Is Landmark a cult?
No.
A cult has things like:
- A charismatic leader. Landmark does not have this. It has a decentralized leadership team.
- Religion or creed you must blindly believe in. Landmark is non-religious and explicitly encourages people to look for themselves.
- Encourage members to donate money. Landmark explicitly does not allow donations or gifts
So why do people use this term sometimes?
The main reason is that some people get very passionate about Landmark (and Landmark encourages people who got something from the Forum to actively "share").
This can create a proselytising or evangelical energy around Landmark that can put some people off.
The late Dr. Margaret Singer, a leading expert on cults and author of the book Cults in Our Midst, studied est and observed the est Training. In a sworn deposition, testifying as an expert adverse to est's interests, Dr. Singer stated that in her expert opinion, the est Training and the est organization were not a cult.
Eminently respected psychologists, psychiatrists, clergy, academics and other qualified professionals who participated in or observed the est Training gave their opinion that est and the est Training were not a cult. These professionals also gave their opinion that the est Training was effective and valuable.
Among these professionals are:
Dr. Edward Lowell, M.D., certified by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, an expert in thought reform and former consulting psychiatrist to the United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, stated:
In the est training there was no point-of-view or indoctrination that was inculcated into participants, and indeed, repeatedly it was stated that nothing said in the course was 'the truth'. Quite the contrary, the est training fostered and produced an enhanced capacity for people to think for themselves, and to participate in their own families, culture, jobs, religions, etc. I have also carefully evaluated est on the issue of its having been a cult or cult like. Categorically I can report that it was not.
Dr. Christopher Was, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Educational Psychology at Kent State University with a research background in cognition and memory, stated:
As a cognitive psychologist and someone who has studied Werner Erhard’s programs, my studies clearly indicate that people got substantial and tangible value from participating in the est Training. Further, it is clear that the program and organization were not spiritual, religious, a cult, or cult-like in any way.
Peter L. Sheras, PhD, ABPP, Member of the Board of Directors of the American Psychological Association stated:
"As a clinical psychologist and an expert in crisis intervention, I personally observed the est training and found it to be a powerful and innovative program that provided real value to participants. I recommended it frequently to others and, when appropriate, to some of my clients. At the time it was offered, the structure and language was appropriate although some media may have mischaracterized the program as an ‘encounter group’ or part of the ‘new age’ or human potential movement. As a professional, it was my opinion that these characterizations were not accurate. The est training was ontological more than psychological in nature, was not a cult or cult-like, and would not be considered brainwashing or harmful."