I was being generous; kind of like, I felt some obligation to offer something seeing that I was being offered so much more. It's like walking into a room full of people who have libraries of knowledge, and I'm standing there with this little book saying, "Hello everyone, this is all I have." And yes, it took several days to get that nobody found it interesting. I didn't even realize I was defending what was being rejected, as I was caught up in the excitement of sharing my insights.

To be honest, this is the longest discussion I have ever had on this topic, as it has never been of interest to anyone over the years. Something told me I may be posting it in the wrong section, but I considered it psychology, and didn't know where else to put it. I'm sorry if I came off as combative, as I was perceiving everyone else in the same way. Not as in a slugfest, but rather I thought I was being invited to debate, to be an advocate for the system, while others played devil's advocate. Again, I apologize for having been intrusive here. I have a tendency to jump into things without getting someone's advice first to determine if I am doing something acceptable. I've never engaged in the forum over the years; I would just read the Sessions and the Wave series.

 

[Ben]

No need to apologise whatsoever. As long as you are open to the feedback you get, and participate honestly in the process of networking, we are all learning together and using the forum for its intended purpose! I understand the need to contribute something, but there are so many ways to do that and your learning the workings of your machine is just as valid an offering as new material. It's a free sharing between us, no expectation of anything other than honesty and willingness to become free from all attempts to manipulate or be manipulated.