Part 1: Rational Inquiry for Dummies

I will now teach what Keith Raniere calls Rational Inquiry – and I’ll do it for FREE.

You need not pay for it unless you think the actual classes taught by Executive Success Programs will help you achieve what is promised by him and his coaches for those who study Rational Inquiry as taught by Keith Raniere.

All that I will teach is online and free to everyone.

Nothing is purloined.

In order to get a patent – which was Mr. Raniere’s goal  – he had to explain what it is was he wished to patent. [For example, you cannot get a patent on a light bulb without describing what it is].

Consequently, Mr. Raniere had to explain what Rational Inquiry is – to the world.

It was placed online because Mr. Raniere made an attempt to patent his “Rational Inquiry” methodology.

His application was made with the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE,  United States Patent and Trademark Office. He filed on September 01, 2000.

He was not successful.

On September 25, 2013, the US Patent Office rejected his patent application.

He was not successful because there is nothing that is patent-able in it.

By the way, Rational Inquiry is not “patent- pending” as ESP claims.

It is “patent rejected”.

No patent has been issued and it is not pending.

The reason for his not being given a patent is that there is nothing he invented.

You can’t patent concepts – vague or specific.

You cannot patent words.

Because he attempted to patent “Rational Inquiry“. the course he says should be patented entered the public domain. It is now as free as air.

If there was something he could have patented, he could charge for the use of it.

But “Rational Inquiry” itself – as he defined it – is and always will be free as air.

That does not mean he cannot charge people for his or his coaches teaching it at their classrooms.

I can also charge you for teaching everything in it since it CANNOT BE PATENTED.

I can also charge you to teach you. for example, yoga or singing or how to be a moron.

But I cannot patent yoga. I cannot stop you from teaching yoga.

I cannot stop you from telling everybody in the world about yoga and how to practice it.

Similarly, you or I or anyone can teach anything mentioned in Raniere’s patent for  “Rational Inquiry“.

I think part of the reason it failed to get a patent is that there is nothing good which is unique and nothing unique which is good.

I don’t think it failed to be patented because Mr. Raneire’s name is so perfidiously soiled by his reputation for sinister deeds, secretiveness, bizarre cult like behavior and rumored criminality, as well as cruelty.

But I cannot imagine there is any value to being associated with a man with the reputation of being a monster. So if you were to teach it, I would not use his name.

WHAT IS IT?

Rational Inquiry“, according to Mr. Raniere, is an “educational method for personal improvement.”

He summarizes his so-called invention in his failed patent application:

Rational Inquiry includes questions and observations [which lead to his answers] on free-will, human sensation, cognition /perception and belief which lead to the discovery of ‘the extent of human potential.’

Something called “Integration” occurs when inconsistencies “become consistent”.

Rational Inquiry teaches “the more integrated an individual is, the more consistent his or her beliefs and behavior patterns will be.”

Pay attention to that term “behavior patterns.”

“The more consistent with respect to reality the person is, the better he or she will be in their life experience.”

Mr. Raniere, by his own admission, assumes he can define “reality” and “better”.

He states, “Rational Inquiry changes the way individuals experience  the world.”

No truer words were ever written.

“When integration occurs, a piece of information falls into place and the meaning of the stimulus changes. Rational Inquiry creates integrations so people become more consistent in their beliefs and behavior.

“Integration provides a shift in how people do things.

Whatever made things difficult in the past “just falls away and disappears.”

Those past difficulties could be as simple as being close to one’s mother and father. Or being faithful to one’s husband. Or sacrificing oneself to raise one’s children or saying no to being branded on your pubic region.

“For example, if an individual has a sub-optimal emotional response to a stimulus, it is often a result of the meaning the student applies to the stimulus.”

This then is the method of changing meaning.

This can be good or bad.

“Traditional therapy modifies and changes the emotional response that the student has to a stimulus. The rational inquiry method modifies the meaning of the stimulus itself to the student before an emotional response occurs.”

The modules include “practices and inquiries that change a individual’s recognition and beliefs.”

The modules create a “consistent personal” definition for “concepts and words.”

It teaches one to rethink and redefine words to get a consistency taught by Mr. Raniere.

There are “rules and rituals” which teach the student  “communication” and to learn to blame themselves for their choices “at all times.”

It teaches the student “honesty and disclosure” for “building integrity” while at the same time requiring the student to never disclose the teachings,

Rational Inquiry teaches the student how to “generate rapport”, an “excited state” to increase “effective communication”; “persistence to build long-term commitment” to generate “peak intensity”; and a “power state’ for a “full bandwidth of emotions”.

It teaches the student “to produce more satisfying results”; to “raise self- esteem” to “recognize good and bad”; to “understand, identify and protect themselves against parasite strategies that keep people dependent on others.”

It teaches “ethics, justice, crime and punishment” and how to “recognize and avoid shifters who destroy value.”

It teaches how to pay “tribute to others who have contributed to them”.

It teaches how to “raise ethics to better society”; to “determine [one’s] market value”; and teaches “time management skills”.

The classes include video tapes, internet, intranet, seminars and hard-copy material.

Mr. Raniere teaches, as absolutes, very subjective things. He teaches what and who are good and bad and who deserves tribute and who deserves punishment.

This may be reasons it was not approved for a patent.

He also assumes a person needs uniform consistency.

As we delve further into the patent, we will see the main idea behind Rational Inquiry is to modify one’s thinking.

The “better” the student, the more compliant they will be to his teachings – and the more “tribute” they will learn to feel they owe him. If they are good and not parasitic, they will pay that tribute by doing everything and anything for him.

Stay tuned for part 2.

4 thoughts on “Part 1: Rational Inquiry for Dummies

  1. This finding is quite incredible. If Keith / ESP has no patent on his “technology” (as ESP would call it) then in reality can he sue when people talk about the course and the nature of the course? Of course there is an NDA that we all signed. But if he doesn’t have anything proprietary or patented in there, then can he prove damages when someone leaks info about the course as the course isn’t necessarily unique in any way? This is a much bigger issue because ESP is a highly litigious company that has gone to court to protect it’s secrets – but as this article suggests, there really are no secrets that are protectable. Several of us are talking about how this one article might bring the end of ESP.

    • One can claim “trade secret” without patent protection. Even with (necessarily published) patent protection, for extensions of the patent. Trade secret requires some affirmative effort to protect it. Raniere-world scrambled a bit to pretend that course material was more carefully protected that it was in practice (can’t remember where I read it).

      Raniere-world actually lost bigly in the Supreme Court regarding “fair use” of copyrighted, patent-pending, trade-secret, and NDA material. People were contracted by Rick Ross to criticize ESP course material as culty, and used short quotes. Even though the Supreme Court agreed that Ross obtained the material basically illegitimately, the public interest in truth, and the minimal revelation through short quotes, made it permissible.

      NXVIM appears as a Supreme Court precedent.

      Raniere inadvertently advanced free speech and truth.

Leave a Reply