913:. It looks at Maslow, Rogers, and Perls. I guess this may also apply well to the Humanistic Psychology article. There is an interesting element that says Edwin Schur identified some key elements: Openness to imediate experience;denigration of the intellect; and being "real" as opposed to playing a social role. ONe criticsim is that self-realization takes one away from social concerns too much. One argument says that Americans have never been strong on ocial consciousness. Thus, Schur states that the movement's popularity is rooted in complacency. Peter Martin referred to the HPM as the "new narcissism" and argued that these are the expressions of the "growing solipsism of and desperation of a beleaguered class". Martin doesn't say it is complacency, rather that it is neither simple greed nor moral blindness, but it is instead the unrealized shame of having failed the world and not knowing what to do about it. Christopher Lasch's analysis differs from both the prior. He argued that the HPM is the result of the warlike condidtions that pervade American society, from the dangers and uncertainty that surround us in abundance, and from the loss of confidence in the future. He says that the defensiveness concerning the "shallowness of society" gives rise to the "living here and now" so as not to seek value in the unreliable world outside of yourself. The tragedy being; these defensive responses to the loss of community contribute to the further denigration of society. The last line of the book is interesting "In the final analysis, the HPM constituted and anathema to the attempt to gain self-understanding ad to create an ethical society of persons. The HPM has apparently disintegrated, although aspects of the consciousness revolution will continue for some time" I can provide page numbers if folk are interested.
570:). Thus, they make an absurdal claim and then rebut it, making their argument a logical fallacy. But the usefulness of speed reading has been proven for many times, and recently, in Poland, there was even a tournament organised in speed reading. 2000-3000 thousand words per minute (with comprehension, of course) was an achievable thing out there. It doesn't, however, stop the 'skeptics' from debunking all speed reading as a useless myth. Well, to give them their due, they presented the dissenting voices of some people in the 'reader comments' section. And speed reading is a wonderful example of how the human minds differ: one person analyses the text while reading it (what takes much time), while another one 'loads it up to his/her memory', and only after this performs its analysis. I think it's no wrong to speculate that the second type of person is more likely to make use of speed reading.
1670:
associated with money-making are marginal in the extreme. The suggestion that it is connected with the 'Hippie' phenomenon may have a little more support, but most commentators regard the connection as very tenuous. When I removed the contentious sentences from your original edit, I did leave the first one in that section, as the Los
Angeles Times is certainly a valid source. However I did make a minor edit to clarify the point that the item was establishing an opinion, whereas your wording conveyed the impression that it was being asserted as a fact. The other content is referenced to the Apologetics website which is not even remotely a reliable source for Knowledge (XXG) purposes.
172:
1866:"HPM was regarded by some as being related to psychedelic culture such as hippies and Summer of Love. According to author Andrew Grant Jackson, George Harrison's adoption of Hindu philosophy and Indian instrumentation in his songs with the Beatles in the mid 1960s, together with the band's highly publicised study of Transcendental Meditation, 'truly kick-started' the Human Potential Movement. It had not been defined what was 'human potentialities'. They themselves came to be called not only 'New Age' but also 'new religion'."'
1390:. I'm also concerned about the description of Maslow's hierarchy. This is often misinterpreted and misquoted. He didn't say that you needed to fulfill your physiological needs to progress to the 'higher' levels. The evidence is pretty clear that this isn't the case and he knew that - many 'enlightened' beings have experienced an aesetic lifestyle, and taken to extreme this interpretation is bordering on racism because it implies that people in low-income countries can't become self-actualised.
1213:) 01:01, 1 November 2010 (UTC) There also appears to be some confusion between 'self-help methods' and human potential movement. The article needs to be re-written, not as a critique but as a factual, unbiased, fully referenced report of the human potential movement.How long has this discussion been going? 2004??? Imagine someone who knows nothing or very little about the human potential movement and regards wikipedia as a reference site. Would they be well informed after reading the article
1201:
Humanistic
Psychology. Secondly, the entire article is very subjective and reads as a critique of the human potential movement. Also, most of the 'theorists' being discussed were not the founders of this movement, nor were they at the forefront. The human potential movement is most certainly not part of the new age movement. Initially some of the leaders of the new age movement tried to associate themselves within the human potential movement in the hope of gaining some credibility.
536:
using "normal" scientific theories. This is the most flaky when the scientific theory does not explicitly support the technique at all, but some additional "interpretation" of the "meaning" of the scientific theory is tacked on in order to justify the technique. This really turns off skeptics and scientists because it is obvious that the technique promoter is abusing science in order to sell something. It smacks of mind-control, religion, dogma, quackery, etc.
204:
510:"Refutting part of this criticism one should, however, separate the pseudoscientific or religious background from the mental techniques, which may, or may not (depending on the individual character of each person) be useful and beneficial. Talking about the techniques, one should not employ the "one-size-fits-all" way of thinking, because human beings are so complicated and diverse, that there can be no panacea that works for everyone. "
225:
80:
90:
53:
544:
Fortunately, at least the NLP movement is almost free of 'pseudoscience', as they openly state that they seek for useful techniques (utilitarian drive) and not for their pseudo-scientific explanation. As many of them are practising psychologists or psychiatrists, some try to explain those things using the scientific methods, but it's in their individual efforts, and not in the "mainstream" of NLP.
326:
305:
1099:
This is a drive-by tag, which is discouraged in WP, and it shall be removed. Future tags should have discussion posted as to why the tag was placed, and how the topic might be improved. Better yet, edit the topic yourself with the improvements. This statement is not a judgement of content, it is only a cleanup of frivolously and/or arbitrarily placed tags. No discussion, no tag.
22:
1411:
article that even implies the existence of the movement past the 1970s is the existence of a "Notable
Proponent" who was born in 1960 and the fact that the footnote source for the Virginia Satir quote "We are at a crossroads" is to a 2011 web article. Then again, that article also quotes Abraham Lincoln. The article indicates the Virginia Satir quote is from 1984.
489:
I do not know how best to express it. I am in many ways a hard-nosed skeptic myself and find myself to be annoyed quite often at the way some "mental techniques" are supported, justified, or theorized using pseudoscientific nonsense. So, I find myself kinda split on the whole idea. This is really very similar as the perrennial psudo-scientific "problems" with
817:
potential and encourage growth and education. I've never read a self-help book, nor had a person recommend any of this to me. My experience with all of this is largely from conclusions I drew myself, so it's interesting to find base for my personal beliefs in larger philosophies. Does anyone else feel like weighing in on personal comments about this movement?
437:"The movement has received criticism in two forms. The first is from researchers in psychology, medicine, and science who often dismiss the movement as being grounded in pseudoscience, overusing Psycho-babble, and whose efficacy can be explained entirely by placebo. This criticism was expressed by Richard Feynman's response to his visit at Esalen."
629:
issues; in the individual psychology, however, it is totally wrong as someone may belong to this 1% -- and those '99%' are the result of intentional overrating the issue by myself, as some psychological research make claims about 60-70% of the population, which leaves a very wide margin for the 'minorities'.
1884:
also doesn't support the arguments in this section; it simply states San
Francisco is the capital of the Human Potential Movement as a continuation of the city's openness to counter-cultural movements, but doesn't state there is a direct, influential connection between HPM and the hippie scene of the
1418:
Finally, there is not much about the movement itself other than what is in the introduction, its "roots," a couple of paragraphs about some authors & essayists , and a list of
Notable Proponents. Since there isn't much on what HPM is about, there is, of course, nothing about criticism of HPM. How
1414:
So, if this is an existing movement, there needs to be something about it. Otherwise it looks like HPM was only a 1960s-70s phenomenon. There should also be some information on the size of the HPM at its maximum, an indication of when that was, and some indication of the size/importance of the HPM at
1328:
I removed a section in the article that had been unsourced since 2008. It was attempting to make a comparison between the human potential movement and the New Age
Movement. I looked for sources for this, but could not find anything that was not a Christian Website or author warning about the dangers
1204:
Also, I don't understand why this article has been rated as 'low importance'? The request for verification of sources is dated June 2010. It is obvious to me, as a professional in the field of
Psychology that this article was written by someone who does not have a solid theoretical foundation in this
653:
Well, that was my shot at it. I think I can do better, but I wanted to get this discussion going. If someone understands what I am saying and agrees that the scientific skeptics have a point, and agrees that the way the article states it is rather poor, then I would love to see that someone give it
628:
And finally, there is a flaw I find in the way of thinking employed by some psychologists: they think that if something works, or is true for 99% of the population, it should work for everybody. Well, such a stance could only be true with regards to psychosociology, which relates to the 'macro-scale'
543:
Yes, I agree that it makes more harm than good, as (1) lying for any purpose is wrong and (2) it's counterproductive, as it may make both experts and the ordinary people turn away from the things that may help them. It's sad how many intelligent people are literally shooting themselves in their feet.
535:
Someone invents a great "mental technique" and begins to practice it regularly and somehow improves his/her life experience. The experience is so convincing that the individual tries to convince others to try out the technique and in order to do so, tries to find some kind of way to support the idea
488:
I am the main author of this article, and I agree with your criticism of this paragraph. I too have had a lot of experience with "mental techniques" and agree that they work for some people and that they work in much the same way as placebo. However, I do think that the skeptics have a point, but
475:
So, one may criticise as pseudoscience some 'archeologic revelations' as well as the 'brand new' new ideas for 'perpetual engine'; but let the sceptics stay away from the mental techniques, for they will never be able to prove them always beneficial or always harmful (or non-efficient) simply because
440:
As for me, use of the word 'placebo' with regard to the mental techniques is totally wrong. It could stand for the pills and other drug medicines. But not for the mental techniques, since placebo effect itself is a form of mental technique (if it works). Thus, there is _NO DIFFERENCE_ between placebo
1200:
I made a general enquiry about editing this page and was advised to 'be bold'. After making some minor edits, I find that they have all been reversed and I am being accused of vandalism. My first point is that this article is not within the scope of religion. The human potential movement is based in
726:
I tried to take the POV out of the refutations. Saying something is true doesn't make it true. What needs to be supplied here are the results of properly controlled studies which support the contention that specific techniques are useful. I say specific techniques because of course evidence that all
588:
Yes, and they will, but at least some methods must change. For example, because of the individual character of those techniques, it would be wrong to employ the same test as used for new chemical drugs, where the selected group of volunteers are provided with their medication; what works for one may
459:
Mental techniques don't work for everybody. It's individual question. I've been practising NLP, Transcendental
Meditation, visualisation-related methods (with regards to thinking capabilities), Silva method, speed reading and other methods _for years_ with good effects. And I don't care whether some
1348:
Is it really right or fair to say that Viktor Frankl and
Abraham Maslow were "proponents" or otherwise associated with the HPM? Certainly their findings are cited by its founders and adherents, so they have been "associated" with it in a retrospective sense, but as used here it seems to imply that
758:
I reverted the Roots section to what it was before the long passage about George
Leonard was substituted for it, and then moved the encyclopedic part of the passage about Leonard to the Esalen section, where most of it belongs. I think I'll go back and add a note about Leonard to the Roots section,
1228:
Hi, thanks for your comments. Please understand that Knowledge (XXG) is an all-volunteer project, and may not have any experts on the topic of HPM. Articles are vandalized often, and that vandalism often consists of section blanking. Your edits, which were not vandalism, also blanked a section. So
1118:
When the article invokes Feynman, it seems to be claiming that he somehow specifically debunked the concept that humans possess potential. Reading the content of his speech, however, he only discusses his visit to Esalen to recall an incident where he witnesses a couple of naked hippies practicing
715:
The "refutations" are also inadequate, which accounts in part for the propagandistic tone. The refutation of the claim that HP is pseudoscientific is, the way I read it, pseudoscientific itself. The argument seems to be that mental techniques work for some people but not others â well, who do they
1879:
In short, the connections aren't sufficiently made, and the block quotation that follows doesn't resolve this problem either. Actually, Elizabeth Puttick's synopsis of HPM contradicts the statements in this section, arguing HPM influenced New Religious Movements rooted in Eastern religion, rather
1871:
I don't find any of this follows logically and is proven. How exactly did these events "kick-start" the Human Potential Movement? Did Transcendental Meditation offer a definition of human potentialities? I think that is implied with the current text, but it isn't clear -- and I also think stating
1722:
TheFreeDictionary.com website is not a reliable source for Knowledge (XXG) purposes either. Please spend some time reading and trying to understand Knowledge (XXG) policies. I do not understand what you mean by your remark above: "The sources of information are the same person." Could you explain
1098:
I'm doing POV tag cleanup. Whenever an POV tag is placed, it is necessary to also post a message in the discussion section stating clearly why it is thought the article does not comply with POV guidelines, and suggestions for how to improve it. This permits discussion and consensus among editors.
615:
In my opinion, both of them employ the naive "one-size-fits-all" view, which disregards the human diversity and complexity. Actually, there is not, and can't be a panacea. Most of those techniques rely on the individual capabilities as the imagination (meant as the ability to imagine), ability to
1410:
Most of the information in the article refers to the 1960s and 70s. Although the article uses the present tense for HPM, a reader might conclude that this movement is historical. In that case, the reader would expect information about the end or dissolution of the movement. The only thing in the
831:
If I'm interpretting the human potential movement properly, then words such as "happiness, creativity, and fulfillment" should not be used in such an unqualified manner. If I can tap my fullest potential, why would I be happy or fulfilled? Maybe I would become more unfulfilled and unhappy. These
700:
I'm a little concerned that the July 20 edit adding material refuting some criticism, and the other paragraph below in that section also refuting criticism, have a tone that becomes too conversational with the reader, as though we are giving the reader personal advice on how to balance competing
663:
Easy solution - I've removed the whole criticism section, which remained entirely unreferenced weasel worded original research. If you restore it - and it should be restored - you must cite sources. If you want to cite your own independently published works, do so, but Knowledge (XXG) is not a
1915:
The Section "In Europe" cites "Implementing European Union Education and Training Policy" for the claim that there is a rising interesting in HPM in Europe. However, I could not find any direct relation to HPM in the source; the word "human potential" appears once in the book, in the title of a
1669:
are very clear and crucial to the integrity of this site as a credible encyclopedia. While the term 'Human Potential Movement' covers a wide range of concepts and activities (some of which are certainly pretty eccentric), the opinions that it is connected with Multi-Level Marketing or primarily
962:
Some of the best and most balanced criticism of the HPM, looking at both its significant contributions as well as the not-so-hidden narcissistic underbelly that it often (and often unwittingly) supports is from Ken Wilber. See "Eye to Eye," "Sex, Ecology, Spirituality," and "The Eye of Spirit"
1525:
So the copyvio was even more serious than I already thought: you had simply copied a section from the book. I will check it and if you are right, I will apologize and reinstate the quote (quotations in encyclopedic articles are not recommended anyway). You have halfheartedly apologized for the
701:
claims. As has been expressed above on this page, I think there is a valid point being made here that needs to be phrased in a more objective, specific manner that ties into the subject of the movement and its critics, rather than drawing the reader aside into a sort of private conversation. --
816:
It's amazing for me to have finally stumbled across this page and its tracing of this movement, having had a personal breakthrough do to self-actualization (a term I learned in high school Health) and the realization that my life's ultimate goals should be in awakening other people's untapped
500:
I believe you that it's difficult. Thinking about it, I came to the conclusion, that one should seperate the pseudo-scientific or (purely) religious background from the mental techniques, basing on the usefulness (taking the utilitarian stance). One may believe in some religion or not, all
1075:
Notes and References Note no.1 is inactive Note no.2 is Harper's Magazine; this is not a scholarly journal Reference (the only one) a book which is a critique of the HPM External link; Coulson; also an article which is a critique of HPM External link; Silva Method; looks like an advert.
759:
though. Anyway, much of the passage about Leonard was unencyclopedic, and more wasn't really necessary in this article because there is a separate article about him. The passage also smelt of copyright. I'm not saying that it's used without permission, but some reassurance is necessary.
1467:
Apparently you partly (the copyvio-part) understood what the problem was: you basically restored your previous edit, this time with quotation marks added. Nevertheless, I have reverted your restored edit again. This 'quotation' is corrupt: it is nowhere to be found in the source
1371:
to this list, as she was an influential figure in the HPM, but to say she was a "proponent" - well, I'm just not sure if you have to be a cheerleader for the whole movement or if you can be steadfastly promoting radial change in one area to qualify. Any objections to adding her?
554:
However, if all the malappropriated science is jettisoned, and the technique is treated as a purely subjective way of approaching something that may work for some people some of the time, then it would be less likely to bother the skeptics. But now there are a couple of new
1123:
demonstrated great potential throughout history, or the parallel theme that whenever someone does this, inexplicably there are always these people waiting in the wings with baseball bats anxious to beat them down. Whatever your agenda, please leave Mr. Feynman out of this.
1119:
reflexology, and that it perplexed him. What is the aim of an author who falsely invokes an undisputedly credible person to discredit something? Despite the hippies who may have tried to push some analog of the idea that we can be something more, you can't deny that humans
599:
Secondly, the "true believer" agrees with this skeptical, yet optimistic, scientist on precisely that point. The believer thinks that somehow these techniques should be useful for everyone if they work for some people, because, after all, we all share the same basic
1469:
864:
After having one small paragraph for introduction, a tiny paragraph for 'roots', a small paragraph and a quote about relation to other fields, we get 3 whole paragraphs on 'alleged failure to achieve goals'. Does this seem objective, unbiased and informative?
648:, NLP, and so on would probably be able to talk about some of these similarities using some fuzzy language (as I sometimes am prone to do) - like "awareness", "presence", "focus", "attention", "pattern", "habit", "freedom", "choice", "illusion" and so on.
716:
work for and who not? If you can't specify that with evidence you're just speculating. The second criticism is just speculation, as well. No evidence is presented. Anyway, the article needs a lot of work not just in that section but throughout.
1916:
coordination program and neither do research hypothesis refer to it or related concepts. So, while it is plausible that HPM influenced EU programs, I could not establish it via the source, so the section might rather be original research --
1241:
It is great to have you here Fridakahlofan. Please make any changes you believe will improve the article but please support any additions by citing a textbook page number or review article, so readers can confirm the information is sound.
1039:
You give as the main reference a book which critisizes the human potential movement, plus 2 other obscure references. I would really like to know why 'the silva method' is mentioned at all, considering you have left out several of the major
501:
pseudoscience may be (more or less) easily debunked, but nonetheless, the techniques they tried to 'incorporate' (or actually incorporated) may (or may not) be useful. Here is an excerpt of my edition, refutting the first claim of critics:
1349:
they were actively involved in it, which I don't feel to be correct. Galileo and Newton laid a foundation for physics that later led to the study of subatomic particles, but neither was in any direct way "associated" with the field.
852:
You're right about the realization of potential not necessarily producing happiness etc., but the point is that the human potential movement believes it does, so using those terms is not POV but simply a description of the movement.
1205:
topic. It also seems to me that to spend huge amounts of time trying to edit an article which is so poorly researched is pointless. Most of the important concepts used within the HPM are not mentioned, or skimmed over inadequately.
616:'convince oneself' to something (necessary for affirmations to work), receptivity to hypnosis (it has been proven long ago that one may be more or less receptive, as well as non-receptive at all), and many more issues like that.
1787:. If you think that other assertions in the article need references to support them, you can add a 'citation needed' tag and probably someone will find a reference; if they don't in a month or so, you can remove the item.
376:
1452:. And the second sentence is also an exact quote, so I'm not sure why that editor called it an "assemblage". I've re-added it, making clear that it's a quote, and attributing in the text as well as the ref. Any thoughts?
580:
First of all, the optimistic scientist would say that the subjective qualities of the mental experience may currently be in a proto-scientific frontier, but that eventually those areas can and should submit to scientific
181:
63:
1229:
perhaps you can understand the concern regarding your edits. I suggest that you add material to the article and/or improve sections rather than simply removing material, however faulty that material may be. â
1638:
I was sorry. I did not know your discussion. I gave a wrong order of references on the former description. Please read the corrected references once again. Both sources are rather regulated well than some
1989:
1860:
In its current form, I find this section doesn't adequately explain the connections between the hippie counter-culture and Western interest in Indian religions / the emergence of New Religious Movements.
366:
476:
those techniques are individual and not universal, and even if some technique works for the single person on the planet Earth, it's fine (because this person is better off). (Critto, but unlogged)
589:
not work for another one, even if he (she) is a volunteer. Rather, I think that the scientists should concentrate their research on the persons who, with failure or success, used those techniques.
562:
It depends on what skeptics you are talking about: the scientific or the prejudiced :) For example, the Skeptic Dictionary categorized the speed reeding as 'junk science and pseudoscience' (link:
342:
525:"Refutting this criticism, one can say that the stronger an individual is, the more he (or she) may help others; and thus, self-development may give more power to one who wants to help others."
1761:
mystic and establishmentist woman. That is more fanatic, and good sense is doubted. They may sell even the earth with newspapers. If NY Times is reliable, you should trust UK Apologetics. --
1984:
1954:
186:
333:
310:
636:
The other interesting thing is that there are a lot of underlying similarities amongst wide ranges of mental techniques. Many people who have tried a variety of things like
1837:
be added to the list of proponents? The article on Assagioli does say that he was a big name in humanistic and transpersonal psychology. What is more, he was the founder of
1876:
TM defined the term (if it did) is crucial. I also find the last sentence to be a bit irrelevant... it seems to be more about hippies or adherents of TM than it does HPM.
1949:
796:
Neither Esalen nor Leonard belong in the roots section. This segment is far too short and speaks more about other relative frameworks than about human potential sources.
1783:
This nothing to do with what I do or do not "trust"; it is a matter of complying with Knowledge (XXG) policies. Apologetics is a self-published website. Please look at
445:
Placebo effect is not a mental technique, and I defy you to provide any evidence that it is. It is chiefly manifested as a statistical phenomenon. If you look at the
1298:, and the citation will be created a few minutes after you save your edit. Search the source article to find its doi. To get an article's PMID, search for its title
287:
923:
Another interesting source of criticism on the HPM is W. R. Coulson who studied/worked with Abraham Maslow and also worked with Carl Rogers for quite some time.
1753:
of "Authors and essayists" does not have reference. Why do you make only my description a problem? Is it because UK Apologetics is Evangelical Conservative?
1510:
The quote is taken from page 399 of my copy of the book (Lion Publishing 2004), and is exact. Perhaps an apology and a reinstatement of my edit is in order?
1471:, p.286-288). The misrepresentation is now attributed to Puttick, what makes it an instance of source manipulation. I would humbly recommend to you to study
162:
116:
1974:
277:
1329:
of many things "non'christian- hardly reliable sources. There was a sourced statement about narcissism that I put in the Authors and Essayists section.
449:
about it you'll see that many people consider it solely organic. And are you implying that placebo effect is a technique of the human potential movement?
966:
1959:
1944:
152:
1784:
934:
Address of October 20, 1994, at a Conference on The Nature and Tasks of a Personalistic Psychology Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio U.S.A.
1979:
253:
1586:
I removed two refs in the 'Social influences' section. Both of these were opinion pieces published on partisan websites which clearly do not meet
124:
1964:
1443:
first sentence of source and edit are identical. Second sentence is an assemblage: partly copyvio, partly misrepresenting what the source says.
1969:
1350:
1131:
970:
232:
209:
120:
1939:
1016:
910:
128:
104:
58:
1448:
It's not clear to me that either of these reasons are justified: as I understand it, one or two sentences quoted are fair use not
680:
I don't see any purpose for having this segment about controversy. You don't need to 'convince the readers, only to inform them.
33:
1590:. Unless reliable sources can be found to substantiate the dubious assertions in that section, perhaps it should be excised?
1548:
for having said that the quote is corrupt. I had compared the quote with another text of Elizabeth Puttick, and I was wrong.
338:
1892:
important, as there is a long legacy of individualism and self-improvement in American culture dating back at least to the
252:
related articles on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
772:
Turned out the article about George Leonard was about another George Leonard, so I started an article about this one.
869:
I don't see the point of having this section at all, or at least making much smaller relative to the other segments.
566:) , basing on the statement that some people claim to be able to read 10000 to 25000 words per minute(!). (the link:
1700:. I think that references in admiration of HPM is more doubtful. The sources of information are the same person. --
171:
1814:
1766:
1705:
1652:
1334:
522:
I have also placed the rebuttal for another part of criticism (regarding to narcissism and self-centered stance).
1395:
1165:
1901:
1745:
The current Notes of No. 3 and 4 is the same, and there are not page numbers. In addition, each description of
1553:
1535:
1498:
1480:
39:
1354:
974:
1218:
1210:
1135:
1084:
1045:
874:
841:
801:
743:
685:
460:
scientist accepts it as truth or not, especially that, as I said, those techniques are _individual-based_.
1693:
1644:
Human Potential Movement: Difference between revisions. Revision as of 17:33, 29 January 2016 (edit) (undo)
1391:
1161:
1127:
1311:
421:
1183:
341:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1012:
Salerno, Steve (2005). SHAM: How the Self-Help Movement Made America Helpless. New York: Random House.
401:: recent messages have been moved to the bottom of the page to maintain chronological integrity.--
1897:
1810:
1762:
1701:
1648:
1377:
1330:
893:
854:
787:
773:
763:
728:
717:
481:
469:
450:
1449:
21:
1792:
1728:
1675:
1632:
1617:
1595:
1567:
1549:
1531:
1515:
1494:
1476:
1457:
1055:
783:
669:
963:(among others). He is quite critical of the HPM, despite being close with leaders in that field.
1754:
1424:
1233:
1214:
1206:
1150:
1080:
1041:
870:
837:
797:
739:
681:
617:
590:
571:
545:
526:
1419:
was it received at the time? What is its relevance today? Does the HPM exist outside of Esalen?
1029:
Though it is looking for an ISBN, it is a search engine with potentially other off-topic results
1834:
1307:
1013:
914:
907:
888:
Doesn't the human potential movement really go back to Joshua Loth Liebman and his bestseller
818:
416:
406:
1809:
I understood it. I am troublesome, but edit it again. There are plenty of similar sources. --
1666:
1609:
1282:
940:
Global Catholic Network. From Vol. 3, No. 1, January-February 1994 issue of "The Latin Mass."
906:
Hi all. For anyone who's interested, there is a major critique of the HPM by Plumb,L.D. 1993
1921:
1846:
1475:. Think twice before you reply you have done so: obviously you violated the relevant rules.
1179:
224:
203:
1661:
Thank you for that acknowledgement. My main point is this: the Knowledge (XXG) policies on
1838:
1373:
1104:
949:
932:
Full hearts and Empty Heads: the price of certain recent programs in humanistic psychology
465:
95:
1662:
1605:
1587:
1064:
However, that is actually standard practice as per the ISBN project on Knowledge (XXG).
991:
762:
Esalen also is clearly not part of the roots of the movement, which go back to the 40s.
415:
I also had to sort chronologically the posts again, that seemed to be in random order. â
1788:
1750:
1746:
1724:
1671:
1628:
1613:
1591:
1563:
1545:
1511:
1453:
1079:
There are no academic/scholarly/genuine references for HPM (as opposed to its critics)
665:
490:
446:
1472:
1933:
1420:
1230:
1147:
480:
No techniques are uniformly helpful, whether there's evidence that they work or not.
245:
241:
1925:
1905:
1850:
1818:
1796:
1770:
1732:
1709:
1679:
1656:
1621:
1599:
1571:
1557:
1539:
1519:
1502:
1484:
1461:
1428:
1399:
1381:
1358:
1338:
1315:
1236:
1222:
1187:
1169:
1153:
1139:
1108:
1088:
1068:
1058:
1049:
978:
952:
931:
917:
896:
878:
857:
845:
821:
805:
790:
776:
766:
747:
731:
720:
689:
673:
453:
427:
410:
402:
937:
1917:
1842:
1387:
1368:
943:
709:
702:
655:
645:
89:
1100:
637:
249:
85:
1785:
wp:Identifying_reliable_sources#Self-published_sources_.28online_and_paper.29
1065:
605:
79:
52:
1026:
Should be avoided: 9 - Links to search engine and aggregated results pages
567:
325:
304:
1005:
Should be avoided: 9 - Links to search engine and aggregated results pages
115:-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us
782:
And it turned out there was an article about this George Leonard, namely
641:
111:
1696:, I can leave many descriptions, but want to leave the quotation of the
1758:
1604:
I see that this removal was reverted. Not only do the sources not meet
1490:
237:
1299:
601:
1544:
I have reinstated the quote, for it is correct, and I apologize to
1364:
Perhaps two separate lists would be useful? Or renaming this list?
1608:, but they relate to opinions rather than facts, and violate the
786:, so I redirected my attempt to it and added a couple of things.
563:
468:
you can cite some properly controlled studies which disprove it.
1265:
1257:
1252:
15:
1247:
170:
464:
I say mental techniques work for nobody â to disprove that
351:
Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Altered States of Consciousness
1441:, and they were promptly reverted with the edit summary: "
1302:, and the PMID will appear below the article's abstract.
1990:
Low-importance Altered States of Consciousness articles
1880:
than the other way around. Mark Stein's article in the
1643:
1527:
1439:
1438:
I added a couple of sentences to the article yesterday
938:"WE OVERCAME THEIR TRADITIONS, WE OVERCAME THEIR FAITH"
1885:
1960's. I do not have access to the two books cited.
493:. Here's a shot at describing the problem informally.
109:, a project to improve Knowledge (XXG)'s articles on
727:
the techniques are useful is unlikely to available.
354:
Template:WikiProject Altered States of Consciousness
337:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
236:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
832:adjectives should be avoided in a neutral article.
664:platform for primary publishing of your opinions.
1985:C-Class Altered States of Consciousness articles
1955:Mid-importance New religious movements articles
1261:, and paste the result directly into your text.
1032:The link does not direct to a specific article.
1588:Knowledge (XXG)'s criteria as Reliable Sources
944:COULSON ON THE DARE DRUG PREVENTION PROGRAMME
8:
1245:To create a book citation, find the book in
334:WikiProject Altered States of Consciousness
299:
198:
47:
1264:To create an article citation, enter its
1950:C-Class New religious movements articles
1692:It is a subjective problem. As there is
827:"happiness, creativity, and fulfillment"
568:http://www.skepdic.com/speedreading.html
357:Altered States of Consciousness articles
1367:On a similar note, I would like to add
1114:Feynman in the "Psychobabble" paragraph
990:The following links do not comply with
738:The whole article is too conversational
301:
200:
49:
19:
1324:Removal of Comparisons to Other Fields
262:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Skepticism
1196:New untitled post moved from page top
7:
998:Personal Growth on Island Foundation
331:This article is within the scope of
230:This article is within the scope of
137:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Religion
101:This article is within the scope of
1160:Someone seems to have put it back.
38:It is of interest to the following
1975:Low-importance Skepticism articles
1894:Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin
182:New religious movements work group
14:
1473:the relevant rules and guidelines
1960:New religious movements articles
1945:Low-importance Religion articles
324:
303:
223:
202:
88:
78:
51:
20:
1980:WikiProject Skepticism articles
371:This article has been rated as
348:Altered States of Consciousness
339:altered states of consciousness
311:Altered States of Consciousness
282:This article has been rated as
265:Template:WikiProject Skepticism
157:This article has been rated as
1434:Summary added to Roots section
564:http://skepdic.com/tijunk.html
441:effect and mental technique.
1:
1965:WikiProject Religion articles
1926:09:50, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
1600:12:19, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
1400:20:25, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
1188:15:32, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
1170:11:38, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
732:02:14, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
721:22:14, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
454:02:14, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
345:and see a list of open tasks.
256:and see a list of open tasks.
179:This article is supported by
140:Template:WikiProject Religion
1819:17:49, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
1797:17:27, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
1771:18:10, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
1733:21:42, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
1710:18:27, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
1680:10:11, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
1657:17:19, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
1622:10:08, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
1610:neutral point of view policy
1562:Thank you, that's gracious.
1429:05:19, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
1359:15:35, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
1339:20:04, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
1316:10:23, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
1237:16:21, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
1223:01:01, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
1089:16:02, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
1050:01:01, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
953:01:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
902:Plumb; A critique of the HPM
879:01:01, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
846:01:01, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
806:01:01, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
748:01:01, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
690:01:01, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
674:09:22, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
411:19:29, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
1970:C-Class Skepticism articles
1888:Correcting these issues is
1851:21:02, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
519:What do you think about it?
2006:
1906:02:21, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
1572:08:27, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
1558:08:05, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
1540:16:20, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
1520:16:03, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
1503:12:04, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
1485:10:54, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
1462:10:41, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
1109:19:10, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
1069:22:44, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
1059:22:34, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
791:14:41, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
777:14:22, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
767:14:08, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
377:project's importance scale
288:project's importance scale
163:project's importance scale
1940:C-Class Religion articles
1530:. I'll leave it at that.
1382:05:56, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
1146:I removed the section. â
918:05:41, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
822:07:39, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
712:22:56, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
705:21:08, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
428:03:52, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
370:
319:
281:
218:
178:
156:
73:
46:
1154:02:38, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
1140:02:20, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
658:01:03, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
127:standards, or visit the
1406:Criticism & Status?
1268:into your text between
979:00:49, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
897:01:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
858:01:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
64:New religious movements
233:WikiProject Skepticism
175:
28:This article is rated
969:comment was added by
174:
32:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
1582:Sources not reliable
696:The July 20 addition
105:WikiProject Religion
1344:Frankl & MasloW
884:Joshua Loth Liebman
784:George Burr Leonard
268:Skepticism articles
1755:The New York Times
654:a go. Thanks! --
176:
117:assess and improve
34:content assessment
1835:Roberto Assagioli
1829:Roberto Assagioli
1528:on your talk page
1130:comment added by
982:
391:
390:
387:
386:
383:
382:
298:
297:
294:
293:
197:
196:
193:
192:
143:Religion articles
131:for more details.
1997:
1856:Social Influence
1723:please? Thanks.
1392:Ursus-deningeri2
1297:
1296:
1291:
1290:
1280:
1279:
1274:
1273:
1260:
1250:
1162:Ursus-deningeri2
1142:
964:
812:Personal Comment
424:
419:
359:
358:
355:
352:
349:
328:
321:
320:
315:
307:
300:
270:
269:
266:
263:
260:
227:
220:
219:
214:
206:
199:
145:
144:
141:
138:
135:
129:wikiproject page
98:
93:
92:
82:
75:
74:
69:
66:
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
2005:
2004:
2000:
1999:
1998:
1996:
1995:
1994:
1930:
1929:
1913:
1898:BornOn8thOfJuly
1858:
1839:psychosynthesis
1831:
1584:
1436:
1408:
1346:
1331:Elmmapleoakpine
1326:
1295:}}</ref: -->
1294:
1293:
1287:
1286:
1278:}}</ref: -->
1277:
1276:
1270:
1269:
1256:
1246:
1198:
1125:
1116:
1096:
988:
965:âThe preceding
960:
904:
894:John FitzGerald
886:
855:John FitzGerald
829:
814:
788:John FitzGerald
774:John FitzGerald
764:John FitzGerald
756:
729:John FitzGerald
718:John FitzGerald
698:
482:John FitzGerald
470:John FitzGerald
466:null hypothesis
451:John FitzGerald
435:
422:
417:
396:
356:
353:
350:
347:
346:
313:
267:
264:
261:
258:
257:
212:
142:
139:
136:
133:
132:
96:Religion portal
94:
87:
67:
61:
29:
12:
11:
5:
2003:
2001:
1993:
1992:
1987:
1982:
1977:
1972:
1967:
1962:
1957:
1952:
1947:
1942:
1932:
1931:
1912:
1909:
1857:
1854:
1830:
1827:
1826:
1825:
1824:
1823:
1822:
1821:
1802:
1801:
1800:
1799:
1778:
1777:
1776:
1775:
1774:
1773:
1751:George Leonard
1747:Abraham Maslow
1738:
1737:
1736:
1735:
1717:
1716:
1715:
1714:
1713:
1712:
1698:UK Apologetics
1694:this reference
1685:
1684:
1683:
1682:
1640:
1636:
1583:
1580:
1579:
1578:
1577:
1576:
1575:
1574:
1550:Theobald Tiger
1532:Theobald Tiger
1508:
1507:
1506:
1505:
1495:Theobald Tiger
1477:Theobald Tiger
1435:
1432:
1407:
1404:
1403:
1402:
1384:
1365:
1345:
1342:
1325:
1322:
1321:
1320:
1319:
1318:
1305:
1304:
1303:
1262:
1197:
1194:
1193:
1192:
1191:
1190:
1173:
1172:
1157:
1156:
1115:
1112:
1095:
1092:
1073:
1072:
1053:
1052:
1037:
1036:
1035:
1034:
1033:
1030:
1021:
1020:
1009:
1008:
1007:
1006:
1000:
999:
987:
986:External Links
984:
959:
956:
947:
946:
941:
935:
925:
924:
903:
900:
885:
882:
867:
866:
861:
860:
849:
848:
828:
825:
813:
810:
809:
808:
780:
779:
755:
752:
751:
750:
735:
734:
697:
694:
693:
692:
677:
676:
660:
659:
650:
649:
633:
632:
631:
630:
623:
622:
621:
620:
610:
609:
596:
595:
594:
593:
583:
582:
577:
576:
575:
574:
557:
556:
551:
550:
549:
548:
538:
537:
532:
531:
530:
529:
523:
520:
514:
513:
512:
511:
505:
504:
503:
502:
495:
494:
491:psychoanalysis
485:
484:
473:
472:
457:
456:
434:
431:
395:
392:
389:
388:
385:
384:
381:
380:
373:Low-importance
369:
363:
362:
360:
343:the discussion
329:
317:
316:
314:Lowâimportance
308:
296:
295:
292:
291:
284:Low-importance
280:
274:
273:
271:
254:the discussion
228:
216:
215:
213:Lowâimportance
207:
195:
194:
191:
190:
187:Mid-importance
177:
167:
166:
159:Low-importance
155:
149:
148:
146:
100:
99:
83:
71:
70:
68:Lowâimportance
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2002:
1991:
1988:
1986:
1983:
1981:
1978:
1976:
1973:
1971:
1968:
1966:
1963:
1961:
1958:
1956:
1953:
1951:
1948:
1946:
1943:
1941:
1938:
1937:
1935:
1928:
1927:
1923:
1919:
1911:HPM in Europe
1910:
1908:
1907:
1903:
1899:
1895:
1891:
1886:
1883:
1877:
1875:
1869:
1868:
1867:
1862:
1855:
1853:
1852:
1848:
1844:
1840:
1836:
1828:
1820:
1816:
1812:
1808:
1807:
1806:
1805:
1804:
1803:
1798:
1794:
1790:
1786:
1782:
1781:
1780:
1779:
1772:
1768:
1764:
1760:
1756:
1752:
1748:
1744:
1743:
1742:
1741:
1740:
1739:
1734:
1730:
1726:
1721:
1720:
1719:
1718:
1711:
1707:
1703:
1699:
1695:
1691:
1690:
1689:
1688:
1687:
1686:
1681:
1677:
1673:
1668:
1664:
1660:
1659:
1658:
1654:
1650:
1646:
1645:
1641:
1637:
1634:
1630:
1626:
1625:
1624:
1623:
1619:
1615:
1611:
1607:
1602:
1601:
1597:
1593:
1589:
1581:
1573:
1569:
1565:
1561:
1560:
1559:
1555:
1551:
1547:
1543:
1542:
1541:
1537:
1533:
1529:
1524:
1523:
1522:
1521:
1517:
1513:
1504:
1500:
1496:
1492:
1488:
1487:
1486:
1482:
1478:
1474:
1470:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1463:
1459:
1455:
1451:
1446:
1444:
1440:
1433:
1431:
1430:
1426:
1422:
1416:
1412:
1405:
1401:
1397:
1393:
1389:
1386:Good call on
1385:
1383:
1379:
1375:
1370:
1366:
1363:
1362:
1361:
1360:
1356:
1352:
1351:75.216.126.16
1343:
1341:
1340:
1336:
1332:
1323:
1317:
1313:
1309:
1306:
1301:
1289:{{Cite pmid|
1284:
1267:
1263:
1259:
1254:
1249:
1244:
1243:
1240:
1239:
1238:
1235:
1232:
1227:
1226:
1225:
1224:
1220:
1216:
1215:Fridakahlofan
1212:
1208:
1207:Fridakahlofan
1202:
1195:
1189:
1185:
1181:
1177:
1176:
1175:
1174:
1171:
1167:
1163:
1159:
1158:
1155:
1152:
1149:
1145:
1144:
1143:
1141:
1137:
1133:
1132:66.66.187.132
1129:
1122:
1113:
1111:
1110:
1106:
1102:
1093:
1091:
1090:
1086:
1082:
1081:Fridakahlofan
1077:
1070:
1067:
1063:
1062:
1061:
1060:
1057:
1051:
1047:
1043:
1042:Fridakahlofan
1038:
1031:
1028:
1027:
1025:
1024:
1023:
1022:
1018:
1017:1-4000-5409-5
1015:
1011:
1010:
1004:
1003:
1002:
1001:
997:
996:
995:
993:
985:
983:
980:
976:
972:
971:68.46.182.104
968:
957:
955:
954:
951:
945:
942:
939:
936:
933:
930:
929:
928:
922:
921:
920:
919:
916:
912:
911:0-8153-0777-2
909:
901:
899:
898:
895:
891:
890:Peace of Mind
883:
881:
880:
876:
872:
871:Fridakahlofan
863:
862:
859:
856:
851:
850:
847:
843:
839:
838:Fridakahlofan
835:
834:
833:
826:
824:
823:
820:
811:
807:
803:
799:
798:Fridakahlofan
795:
794:
793:
792:
789:
785:
778:
775:
771:
770:
769:
768:
765:
760:
753:
749:
745:
741:
740:Fridakahlofan
737:
736:
733:
730:
725:
724:
723:
722:
719:
713:
711:
706:
704:
695:
691:
687:
683:
682:Fridakahlofan
679:
678:
675:
671:
667:
662:
661:
657:
652:
651:
647:
643:
639:
635:
634:
627:
626:
625:
624:
619:
614:
613:
612:
611:
607:
603:
598:
597:
592:
587:
586:
585:
584:
579:
578:
573:
569:
565:
561:
560:
559:
558:
553:
552:
547:
542:
541:
540:
539:
534:
533:
528:
524:
521:
518:
517:
516:
515:
509:
508:
507:
506:
499:
498:
497:
496:
492:
487:
486:
483:
479:
478:
477:
471:
467:
463:
462:
461:
455:
452:
448:
444:
443:
442:
438:
432:
430:
429:
425:
420:
413:
412:
408:
404:
400:
393:
378:
374:
368:
365:
364:
361:
344:
340:
336:
335:
330:
327:
323:
322:
318:
312:
309:
306:
302:
289:
285:
279:
276:
275:
272:
255:
251:
247:
246:pseudohistory
243:
242:pseudoscience
239:
235:
234:
229:
226:
222:
221:
217:
211:
208:
205:
201:
188:
185:(assessed as
184:
183:
173:
169:
168:
164:
160:
154:
151:
150:
147:
130:
126:
122:
118:
114:
113:
108:
107:
106:
97:
91:
86:
84:
81:
77:
76:
72:
65:
60:
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
1914:
1893:
1889:
1887:
1881:
1878:
1873:
1870:
1865:
1864:
1863:
1859:
1832:
1811:SĂ©rgio Itigo
1763:SĂ©rgio Itigo
1757:supported a
1702:SĂ©rgio Itigo
1697:
1649:SĂ©rgio Itigo
1642:
1603:
1585:
1509:
1447:
1442:
1437:
1417:
1413:
1409:
1347:
1327:
1288:<ref: -->
1272:{{Cite doi|
1271:<ref: -->
1251:, enter its
1248:Google Books
1203:
1199:
1120:
1117:
1097:
1078:
1074:
1054:
989:
961:
948:
926:
915:Savoylettuce
905:
889:
887:
868:
830:
819:Cybertooth85
815:
781:
761:
757:
754:Roots/Esalen
714:
707:
699:
606:phenotypical
474:
458:
439:
436:
414:
398:
397:
372:
332:
283:
231:
180:
158:
119:articles to
110:
103:
102:
40:WikiProjects
1388:Ida P. Rolf
1369:Ida P. Rolf
1180:Doctorx0079
1126:âPreceding
994:standards:
708:I agree. --
646:Feldenkrais
608:attributes.
433:Controversy
1934:Categories
1415:present.
1374:Karinpower
1178:Where? --
1040:theorists.
958:Ken Wilber
950:Malangthon
836:subjective
638:meditation
604:and basic
259:Skepticism
250:skepticism
210:Skepticism
1890:extremely
1789:DaveApter
1725:DaveApter
1672:DaveApter
1629:DaveApter
1614:DaveApter
1592:DaveApter
1564:DaveApter
1546:DaveApter
1512:DaveApter
1489:See also
1454:DaveApter
1281:, or its
666:Rogerborg
555:problems.
1882:LA Times
1526:copyvio
1421:Ileanadu
1285:between
1231:goethean
1148:goethean
1128:unsigned
1094:POV Tags
1056:Lsi john
967:unsigned
892:(1946)?
642:hypnosis
581:inquiry.
394:Untitled
134:Religion
112:Religion
59:Religion
1759:New Age
1667:WP:NPOV
1639:others.
1450:copyvio
1308:Anthony
447:article
423:Neonate
403:Kudpung
375:on the
286:on the
238:science
161:on the
30:C-class
1918:Simulo
1843:Vorbee
1833:Could
710:mporch
703:Gary D
656:mporch
618:Critto
602:genome
591:Critto
572:Critto
546:Critto
527:Critto
36:scale.
1663:WP:RS
1606:WP:RS
1255:into
1101:Jjdon
992:WP:EL
418:Paleo
1922:talk
1902:talk
1847:talk
1815:talk
1793:talk
1767:talk
1749:and
1729:talk
1706:talk
1676:talk
1665:and
1653:talk
1633:talk
1627:To:
1618:talk
1596:talk
1568:talk
1554:talk
1536:talk
1516:talk
1499:talk
1491:here
1481:talk
1458:talk
1425:talk
1396:talk
1378:talk
1355:talk
1335:talk
1312:talk
1300:here
1292:and
1283:PMID
1275:and
1258:here
1219:talk
1211:talk
1184:talk
1166:talk
1136:talk
1121:have
1105:talk
1085:talk
1066:Smee
1046:talk
1014:ISBN
975:talk
927:See
908:ISBN
875:talk
842:talk
802:talk
744:talk
686:talk
670:talk
407:talk
399:NOTE
248:and
123:and
121:good
1874:how
1266:doi
1253:URL
865:No.
367:Low
278:Low
153:Low
125:1.0
1936::
1924:)
1904:)
1896:.
1849:)
1817:)
1795:)
1769:)
1731:)
1708:)
1678:)
1655:)
1647:--
1620:)
1612:.
1598:)
1570:)
1556:)
1538:)
1518:)
1501:)
1493:.
1483:)
1460:)
1445:"
1427:)
1398:)
1380:)
1372:--
1357:)
1337:)
1314:)
1221:)
1186:)
1168:)
1138:)
1107:)
1087:)
1048:)
977:)
877:)
844:)
804:)
746:)
688:)
672:)
644:,
640:,
426:â
409:)
244:,
240:,
189:).
62::
1920:(
1900:(
1845:(
1841:.
1813:(
1791:(
1765:(
1727:(
1704:(
1674:(
1651:(
1635:)
1631:(
1616:(
1594:(
1566:(
1552:(
1534:(
1514:(
1497:(
1479:(
1468:(
1456:(
1423:(
1394:(
1376:(
1353:(
1333:(
1310:(
1234:à„
1217:(
1209:(
1182:(
1164:(
1151:à„
1134:(
1103:(
1083:(
1071:.
1044:(
1019:.
981:.
973:(
873:(
840:(
800:(
742:(
684:(
668:(
405:(
379:.
290:.
165:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
