Dear reader,
the questions you ask are very interesting and give the opportunity to clarify a few points ... First you have identified
you: Do not confuse a valuable tool, as the Ontopsychological, using which may cause some people interpreting ' Ontopsychology in its own way. I mean because - as you noted - it is not a cult, it may happen - as in any other area - that there are people who live the advanced knowledge provided by this science as if they were "elected" consecrated or devoted to the cause ... that is, those who have had the opportunity to get closer to a great man (take for example the political sphere), knows that the risk may exist for "exaggerating" mystifying things on which there is nothing to mystify, surrounding this case made in science and technology with some suggestion too. Take note of this fact, but who is seriously interested in understanding the scope of discovery Ontopsychological can get beyond these idiosyncrasies.
I'm sorry "contradicts" the absence of contradictory, but Antonio Meneghetti never refused questions, none of the lectures! On the contrary, the point is that its calls are almost always inaccolti ask questions from the audience ... and the many public interventions are still required evidence that Meneghetti never removed from the comparison with the public, both at television, radio, who lectures that were open to absolutely everyone! Often I reflect on this thing and I'll tell you, I arrive at the same conclusion: the truth is that it exposes an application's intelligence much more than when you give an answer ...
get to the last point, which acts as a thread to everything written above and it touches, in particular, the speech had not noticed improvements in therapy. This point is called free will: no method or technique, as accurate, can act without the full availability of the individual to get involved. Unfortunately sometimes they do not realize it, but also go regularly to a therapist, armed with all the enthusiasm possible is not enough to say "yes." If at the end of the scalpel before you subtract intervention, in reality you have never even been able to verify the effectiveness ... if you want to know more about the relationship between intention and method, you can see this post: individual will
the questions you ask are very interesting and give the opportunity to clarify a few points ... First you have identified
you: Do not confuse a valuable tool, as the Ontopsychological, using which may cause some people interpreting ' Ontopsychology in its own way. I mean because - as you noted - it is not a cult, it may happen - as in any other area - that there are people who live the advanced knowledge provided by this science as if they were "elected" consecrated or devoted to the cause ... that is, those who have had the opportunity to get closer to a great man (take for example the political sphere), knows that the risk may exist for "exaggerating" mystifying things on which there is nothing to mystify, surrounding this case made in science and technology with some suggestion too. Take note of this fact, but who is seriously interested in understanding the scope of discovery Ontopsychological can get beyond these idiosyncrasies.
I'm sorry "contradicts" the absence of contradictory, but Antonio Meneghetti never refused questions, none of the lectures! On the contrary, the point is that its calls are almost always inaccolti ask questions from the audience ... and the many public interventions are still required evidence that Meneghetti never removed from the comparison with the public, both at television, radio, who lectures that were open to absolutely everyone! Often I reflect on this thing and I'll tell you, I arrive at the same conclusion: the truth is that it exposes an application's intelligence much more than when you give an answer ...
get to the last point, which acts as a thread to everything written above and it touches, in particular, the speech had not noticed improvements in therapy. This point is called free will: no method or technique, as accurate, can act without the full availability of the individual to get involved. Unfortunately sometimes they do not realize it, but also go regularly to a therapist, armed with all the enthusiasm possible is not enough to say "yes." If at the end of the scalpel before you subtract intervention, in reality you have never even been able to verify the effectiveness ... if you want to know more about the relationship between intention and method, you can see this post: individual will
Hello and thanks intervention.
Personally, I approached some time ago to ' Ontopsychology , following a year of therapy, but after an initial enthusiasm, I found myself faced with different situations that I did not like, such as the "closure" to the 'outside of this environment: it is not true that it is a sect, like many people say, but, unfortunately, often the people who belong to this environment behave as if they were. I've also seen people who pass the adulation for the prof. Meneghetti, I heard with my ears absurd stories like "The Prof as it passes in front of a computer does shut down (a lesson is successful, it was simply entered into standby but many believed that), or" today Lizori the sun is because there is the professor, if he wants it does not rain "and other like that. Probably there are people running in this environment that ruin it. I have never talked in person with Meneghetti, but you have to say that it is very difficult since only intervenes in events carefully prepared and its lessons are not permitted applications or comparisons. The thing that bothered me most is this: pretend to do science without contradiction, without making public the evidence and results and branded as absolute truths, all the theories put forward by the ' Ontopsychology . In this environment, nothing is Availlable, if you want some proof of what is being said in class, you go and ask him or one of his therapists, paying. In a year I really do not care I felt better, but when I explained my problem I was immediately described as a "negative" ...