Good things in Scientology

[I told you I was trouble]

Panda doesn't promote Scn, true. But he does sometimes say relatively positive things about it- giving credit where he thinks it's due. If I (or a couple others here) were to write the same identical posts, I'd/we'd be either treated to a lot of sententious claptrap about how we needed help or would be pilloried.

It's not just what gets said - it's sometimes who says it.

For the record, I happen to think Panda has a very good understanding of where Scn went wrong and goes wrong and a great outlook and a wonderful sense of humor.

I'm glad that people can recognize that- even if some seem incapable of applying this understanding to others.

Sorry to sound snarky or upset. However, when it all comes down to it, I find that critical fora, websites, pickets and other things in the anti CofS movement accomplish far more good than not.

I dunno if Panda would agree that he 'gets away' with saying anything positive about scio here.

Discussing and promoting scientology (or a variation of it) are very different things though, the former isn't an issue for most (including me) but the latter can be.

Perhaps you have a history of fiercely defending some that promote it here (or used to, until they were stopped) and that could be why you feel pilloried at times?

More importantly (sorry Veda but I think this thread is almost done) ... how is the kitchen renovation going???

 

[Alle G]

MY bolding in the above 2 quotes.

I think it lays in the area of the relinquishing of self control, or decision that one has not been able to control, (as in failed self control =a ruin) followed by the decision to ALLOW another to take control of part or all of one's control of mind (perception, evaluation and decision making) resulting in henceforth being controlled at least in part by Ron's/scientology ideas. The degree to which one has given over one's mind to someone/some idea is the degree to which one ceases to be self. There is a lot more that could be said about this, but I think the pivotal point is, who and what is influencing one's decisions, emotions and thus actions.

Thanks, Dchoice
I think so too. I have not done TRs or Objective processes, but I still have an opinion.

Say, I become angry or disagree with someone controlling me. I express my feelings only to be told that it is my reactive bank is talking. I would hate it, they are deciding what part is I and what part is my bank. They may be right, they may be wrong, but they are defining reality for me.

In scientology people first agree with someone (Hubbard) defining reality for them, so later when Hubbard engages in world construction (axioms, history of universe) they also agree.

As to bullbaiting, I am a teacher and I am being bullbaited and bullbait others on a daily basis.

 

[Panda Termint]

I dunno if Panda would agree that he 'gets away' with saying anything positive about scio here.

<snip...>

Lol, well I've been called more than a few derogatory names over the years, of course, but that stuff doesn't really faze me at all. I've had a few occasions where people vigorously tried to attach their own invented labels to me but they always fall off due to lack of truth in the glue.

My approach to helping people leave scientology behind includes acknowledging the fact that the "truth about scientology" must include acknowledging that some of it works sometimes for some people. It's as simple as that.

I'm reasonable about it, I know. Some of my best friends despair at my reasonable attitudes about scientology.

I've pretty much said all that I'm likely to say about my experience as a scientologist but I'll be sure to let you (and everyone else here) know if I change my mind about anything.

 

[Claire Swazey]

Kithen!!!! (temp derail)

More importantly (sorry Veda but I think this thread is almost done) ... how is the kitchen renovation going???

Oh boy. Taking a looong time. I think I mentioned we're using someone who's basically a one man show. His work is great, just takes a while.

The counters are all in and the sink-- we got a rounded triple basin steel sink and they welded it so that it was integrated. It looks gorgeous.

Backsplash not in yet. Some flooring still left to be done, some appliances not in yet and the electric wall mount fireplace I got still has to be installed. Also, new backdoor (and widening of the frame) so that we can have one door in this house that isn't 1920s small- will go in probably this week. But he did put the new pet door in it and the special block (Didi can pick pet door locks). Also a couple other little things to be done.

I think I'm looking at an eta of early April...but so far, so good!!!!!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/claireswazey/8565978410/in/photostream

 

[GreyLensman]

Yeah, Scientology is a $500,000 buzz that you try to keep going by somehow avoiding the buzzkill called reality.

Yes.

The bad:

• totalitarian fascist mentality, the end justifies the means.
• hidden real goals - professed goal, world without criminality, etc, real goal, criminal exchange
• out-exchange, enforced exchange
• this list would be endless...

The ok:

• camaraderie (even if for purposes not really available to be achieved)
• feeling of caring (present at class four orgs and occasionally at AO's, when convenient)
• etc.

You know, this isn't worth the time to finish. Yes, there are some parts that worked (ARCX assessment, attention spanning process from COHA, CCHs), some things that were valuable ( the concept of a spirit as a separate and definite entity, the goal of greater responsibility and ability, improving conditions and saving the planet...), and some things that sucked (ahemmm... Seeeeee Aaaaaarghhh).

All of them are negated by the falseness of the whole. The core is false. There is no goal shared throughout Scientology - you have the fleeced (goal of Clearing the Planet and saving the world) and you have Sea Org and management (fleece the sheep for their own good, and at the top, fleece 'em...) and you have a vast gradient in between.

There is no there there to be good. It was a con game from the start, with shiny glittery pieces here and there and a shitload of self-deception necessary to walk the bridge for any distance. A brilliant con, but still and only a con at the heart. Any good done was incidental and accidental to true purpose.

 

[Infinite]

... and so another potentially interesting thread descends into infantile sniping and trollery. Another one bites the dust. C'est la ESMB.

Yeah - this one went off the rails ages ago, then picked up, then fell off again. Perhaps there's still some life in it yet. Shall we see if we can fire it up . . .

One good thing about Scientology is the tech on using newspapers to clean windows. I used to think the polishing effect it gives was a thing of the past since lead has been removed from printers' ink. But, apparently not. Stuck for a clean chamois the other day, I tried out the newspaper tech and - hey presto - worked a wonder. Even seemed to stop the wipers from squawking across the windscreen.

 

[This is NOT OK !!!!]

I think I learned a lot about being a salesman in Scientology.

Strong intention.

Endurance.

Control.

I limit myself these days to low cost consumer goods - I can't cause too much harm by saving the world from overpriced rugs.

 

[Infinite]

I think I learned a lot about being a salesman in Scientology.

Strong intention.

Endurance.

Control.

I limit myself these days to low cost consumer goods - I can't cause too much harm by saving the world from overpriced rugs.

Fer sure!! Scientology must, surely, be about the hardest product to sell, especially these days. Of course, like all good scams, it doesn't have to be popular, it only has to trick a few people to sustain itself. Think Nigerian 419. But, yeah, if you can sell Scientology, you can sell anything. Hadn't thought of that. Thanks.

 

[Commander Birdsong]

Fer sure!! Scientology must, surely, be about the hardest product to sell, especially these days. Of course, like all good scams, it doesn't have to be popular, it only has to trick a few people to sustain itself. Think Nigerian 419. But, yeah, if you can sell Scientology, you can sell anything. Hadn't thought of that. Thanks.

when i first got involved i was entirely put off by the sales pitch. but i examined the materials and liked them

 

[mischief]

A big thank you,Veda,..kiss, kiss for starting this thread and also to Gadfly (in particular) for the way you post.

After having to come to terms with the fact that what I learned on staff is as deeply embedded as it is, I wondered if I was ever going to work out what was what.
Reading through everything, it felt like tentacles uncurling and dropping away.
I have even started back at working on my home reno's projects, (there were so many things I was supposed to get done this summer, but I just didnt have the energy or motivation.)... I'm making a new chicken pen for my 'girls'-got the first half of their 4 pen rotation yard plus the scratch yard fenced off.
Just got the roof of their new home to put on and to sort out the water tank stand.All going well, they should be moving in tomorrow and they should be happy there til next spring/summer when I get to finish the remaining 2 forage pens for them.

 

[Veda]

YW

Yes, I'm just lazy at times. And so it appears are you in failing to insert said missing links!! haha

Yes, I added the links after I wrote the post.


Just for fun, here's another item that I've taken a lot of heat for posting, even though I haven't posted it that often, it definitely rubs some people the wrong way.

Excerpts from the 20 June 1984 findings of Judge Breckenridge:

As indicated by its factual findings, the court finds the testimony of Gerald and Joycelyn Armstrong, Laurel Sullivan, Nancy Dincalcis, Edward Walters, Omar Garrison, Kima Douglas, and Howard Schomer to be credible, extremely persuasive... In all critical and important matters their testimony was precise, accurate and rang true...

Each has broken with the movement for a variety of reasons, but at the same time, each is still bound by the knowledge that the Church has in its possession his or her own most inner thoughts and confessions, all recorded in 'pre-clear' folders, or other security files of the organization, and that the Church or its minions is fully capable of physical intimidation, or other physical or psychological abuse if it suits their ends. The record is replete with evidence of such abuse.

In addition to violating and abusing its own members' civil rights, the organization over the years with its 'Fair Game' doctrine has harassed and abused those persons not in the Church whom it perceives as enemies.

The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder LRH. The evidence portrays a man who has been virtually a pathological liar when it comes to his history, background and achievements.

The writings and documents in evidence additionally reflect his egotism, greed, avarice, lust for power, and vindictiveness and aggressiveness against persons perceived by him to be disloyal or hostile.

At the same time it appears that he is charismatic and highly capable of motivating, organizing, controlling, manipulating, and inspiring his adherents...

Obviously, he is and was a very complex person, and that complexity is further reflected in his alter-ego, the Church of Scientology. Notwithstanding protestations to the contrary, this court is satisfied that LRH runs the Church in all ways, through the Sea Organization, his role as Commodore, and the Commodore's Messengers.

He has, of course, chosen to go into 'seclusion', but he maintains contact and control through his top messengers.

Seclusion has its light and dark side too. It adds to his mystique, and yet shields him from accountability and subpoena and service of summons.

LRH's wife, Mary Sue Hubbard, is also a plaintiff herein. On the one hand she certainly appeared to be a pathetic individual. She was forced from her post as Controller, convicted and imprisoned as a felon, and deserted by her husband.

 

[Gib]

Yes, I added the links after I wrote the post.


Just for fun, here's another item that I've taken a lot of heat for posting, even though I haven't posted it that often, it definitely rubs some people the wrong way.

Excerpts from the 20 June 1984 findings of Judge Breckenridge:

As indicated by its factual findings, the court finds the testimony of Gerald and Joycelyn Armstrong, Laurel Sullivan, Nancy Dincalcis, Edward Walters, Omar Garrison, Kima Douglas, and Howard Schomer to be credible, extremely persuasive... In all critical and important matters their testimony was precise, accurate and rang true...

Each has broken with the movement for a variety of reasons, but at the same time, each is still bound by the knowledge that the Church has in its possession his or her own most inner thoughts and confessions, all recorded in 'pre-clear' folders, or other security files of the organization, and that the Church or its minions is fully capable of physical intimidation, or other physical or psychological abuse if it suits their ends. The record is replete with evidence of such abuse.

In addition to violating and abusing its own members' civil rights, the organization over the years with its 'Fair Game' doctrine has harassed and abused those persons not in the Church whom it perceives as enemies.

The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder LRH. The evidence portrays a man who has been virtually a pathological liar when it comes to his history, background and achievements.

The writings and documents in evidence additionally reflect his egotism, greed, avarice, lust for power, and vindictiveness and aggressiveness against persons perceived by him to be disloyal or hostile.

At the same time it appears that he is charismatic and highly capable of motivating, organizing, controlling, manipulating, and inspiring his adherents...

Obviously, he is and was a very complex person, and that complexity is further reflected in his alter-ego, the Church of Scientology. Notwithstanding protestations to the contrary, this court is satisfied that LRH runs the Church in all ways, through the Sea Organization, his role as Commodore, and the Commodore's Messengers.

He has, of course, chosen to go into 'seclusion', but he maintains contact and control through his top messengers.

Seclusion has its light and dark side too. It adds to his mystique, and yet shields him from accountability and subpoena and service of summons.

LRH's wife, Mary Sue Hubbard, is also a plaintiff herein. On the one hand she certainly appeared to be a pathetic individual. She was forced from her post as Controller, convicted and imprisoned as a felon, and deserted by her husband.

In re reading that again, I have read it before maybe 6 months ago, the Judge is very to the point. What I concluded is the Judge has the advantage of not having been indoctrinated like we have been thru the reading and lectures of L Ron. And in connecting dots, that's why DM ordered every scientologist to buy all the new re-edited books and do the "The Basics" courses at local orgs and missions. DM wanted everybody to be indoctrinated with ron's hypnotic teachings. In my viewpoint.

 

[Shlomo Knotts]

Yes, I added the links after I wrote the post. Just for fun, here's another item that I've taken a lot of heat for posting, even though I haven't posted it that often, it definitely rubs some people the wrong way. Excerpts from the 20 June 1984 findings of Judge Breckenridge: As indicated by its factual findings, the court finds the testimony of Gerald and Joycelyn Armstrong, Laurel Sullivan, Nancy Dincalcis, Edward Walters, Omar Garrison, Kima Douglas, and Howard Schomer to be credible, extremely persuasive... In all critical and important matters their testimony was precise, accurate and rang true... Each has broken with the movement for a variety of reasons, but at the same time, each is still bound by the knowledge that the Church has in its possession his or her own most inner thoughts and confessions, all recorded in 'pre-clear' folders, or other security files of the organization, and that the Church or its minions is fully capable of physical intimidation, or other physical or psychological abuse if it suits their ends. The record is replete with evidence of such abuse. In addition to violating and abusing its own members' civil rights, the organization over the years with its 'Fair Game' doctrine has harassed and abused those persons not in the Church whom it perceives as enemies. The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder LRH. The evidence portrays a man who has been virtually a pathological liar when it comes to his history, background and achievements. The writings and documents in evidence additionally reflect his egotism, greed, avarice, lust for power, and vindictiveness and aggressiveness against persons perceived by him to be disloyal or hostile. At the same time it appears that he is charismatic and highly capable of motivating, organizing, controlling, manipulating, and inspiring his adherents... Obviously, he is and was a very complex person, and that complexity is further reflected in his alter-ego, the Church of Scientology. Notwithstanding protestations to the contrary, this court is satisfied that LRH runs the Church in all ways, through the Sea Organization, his role as Commodore, and the Commodore's Messengers. He has, of course, chosen to go into 'seclusion', but he maintains contact and control through his top messengers. Seclusion has its light and dark side too. It adds to his mystique, and yet shields him from accountability and subpoena and service of summons. LRH's wife, Mary Sue Hubbard, is also a plaintiff herein. On the one hand she certainly appeared to be a pathetic individual. She was forced from her post as Controller, convicted and imprisoned as a felon, and deserted by her husband.

That sounds a lot like a typical ESMB post. The judge even talks like an ex-Scientologist (Did I hear an "LRH" or two in there?).

 

[PirateAndBum]

Yes, I added the links after I wrote the post.


Just for fun, here's another item that I've taken a lot of heat for posting, even though I haven't posted it that often, it definitely rubs some people the wrong way.

Excerpts from the 20 June 1984 findings of Judge Breckenridge:

As indicated by its factual findings, the court finds the testimony of Gerald and Joycelyn Armstrong, Laurel Sullivan, Nancy Dincalcis, Edward Walters, Omar Garrison, Kima Douglas, and Howard Schomer to be credible, extremely persuasive... In all critical and important matters their testimony was precise, accurate and rang true...

Each has broken with the movement for a variety of reasons, but at the same time, each is still bound by the knowledge that the Church has in its possession his or her own most inner thoughts and confessions, all recorded in 'pre-clear' folders, or other security files of the organization, and that the Church or its minions is fully capable of physical intimidation, or other physical or psychological abuse if it suits their ends. The record is replete with evidence of such abuse.

In addition to violating and abusing its own members' civil rights, the organization over the years with its 'Fair Game' doctrine has harassed and abused those persons not in the Church whom it perceives as enemies.

The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder LRH. The evidence portrays a man who has been virtually a pathological liar when it comes to his history, background and achievements.

The writings and documents in evidence additionally reflect his egotism, greed, avarice, lust for power, and vindictiveness and aggressiveness against persons perceived by him to be disloyal or hostile.

At the same time it appears that he is charismatic and highly capable of motivating, organizing, controlling, manipulating, and inspiring his adherents...

Obviously, he is and was a very complex person, and that complexity is further reflected in his alter-ego, the Church of Scientology. Notwithstanding protestations to the contrary, this court is satisfied that LRH runs the Church in all ways, through the Sea Organization, his role as Commodore, and the Commodore's Messengers.

He has, of course, chosen to go into 'seclusion', but he maintains contact and control through his top messengers.

Seclusion has its light and dark side too. It adds to his mystique, and yet shields him from accountability and subpoena and service of summons.

LRH's wife, Mary Sue Hubbard, is also a plaintiff herein. On the one hand she certainly appeared to be a pathetic individual. She was forced from her post as Controller, convicted and imprisoned as a felon, and deserted by her husband.

Rubs me well. The judge appears to have paid careful attention to the information he was provided and came to a very clear and insightful understanding.

 

[Gadfly]

Well, it's spring time in the mountains of Tennessee, and I have been OUTSIDE a great deal. Along with putting together a new music computer system, I have had little time to read or post here on ESMB. I just scanned through the past 6 pages of posts, and . . . . . it seems that I didn't miss much! :confused2:

All this bickering is so boring (to me). Endless yap, yap, yap.

I watch from a distance (as I do most things), and so much of it seems SO pointless.

I read posts by each of these people, and often I very much like what I read:

Veda, Mark Baker, HelluvaHoax, Panda, Infinite, Lone Star (whose sarcasm often gets incorrectly misinterpreted - but I like it), Claire, Caroline, and so forth.

Do you know what I wish? That these people would just give it a rest in terms or saying ANYTHING to each others' OPTERMS ("opposition terminals"):

Veda, Mark Baker, HelluvaHoax, Infinite

If THAT alone were enacted, it seems that 80% of the noise at least would vanish. Of course, PLEASE, each of you must and should continue posting about the evils and harms of Hubbard and Scientology. Just take a break on crapping on EACH OTHER. It gets so . . . . BORING!!!!!!!

Well, enough of this. Back out to eat a nice hot bowl of soup by the blazing crackling fire!

Here is the summary of this entire thread for the lazy folks out there:

1. There are some good things spread throughout the larger subject of Scientology, within the auditing, administrative and even ethics data. Some of these are VERY valuable, and cannot be found anywhere else in the same form. Much is also stolen or distorted from other earlier subjects.

2. The Scientology package-deal, as pushed and promoted by the official Church of Scientology is largely TOXIC, and functions as a trap.

3. There is NO Bridge to Total Freedom. There are no clears. There are no OTs. The hopes, goals, and promises of Scientology, while often nice-sounding and even desirable, CANNOT be achieved through any application of any combination of Scientology "tech". These are largely PR and bait. These various claims and assertions are LIES!

4. Decent people can take isolated decent ideas OUT of the context of the larger convoluted subject of Scientology and obtain positive results and experiences, depending on the person and it is a YMMV type of deal.

5. There MUST be some "good things" within the larger subject and practices of Scientology, or only the very dumbest would fall for it - and that is often NOT the case. So, there are some good techniques, some good ideas, and LOTS of good-sounding ideals, hopes and dreams. With such things the hook is well-baited!

6. Organized Scientology is 90% PR, lies, deceit, manipulation and abusive control.

Different people, being different people, have gotten different results and experiences from their involvement with Scientology. There is some "actual" good strewn throughout the subject, and then there is also "good" based on unique personal experiences, where certain people managed to extract more "good" than others out of his or her own experiences with Scientology. I did.

So, I don't get what all the arguing is about. :confused2:

This below seems largely to be true (at least for the whole package-deal, COB, RTC, C of S, Sea Org, Hubbard version of organized Scientology) . . . .

 

[Panda Termint]

Do you know what I wish? That these people would just give it a rest in terms or saying ANYTHING to each other.... <snip....>

Funnily enough this is the exact conclusion of "right action" that I arrived at independently this morning! Your wish is granted!

 

[Veda]

Rubs me well. The judge appears to have paid careful attention to the information he was provided and came to a very clear and insightful understanding.

Yes, it is an amazingly insightful statement. Judge Breckenridge really took a good look.

 

[Dulloldfart]

What's Self Analysis other than self auditing?

I'm just catching up on this thread, so sorry for the delay in offering my opinions here:

I agree that Self Analysis done per its instructions could well be called "self auditing." Hubbard tried to put across the (silly) idea that it was not really self auditing but Hubbard auditing the reader through the book's pages.

In an HCOB on the Solo Course he says that it is impossible to self audit properly except with the materials officially designated for "solo auditing." This is patently untrue. Much of the stuff in the Expanded Grades and repairs can be self-audited with success -- it seems to me that whether or not it will work solo depends on the person's skill as an auditor and his particular case. If it doesn't work today, do some more auditing and/or training and try again later on. Rinse and repeat.

Back to Self Analysis: there is a PaulsRobot3 version of Self Analysis, at least enough to get one's feet very wet (links given in the video's annotations. There are subtitles there too). Like pretty much all of PaulsRobot stuff, such sessions *feel* more like dual sessions with a separate auditor than they feel like self-auditing solo sessions. Whatever the theory might look like, the reality is that is how (by report) they tend to *feel* to someone genuinely doing them.

-----

Mr. Spock gets a Self Analysis session (turn on annotations and subtitles and watch in hi-definition for best results):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTphB7n2Z84

Paul

 

[Veda]

I'm just catching up on this thread, so sorry for the delay in offering my opinions here:

I agree that Self Analysis done per its instructions could well be called "self auditing." Hubbard tried to put across the (silly) idea that it was not really self auditing but Hubbard auditing the reader through the book's pages.

In an HCOB on the Solo Course he says that it is impossible to self audit properly except with the materials officially designated for "solo auditing." This is patently untrue. Much of the stuff in the Expanded Grades and repairs can be self-audited with success -- it seems to me that whether or not it will work solo depends on the person's skill as an auditor and his particular case. If it doesn't work today, do some more auditing and/or training and try again later on. Rinse and repeat.

Back to Self Analysis: there is a PaulsRobot3 version of Self Analysis, at least enough to get one's feet very wet (links given in the video's annotations. There are subtitles there too). Like pretty much all of PaulsRobot stuff, such sessions *feel* more like dual sessions with a separate auditor than they feel like self-auditing solo sessions. Whatever the theory might look like, the reality is that is how (by report) they tend to *feel* to someone genuinely doing them.

-----

Mr. Spock gets a Self Analysis session (turn on annotations and subtitles and watch in hi-definition for best results):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTphB7n2Z84

Paul

Excellent and entertaining video.

For those lurkers on the Star ship, watching from the 23rd century, this is a facsimile of one of the primitive paper disks used in the 20th century.

 

[Free Being Me]

“I define connection as the energy that exists between people when they feel seen, heard, and valued; when they can give and receive without judgment; and when they derive sustenance and strength from the relationship.”
― Brené Brown