Scientology is all bad

[Panda Termint]

Yes, indeed. "It's all in the mind!"

 

[Jquepublic]

What you are characterizing as "making you wrong" is what others term as disagreement or opinion.

Example: A couple days ago I called in the top scientists, engineers, physicists, doctors and designers of a new medical technology that my company has been developing for several years. We had some decisions to make on functions, specifications, FDA issues and patents. Our top two visionaries (and geniuses) had major disagreements and could "prove" the other was mistaken on some rather complex issues of optics and the behavior of light. They went at it (as usual) in a brilliant tour de force of mastery that ping-ponged back and forth--but without unproductive "hostility "or "make wrong". They were, in truth, not actually hostile as it might have appeared--they were simply passionate to an extreme level. Left to themselves a few moments, they would, however, have possibly stormed out, lol. However they were, in fact, proving each other wrong every step of the way. I put these two on the same R&D project over two years ago although they had inherently different methods of approach to problem solving and innovation--on top of their respective mastery of different but related scientific disciplines. The outcome, as usual, was that yet new IP was generated and heralded as a breakthrough. I never allowed them to devolve into personal histrionics and proprietary warfare, although they had each advised me over the years that it was "impossible" for them to work with the other for reasons they could quite eloquently detail. I simply patched up the glitches and got them back to a their phenomenally successful collaboration and, thus far over 100 patent claims have been filed.

The point, here, is that characterizing it as "make wrong" is not taking into account the oft-times phenomenal benefits that arise out of disagreement if it is allowed to run its course.

I disagreed with you. It's not the end of the world. Usually it is a lot better to let these things play out and see where it leads to.

The concept of "make wrong" is something that evolved out of the madness of L. Ron Hubbard and was used as a mechanism for stopping people from discussing Scientology. I don't see it as a valuable tool.

I harbor no animosity for you. I simply have a different opinion.

I see what happened now. I was talking about feelings, you responded as if I stated an opinion. From my end, I said such and such makes me feel creeped out and from that position, your reply read as "that's stupid". Hence my use of the term made wrong - I felt that my emotional reaction was negated by your statement of opinion.

I was just bitching about something that bugs me and acknowledging that it stems from my own involvement with the cult. Having recognised that, contrary to Hubbard's assertions, doesn't make it go away. :confused2:

 

[Jquepublic]

Arguing about whether or not there is a state of Clear, and what the abilities might be, is not unlike arguing about what the PH of Alien's acid blood might be or how long Neo from Matrix can live.

<snip>THAT is what Scientologists do. They familiarize themselves with an entire fictional scenario, filled with make-believe histories, events and abilities, and then they PRETEND to BE these things.

The problem, of course, is that the players do not know that they are ROLE PLAYING! They actually believe the fictions.

Now, there is nothing wrong with imaginatively discussing the characters of fictional stories, just for the sake of "what if", but most people who are involved with role playing games stop playing the game after a period of play. They go and live life and do OTHER things. The game is only a part of ones whole varied life.

In Scientology, it is a role playing game that pretends NOT to be a role playing game. And, there is no time out or turning the game off. It embraces and claims to underlie ALL life.

Love these analogies! As a seasoned gamer, let me take the opportunity to suggest anyone currently engaged in RPing Scientology check out World of Warcraft. You'll only be asked to pay $15 a month and get way better loot!

 

[Bill]

I would disagree that it is necessarily 'less'. That's your assessment, not mine.


Mark A. Baker

Well spotted!

Since David Mayo uses the term "Release", which is much, much less than the original definition of Clear (Clear being "permanent" and release being temporary), I'd say my summation of that paragraph was accurate.

But that's just my assessment.

Bill

 

[Smilla]

Which of course involves 100% total SUBJECTIVITY.

So much of Scientology is subjectivity pretending to be what it is not.

Personal fiction parading as some sort of "objective truth".

I'm quite happy with people inhabiting their subjective reality of choice. It gets to be a problem when people want others to believe that their subjective reality should be accepted by others.

I had an imaginary friend when I was a kid, and my mother only told me a few years ago that he never existed.

No problem.

He existed for me, but not for anyone else.

I'm comfortable with that.

 

[Bill]

...

How come nobody is saying the punchline to the joke about Clear?

Take ANY definition of Clear, much as it alters or contradicts the other definitions, and you still end up with a glowing homo novus, capable of "powers" and "cause".

That Clear can finally be free and healthy and happy.............

Until they visit the registrar's office and find out that they, the Clear "....are at great risk" unless they pay for and do OT III when they will permanently remove and erase the source of all "overwhelm" that still plagues and "ruins" their very existence (requiring more Clearing).

Until they visit the registrar's office and find out that they have only scratched the surface and, essentially, are going down a 76 trillion year dwindling spiral because of unhandled NOTs (more OT III).

The gains of Scientologists are very short lived, amounting to an induced euphoria (by others and self, called a "big win") that is sufficient and adequate to obscure-by-oblivion the next dissem formula which will "find their ruin or make one real to them".

Scientologists are always in a state of ruin or being ruined. I mean, come on Scientologists and Indie Scientologist....how great can a "state" be when the person is "at great risk"? Yeah, so that is the forbidden punchline to the joke of Scientology.

Whatever they are promised or understand about the state of Clear is largely irrelevant as long as they are intoxicated to the degree that they can be seduced into taking off their [STRIKE]panties[/STRIKE] "brick overcoat" and "laying down" (hard cash).

But you forget! The fz/indies are, as we speak, redefining everything you might poke fun at as ... something else.

Their conception of Scientology is something different from anything illogical or stupid. They won't put it in writing and they won't tell you what it is (so you can't poke holes in it and laugh) but, trust me, it's "not like that" in the indie/fz Scientology. Their Scientology is "good" and "scientific". So stop making fun of their (hidden) belief system - that's "intolerant" and "bigoted".

Bill

 

[Demented LRH]

No no, the auditors applied only Hubbard-"Tech" of that time:


And all of this "very few thetans" entered Scientology because they were Clear. Some of them where crossed as Jesus in a past life. Maybe because they had a common BT. Research still pending.

Yes, you are correct -- they all apply Hubbard's Tech, I know it now. But at the time when I met a group of natural-born Clears I was a Scientologist. I tried to explain the contradiction between their existence and the material that I got from book 1, Volumes I and II of Dianetics Series. The only explanation I could come up with was the incompetent auditing.

 

[Demented LRH]

The Church all omnipotent, do not mess with them. Even if you are a Clear, they can punish you by reinstalling all your engrams.

I read an article at OCMB saying that the the cult "can revoke the status of Clear". This applies even to the OTs.

 

[Bill]

I would disagree that it is necessarily 'less'. That's your assessment, not mine.


Mark A. Baker

Look, Mark, it's a given in these discussions of Hubbard™ Scientology that you will interrupt the discussion to claim that Baker™ Scientology is superior in every way and does not have any of the flaws of Hubbard™ Scientology. And, since the only thing we actually know about Baker™ Scientology is that "it isn't Hubbard™ Scientology", we'll just have to take your word for it.

Thanks for your contribution to the discussion. Now we'll go back to discussing Hubbard™ Scientology.

Bill

 

[Gadfly]

The Church all omnipotent, do not mess with them. Even if you are a Clear, they can punish you by reinstalling all your engrams.

I read an article at OCMB saying that the the cult "can revoke the status of Clear". This applies even to the OTs.

Isn't it amazing? The Church of Scientology can cancel and revoke ALL of your "certificates". Isn't that sort of like taking away from you what you NEVER really had in the first place anyways?

People who framed and put their "Clear cert" or "OT III cert" up on their wall always seemed weird to me. I would get a cert, and basically bury it in a drawer. I never attached much meaning to such absurdities. It was as if the Qual Division in Scientology would license the capabilities of your mind!

Mmmm? So, if you are a "problems release", and have the "ability to spot the source of problems and make them vanish", when your cert is cancelled, you THEN LOSE the "ability"?



In Scientology they "make sense" of this with the notion that a person cannot hold onto his or her gains if he or she is unethical. Thus, ANY person who gets his or her certs and awards cancelled MUST be "out-ethics", and THUS will, of course, "lose the gains and abilities".

With all the various FIXED IDEAS of Scientology, once you accept them, it DOES make "logical sense". If one accepts all the nutty premises, then using logic, various conclusions seem to flow naturally. Of course the largest illogical thing of all was ACCEPTING THE NUTTY CLAIMS AND STATEMENTS of Hubbard in the first place.

 

[Jquepublic]

Isn't it amazing? The Church of Scientology can cancel and revoke ALL of your "certificates". Isn't that sort of like taking away from you what you NEVER really had in the first place anyways?

People who framed and put their "Clear cert" or "OT III cert" up on their wall always seemed weird to me. I would get a cert, and basically bury it in a drawer. I never attached much meaning to such absurdities. It was as if the Qual Division in Scientology would license the capabilities of your mind!

Mmmm? So, if you are a "problems release", and have the "ability to spot the source of problems and make them vanish", when your cert is cancelled, you THEN LOSE the "ability"?



In Scientology they "make sense" of this with the notion that a person cannot hold onto his or her gains if he or she is unethical. Thus, ANY person who gets his or her certs and awards cancelled MUST be "out-ethics", and THUS will, of course, "lose the gains and abilities".

With all the various FIXED IDEAS of Scientology, once you accept them, it DOES make "logical sense". If one accepts all the nutty premises, then using logic, various conclusions seem to flow naturally. Of course the largest illogical thing of all was ACCEPTING THE NUTTY CLAIMS AND STATEMENTS of Hubbard in the first place.

I never framed any certs - I was presented with some that were already framed but those wound up taking space under the bed and eventually abandoned - but I framed my declare.

It was hard for me to come to terms with the fact that I'd spent years earning "credentials" that in no way carried over outside the confines of the cult. Nothing useful, nothing applicable to the job market, nothing worth listing on a resume. Wasted time. Except of course for the life lessons resulting from wasting said time.

 

[Caroline]

so in session, one runs incidents "whether real or imagined"

And the auditor doesn't evaluate, he just states "thank you your needle is floating"

thus past lives seem real. I guess.

It's kind of like that. There are certain incidents, such as the ones Hubbard wrote about in HOM and in the OT 3 materials that Scientologists must accept and run exactly as given. If they don't, their cases are evaluated as "dub-in" or "bypassed" or "resistive," etc.

The idea that auditors don't evaluate is BS. We'd evaluate like crazy. We were just not allowed to let on to the pc that we were evaluating them. You should read some of the back and forth between auditors and C/Ses in pc folders.

By the time Scientologists get to OT 3, they must be in a case condition where they accept the Xenu story and the "reality" that their bodies are infested with BTs. If not, their C/Ses evaluate their cases as "bypassed" or "resistive."

Instructions (cont) 5c
There are hundreds of BTs you will find.

If you find none, get audited on Dianetics and as above (Impact List), and if you still find none, get a Review GF #40 [1] and handle all items, then go back to solo.

If you find only one or Two, get the Dianetic Impact List done.

All "none on OT III" were later found loaded.

[1] GF #40: Green Form 40 is a prepared list that auditors use to detect the reasons for why cases are "resistive." Items on the list, which includes overts, evil purposes, drugs, former therapy before Scientology, and problems with lower grades, are "assessed" on the meter. Reading items are handled according to GF instructions.

Hubbard called it a "key law" that "Reality is proportional to the amount of charge off" the case. (HCOB 2 November 1968 Case Supervisor Class VIII The Basic Processes)

When beginning pcs don't find "real" incidents to run, the remedy is to purposely run them on imaginary incidents. (HCOB 16 January 1975 Past Life Remedies.) Pretty soon those incidents start looking perfectly real.

So the idea technically is to keep running them on anything that will run, keep getting that TA action on the e-meter and pretty soon those Scientologists will be mocking up some real doozies to run, and they'll "know" they're perfectly real.

There's nothing quite like getting told by your auditor that your needle is floating, when that engram erased or that BT blew. What a win!

Actually, what auditors do constantly is misevaluate for their pcs; that is, they evaluate incorrectly. It is possible, no matter how rare, to receive evaluation (or non-misevaluation) from some psychotherapist or counselor. But it's only possible to get misevaluation from Scientology auditors, beginning with the evaluation that auditing is what their pcs need.

Logically, there must be incorrect evaluations, i.e., misevaluations; otherwise all evaluations would be correct. If auditors actually did evaluate for their pcs and ended the endless misevaluation, they would tell them to stop looking to Hubbard and the Scientologists for their evaluations.

 

[R6Basic]

Love these analogies! As a seasoned gamer, let me take the opportunity to suggest anyone currently engaged in RPing Scientology check out World of Warcraft. You'll only be asked to pay $15 a month and get way better loot!

Right now you can play World of Warcraft for free up to level 20!

And what's great about that game is, unlike Scn., the abilities obtained are real.

 

[Gib]

It's fully explained in BT Theory, lol.

The PC isn't the person who has OT3 as an incident, it's dem pesky BTs. They've been around a lot longer per the paradigm. The theory about the "whole track" pictures is that they don't really belong to the PC at all, they are BT pictures misowned by the PC.

NB: Explaining this stuff, not promoting it.

I found this today:

https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!msg/alt.religion.scientology/fnkH09otHa8/mdd5UrRHRLUJ

 

[Gib]

The ONLY definition of ' Clear' that can hold any water is:

A Clear is someone who thinks they are a Clear.

ok, I get what you are saying. I also follow now what you say in your posts. You are very simple (basic) in stating your viewpoint. To a certain degree I do the same.

 

[Infinite]

I found this today:

https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!msg/alt.religion.scientology/fnkH09otHa8/mdd5UrRHRLUJ

One snippet from that great link . . .

. . . I always preface my response by saying that there have never been any clinical studies done to determine the effects of auditing. I have my opinions, but my opinions are based purely on my own experience and nothing else. Certainly they are not based on any scientific evidence, because there
isn't any. Hubbard never did any scientific testing, and no one else ever has either. The only available information is purely anecdotal . . .

. . . there were two studies done, with the cooperation of L Ron Hubbard, at New York University. One found no substantiation for the existence of Engrams and the other found that there was no measurable increase in various abilities as claimed by Dianetics. Of course, Stacy is talking about Scientology and not Dianetics, but I think its worth mentioning the the two university clinical trials.

 

[Gib]

One snippet from that great link . . .



. . . there were two studies done, with the cooperation of L Ron Hubbard, at New York University. One found no substantiation for the existence of Engrams and the other found that there was no measurable increase in various abilities as claimed by Dianetics. Of course, Stacy is talking about Scientology and not Dianetics, but I think its worth mentioning the the two university clinical trials.

Got it.

I will offer this. A simple study to do.

Somebody on drugs. Says he wants to get off it. Do a OCA test, IQ test. Get them off the drugs by whatever means. Re do the tests. See the tests raise by 20 IQ points.

Now, at the same time, have somebody in the same sit, wants to get off drugs, have them do the purif, re test the IQ test and OCA.

My guess, same results. That is their IQ and OCA will raise.

So do the same with any other therapy for whatever.

It's a PR world per Hubbard.

 

[Gottabrain]

I found this today:

https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!msg/alt.religion.scientology/fnkH09otHa8/mdd5UrRHRLUJ

Good find, Gib!

There are some great comments in there. Did you do the OT levels? Do you know what Incident 1 is?

Here is one of the comments:



INCIDENT 4

LOUD SNAP (Bones breaking)
CHEVROLETS COME OUT
BURN RUBBER
FISHTAIL RIGHT
DO U-TURN
STALL
FLAT TIRE (No motion)
BLOWS HORN
BLOWS MISCAVIGE
CRASH




And Bob Minton wrote a comment on that thread, too:

Peter, could it be the remnants of your Scieno/Psych/CCHR phobias kicking in to
cause you to make what I consider to be such an uninformed statements on the
effects of psychtropic drugs? Pyschotropic drugs neither "scramble up the mind"
or make someone "no longer troubled." No doubt Diane Richardson will educate us
further.


>Anyway, all I can say is that personally, my mind is much clearer since I
>stopped auditing OT7. I'm afraid that the real road to freedom consists of
>confronting your own problems, and doing things in the real world, and not
>sitting around turning your mind into mush with a lot of screwball Science
>Fiction.

Amen!

Bob Minton

 

[Gib]

Good find, Gib!

There are some great comments in there. Did you do the OT levels? Do you know what Incident 1 is?

Here is one of the comments:



INCIDENT 4

LOUD SNAP (Bones breaking)
CHEVROLETS COME OUT
BURN RUBBER
FISHTAIL RIGHT
DO U-TURN
STALL
FLAT TIRE (No motion)
BLOWS HORN
BLOWS MISCAVIGE
CRASH




And Bob Minton wrote a comment on that thread, too:

Peter, could it be the remnants of your Scieno/Psych/CCHR phobias kicking in to
cause you to make what I consider to be such an uninformed statements on the
effects of psychtropic drugs? Pyschotropic drugs neither "scramble up the mind"
or make someone "no longer troubled." No doubt Diane Richardson will educate us
further.


>Anyway, all I can say is that personally, my mind is much clearer since I
>stopped auditing OT7. I'm afraid that the real road to freedom consists of
>confronting your own problems, and doing things in the real world, and not
>sitting around turning your mind into mush with a lot of screwball Science
>Fiction.

Amen!

Bob Minton

I'm grade 0. Wife ot8.

 

[Infinite]

Got it.

I will offer this. A simple study to do.

Somebody on drugs. Says he wants to get off it. Do a OCA test, IQ test. Get them off the drugs by whatever means. Re do the tests. See the tests raise by 20 IQ points.

Now, at the same time, have somebody in the same sit, wants to get off drugs, have them do the purif, re test the IQ test and OCA.

My guess, same results. That is their IQ and OCA will raise.

So do the same with any other therapy for whatever.

It's a PR world per Hubbard.

Heh!! Like being on drugs doesn't affect your IQ. Very clever. But carrying out a before and after IQ test under clinical conditions and with a double-blind (or whatever they're called) would be a very easy measure of the efficacy of the claims made for Auditing. From a therapeutic perspective, there's also the EQ vs IQ aspect which might be a more interesting avenue for research. The difficulty, of course, is getting anyone even interested in looking at Auditing since one of its very foundation pillars - the state of Clear - is such a nonsense. And then, of course, there's the Engrams which remain, as yet, an unproven concept. Of course, any such examination of Scientology remains an anethma to Scientologists whose "knowingness" does not extend to a formal test of it. I was interested to see both Marty Rathbun and Mike Rinder go into detail on a recent M&M Show blog about why it was essential the subject remain classified as a religion. They know L Ron Hubbard dodged a bullet with that PR manoeuvre.