There’s a disconnect between the forum’s professed ideals (happiness, harmlessness and felicity, sincerity) and engagement with critiques and alternative perspectives.
My intentions were (and are) positive revisiting the forum after months to share an update about things going well for me - not to start a debate or argue about AF.
Instead of accepting these at face value, there was doubling down on insisting I try aspects of AF I’ve repeatedly said weren’t for me (back to my old point about autonomy) and instead I saw personal attacks calling me psychotic, neurotic, insincere, having gall etc etc going against the very ideals AF claims to practice.
The stark irony in the disconnent between professed ideals (happy, harmless, felicity, caring, sincerity) and actual behaviours (personal attacks, malice, over intellectualising, verbal gymnastics) further undermines credibility.
My critique of the 0% success rate isn’t baseless - it’s observations rooted in what I’ve clearly seen and others on here have commented on.
Maybe the gap between professed values and actual behaviour stems from a discomfort with critiques of a method people here are heavily invested in. This isn’t unique to AF, but any idealogy or practice that people attach their identities to often becomes difficult for them to question, let alone acknowledge limitations.
At the end of the day, I’ve acted with authenticity, sharing my journey and findings without malice.
In response, this is countered with a mix of condescenscion, attacks, and a rigid defense of the method. Which again is the antithesis of the openeness and sincerity people claim to practice.
The methods results dont back it up - a 0% success rate after decades is a clear indicator that something isn’t working. This isnt’ an attack but a rational observatio. And the refusal to engage with this point further highlights the unwillingness to introspect or adapt.
It’s not just about this forum or method, but about the broader issue of idealogies claiming to hold the ONLY truth whilst clearly failing to deliver results (0% is 0%). Calling this out isn’t just justified, it’s necessary to prevent others from being misled or mistreated.
A truly robust method or ideology would welcome dissent as an opportunity to strengthen it’s foundation. But here, dissent is met with defensiveness, personal attacks and gaslighting under the guise of ‘truth telling’.
There’s a stark over-reliance on verbal gymnastics and intellectualising to obscure what’s plain to see: the method’s claims don’t align with its results.
If the method truly worked, results would speak for themselves.
Instead, the 0% success rate and defensive reactions to critiques highlight a lack of introspection, which to me dont seem to be the hallmarks of a credible or effective practice.
I feel compelled to call this out because integrity does matter to me, and when people claim to embody certain values but act in direct contradiction its disappointing.
I’m challenging dogma and of course, many ideologies operate in echo chambers, dismissing dissenting voices as attacks. I just hope to challenge this complacency by standing up for truth and transparency in a space that seems to lack both.
And c’mon guys, I really want people to succeed with this. And I do hope (somewhat grandiosely) that my critiques lead to better outcomes for those sincerely pursuing the method
If openness, sincerity, and harmlessness are truly core values, then addressing these discrepancies should be welcomed rather than deflected. That to me would be true integrity and sincerity.
Despite my critiques, I’m grateful for what I’ve learned here and wish you all well in your journeys.
But the 0% success rate remains the elephant in the room—one that can only be addressed with the sincerity and openness this forum claims to practice.
And with that, I’ll take my leave. I remain deeply grateful for the insights that have truly worked for me, and I hope this forum finds its way to aligning its ideals with its actions.
but less blind than I used to be