In the last article, I wrote about negative training, of which there are a huge number in our time. People are interested in the criteria by which an untrained person can identify dangerous training. I will make a reservation that it is worth using these criteria as recommendations when making a decision. Don't draw a conclusion based on one criterion. Sometimes there may be exceptions - but they must be considered on a case-by-case basis. If you have questions about specific trainings, please contact me, I can tell you what to look for - the decision, of course, is up to you. At the Institute of Forensic Psychiatry named after. Serbsky said about such trainings: “Participation in such training is permissible only under the supervision of a psychotherapist, no matter what the company representatives themselves say. These trainings are dangerous because they give rigid, categorical life guidelines and use crude methods of “reprogramming” the psyche.” So, about the criteria (in order not to reinvent the wheel - this article is in many ways a compilation of the works of the Orthodox missionary apologetic center "Stavros", and the candidate of psychological sciences A. Neveev, with my own modifications): 1. First, let's look at the name. Is it named in scientific terms or words that can be explained? Does it contain incomprehensible, abstract, but positive words such as leadership, success, efficiency, personal growth? These criteria are immeasurable and not aimed at specifics. If the training is from an organization, you need to find out which organization is conducting the training, who is the leader of the organization, what is its experience? If you are told that the training is being conducted by the “International Academy of the Holy Spirit”, “Institute of Light”, “Academy of Parapsychological Sciences”, “Laboratory of Esoteric Knowledge”, etc., etc., there is every reason to be wary. 2. Who will conduct the training, be sure to find out the education of this person: basic, additional (higher psychological education is required, academic degrees and certificates are desirable). How real are the coach's credentials? To what extent does his education and experience correspond to the goals of the training and its title? What is the general cultural level of the coach? How correct is his speech? Is the coach behaving strangely? And are there any reviews about the trainer’s inappropriate behavior “behind the scenes” (Often, such data is not difficult to find on the Internet). If a trainer cannot present a relevant higher education or states that education and qualifications are stupid and he has long outgrown this level, or simply declares himself a successful businessman who decided to share the secrets of success, then most likely this trainer is conducting dangerous training. At the same time, the presence of regalia, education, membership in some society or academy, unfortunately, in our country does not guarantee anything: regalia can be fake. (Or the so-called academy that issued the diploma can be simply made up - I I personally encountered this situation). We do not exclude the possibility of nuggets, well-read people - here it is simply important to be attentive.3. Personality of the trainer and presenter. If the training leader is a doctor of physical sciences, has completed two months of psychological courses, and during the training process uses, for example, methods of pressure on emotions, there is every reason to doubt the environmental friendliness of the training. Psychologists who practice dubious methods tend to avoid scientific conferences, forums and, in general, the “bird” language of science. Note statements such as: “they are theoreticians, and I am a practitioner, I bring real benefit - I treat people,” “science has become ossified, it is untenable, the time has come for a new psychology, new people.” If the trainer considers himself the developer of his own theory, direction, or concept, ask how substantiated it is, whether it is recognized in scientific circles (if so, by whom) and on the works of which authors it is based. Since the foundations of fundamental psychology (social, personality, developmental, etc.) have been laid, it is almost impossible to create your own direction (school, theory) without relying on their experience. A theory isolated from scientific knowledge,the concept of personality, etc., most likely speaks of its failure, deliberate distancing. If the author cites authoritative religious works (the Bible, Vedas, etc.) as the fundamental basis of his psychological direction, and often refers to them, it is worth considering that a considerable part of the statements of the sacred scriptures are abstract, not defined, and their distorted interpretation is not excluded.4 . Within the framework of which psychological school is the training conducted (Gestalt psychology, transactional analysis, psychosynthesis, drama therapy, psychoanalysis, etc.)? Remember that sciences such as parapsychology, transcendental psychology, esoteric psychology, etc. are not recognized by scientific psychology, so how they are not scientifically substantiated, do not have a clear paradigm, methodology, do not meet the criteria of being scientific. To what extent does the training affect the global sphere? Success in general? Leadership in general? Attractiveness in general? Adequate training will be aimed at something specific (working with fears, with the emotional sphere, etc.) Abstract words about “happiness”, “world peace”, “a journey into the depths of one’s Self” and “self-improvement” - should arouse suspicion.5. The manner of conducting the event. How does the coach behave: does he keep his distance? Does irrational reacting fuel emotions? Does it incite hatred towards any object? If you answered “yes” to at least one of these questions, then most likely you have entered a dangerous training. Is it possible on the part of the trainers, during the training, to expect directive instructions, suppression of the opinion of the training participant, strict control, manipulation, provocations? If you are confidently told “no”, and during the training you encountered exactly these techniques, you have the right to immediately indicate for deception, refuse the training, demand reimbursement of expenses. Be sure to check whether the “stop” rule applies to the training (the ability to “switch off” from the exercise, the possibility of non-participation). What part of the training is the trainer's motivational speeches? Motivational speeches are full of slogans, appeals, shouts, attacks, inflated emotions and inflamed primitive instincts - self-preservation, rejection of strangers, sex, profit, etc. The larger the part occupied by motivational speeches, the more dangerous the training. Hitler's speeches were almost 100% motivational - no verifiable facts, just shouts, waving of arms and arousal of emotions and primitive instincts! 6. To what extent does the training affect your personality? Does the coach get personal? Does it speak about who you are and who you should become? Does your coach humiliate you? Does it offend you? Does he make fun of you? Does the coach use group pressure? Are individual members pitted against the group as a whole? Are you ashamed of what you do and/or say during the training? If you answered “yes” at least once, then you are in dangerous training.7. Is the training organization and its leader criticized? What persons and organizations? What is the point of criticism? How justified is it? How does the organization react to criticism and how to treat the individuals and organizations that criticize it?8. Note statements such as: “And Jesus was not recognized at first,” “Everything new makes its way with great difficulty,” “Some crazy people even claim that we are some kind of sect,” “We many times offered him to undergo our trainings to make sure in their effectiveness, but he refused...", "There are people trying to vulgarize everything, throw mud at everything, unfortunately, and we have become their victim." The refusal to accept criticism, attempts to make people who criticize the organization seem angry, closed-minded, etc., speak for themselves. No training can be 100% effective? If they confidently answer you “yes, it is effective,” you have reason to be wary. Ask to justify effectiveness.9. Do training participants sign any document before the training, and if so, what is its essence? Is it possible to familiarize yourself with it? Is there a clause like: “no matter what happens during the training, the training participant himself is responsible for everything, he himself is to blame for all possible excesses.” Do they sign.