My biggest confusion about the "spiritual scene," especially Buddhism

Actually it is good to know what is meant by "denial" in the 12 step context (like Al-Anon).

Denial is a word that is used when person doesn't agree with the diagnosis that is cast upon him/her. When groupers, family members or other social groups have an opinion that a person has problems with alcohol, other drugs or with his/her personality they will cast a commonly agreed diagnosis on that person. Then when they confront that person, they will address this diagnosis on him/her. If the person fails to admit that it is indeed a correct diagnosis for me and I shall take actions because of it, they will say that that person is in denial - s/he doesn't want to see the truth but rather sticks with his/her own story of how things are.

Denial is used very much in the 12 step context and actually it is one of the mind-controlling mechanisms integrated in the program vocabularity. There are also many slogans that are repeated over and over again that are supposed to reveal some universal truth and groupers strenghten those mantras by repeating them endlessly in the groups.

One of the means of authority transferring is the concept of "long time members"/"old timers". By just attending the groups for rather long time, those members are supposed to gain such wisdom which lifts them above the more junior members. The 12 step program vocab and literacy strengthens this kind of hierarchy with slogans, anecdotes etc. It is very common that old timers, who have practiced the usage of the mind-controlling language for a long time, will use it to build their own authority over the more junior members who lack the ability to use that vocabularity in a debate.

So Telecaster, even though you propably aren't a member of 12 step fellowship, it might be the case that your observations are being mitigated with the language and methods learned from the spiritual trad of 12 step fellowship..

Yes, the disempowering of an individual's innate critical thinking and insight in response to refuting the diagnosis of an authority figure has a long and rich history in psychiatry, and is the source of the "denial" language of AA. Someone who has a psychiatric label placed upon them, who disagrees, is usually said to "lack insight" or be in denial. Sometimes the diagnosis is wrong, and the individual has enough insight to know this; other times, they genuinely do lack insight or are in denial. All parties need to be open to both possibilities. That is why in contemporary mental health, there is a push to towards a partnership, collaboration and equality of power relations between professionals, carers and service users. It is no longer an imposed top-down force-fed 'disempowerment for your own good', except where individuals are deemed a risk to themselves and others and an involuntary treatment order is enacted for these reasons.

In AA, as I understand it, one is expected to voluntarily acknowledge one's powerlessness to give up drinking and turn over to a greater power - God or program itself - this may work, or not. On principle, these are old-school lines of thought, and not consistent with contemporary practice, at least in Britain and Australia.

In kind regards,

Adam.

Constance, are you still around?