Do those other meditation centres make similarly extreme claims about the benefits of their programs? If so, I would be skeptical of them for the same reasons. If not, then the comparison is inapt.
If I had developed a meditation program that I really thought did what Jhourney is claiming their meditation program does, I would not be approaching it this way. I would try to make the knowledge as widely accessible as I could as quickly as possible. Jhourney has been doing retreats for over two years. Whatâs the hold up?
Transcendental Meditation (TM)âs stated justification for their secrecy and high prices is that TM requires careful, in-person, one-on-one instruction. Whatâs Jhourneyâs justification for not making instructional videos or audio recordings that anyone can buy for, say, $70?
Could it be just commercial self-interest? But, in that case, why hasnât the jhana meditation encouraged them to prize altruism more? Isnât that supposed to be one of the effects?
Iâm willing to make some allowance for personal self-interest and for the self-interest of the business, of course. But selling $70 instructional materials to millions of people would be a good business. And the Nobel Peace Prize comes with both a $1 million cash prize and a lot of fame and acclaim. Similarly, the Templeton Prize comes with $1.4 million in cash and some prestige. There are other ways to capitalize on fame and esteem, such as through speaking engagements. So, sharing a radical breakthrough in jhana meditation with the world has strong business incentives and strong personal self-interest incentives. Why not do it?
The simplest explanation is that they donât actually have the âproductâ theyâre claiming to have. Or, to put it another way, the âproductâ they have is not as differentiated from other meditation programs as theyâre claiming and does not reliably produce the benefits theyâre claiming it reliably produces.
Do those other meditation centres make similarly extreme claims about the benefits of their programs? If so, I would be skeptical of them for the same reasons. If not, then the comparison is inapt.
Why would the comparison be inapt?
A load-bearing piece of your argument (insofar as Iâve understood it) is that most of the benefit of Jhourneyâs teachingsâif Jhourney is legitâcan be conferred through non-interactive means (e.g., YouTube uploads). I am pointing out that your claim goes against conventional wisdom in this space: these other meditation centres believe (presumably), much like Jhourney does, that their teachings canât be conferred well non-interactively. Iâm not sure why the strength of claimed benefits would come into it?
(I will probably drop out of this thread now; I feel a bit weird about taking on this role of defending Jhourneyâs position.)
Sorry, this is an incredibly late reply in a (by Internet standards) ancient comment thread.
My point is about differentiation. If Jhourney is saying their work confers benefits on approximately the same level as the many meditation centres you can find all over the place, then I have no qualms with that claim. If Jhourney, or someone else, is saying that Jhourneyâs work confers benefits far, far higher than any or almost any other meditation centre or retreat on Earth, then Iâm skeptical about that.
Transcendental Meditation or TM is an organization that claims far, far higher benefits from its techniques than other forms of meditation, insists on in-person teaching, and charges a very high fee. Itâs viewed by some people as essentially a scam and some people as a sort of luxury product that is not particularly differentiated from the commodity product.
Iâm not saying Jhourney is like Transcendental Meditation, Iâm just noting that similar claims have been made in the area of meditation before with a clear financial self-interest to make these claims, and the claims have not been borne out. So, there is a certain standard of evidence a company like Jhourney has to rise above, a certain level of warranted skepticism it has to overcome.
Do those other meditation centres make similarly extreme claims about the benefits of their programs? If so, I would be skeptical of them for the same reasons. If not, then the comparison is inapt.
If I had developed a meditation program that I really thought did what Jhourney is claiming their meditation program does, I would not be approaching it this way. I would try to make the knowledge as widely accessible as I could as quickly as possible. Jhourney has been doing retreats for over two years. Whatâs the hold up?
Transcendental Meditation (TM)âs stated justification for their secrecy and high prices is that TM requires careful, in-person, one-on-one instruction. Whatâs Jhourneyâs justification for not making instructional videos or audio recordings that anyone can buy for, say, $70?
Could it be just commercial self-interest? But, in that case, why hasnât the jhana meditation encouraged them to prize altruism more? Isnât that supposed to be one of the effects?
Iâm willing to make some allowance for personal self-interest and for the self-interest of the business, of course. But selling $70 instructional materials to millions of people would be a good business. And the Nobel Peace Prize comes with both a $1 million cash prize and a lot of fame and acclaim. Similarly, the Templeton Prize comes with $1.4 million in cash and some prestige. There are other ways to capitalize on fame and esteem, such as through speaking engagements. So, sharing a radical breakthrough in jhana meditation with the world has strong business incentives and strong personal self-interest incentives. Why not do it?
The simplest explanation is that they donât actually have the âproductâ theyâre claiming to have. Or, to put it another way, the âproductâ they have is not as differentiated from other meditation programs as theyâre claiming and does not reliably produce the benefits theyâre claiming it reliably produces.
Why would the comparison be inapt?
A load-bearing piece of your argument (insofar as Iâve understood it) is that most of the benefit of Jhourneyâs teachingsâif Jhourney is legitâcan be conferred through non-interactive means (e.g., YouTube uploads). I am pointing out that your claim goes against conventional wisdom in this space: these other meditation centres believe (presumably), much like Jhourney does, that their teachings canât be conferred well non-interactively. Iâm not sure why the strength of claimed benefits would come into it?
(I will probably drop out of this thread now; I feel a bit weird about taking on this role of defending Jhourneyâs position.)
Sorry, this is an incredibly late reply in a (by Internet standards) ancient comment thread.
My point is about differentiation. If Jhourney is saying their work confers benefits on approximately the same level as the many meditation centres you can find all over the place, then I have no qualms with that claim. If Jhourney, or someone else, is saying that Jhourneyâs work confers benefits far, far higher than any or almost any other meditation centre or retreat on Earth, then Iâm skeptical about that.
Transcendental Meditation or TM is an organization that claims far, far higher benefits from its techniques than other forms of meditation, insists on in-person teaching, and charges a very high fee. Itâs viewed by some people as essentially a scam and some people as a sort of luxury product that is not particularly differentiated from the commodity product.
Iâm not saying Jhourney is like Transcendental Meditation, Iâm just noting that similar claims have been made in the area of meditation before with a clear financial self-interest to make these claims, and the claims have not been borne out. So, there is a certain standard of evidence a company like Jhourney has to rise above, a certain level of warranted skepticism it has to overcome.