What's new

”Evaluation” and ”Invalidation”

Adam7986

Declared SP
Anyone who completes Staff Status II doesn't have a clue.

Anyone who does have a clue realizes that Scientology, by its founder's design, has been run as a criminal conspiracy since its inception.

And this is exactly how I feel. Thank you.
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
Anyone who completes Staff Status II doesn't have a clue.

Anyone who does have a clue realizes that Scientology, by its founder's design, has been run as a criminal conspiracy since its inception.


A hymn to all Scientologists lost in the labyrinth.

CLUELESS

In the night I hear 'em talk,
The coldest story ever told,
Somewhere far along this road
He lost his soul,
To a cult so heartless
How could they be so heartless?
Oh, how could He be so clueless?



[video=youtube;YGJGTdhbGEM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGJGTdhbGEM[/video]


 

uniquemand

Unbeliever
Anyone who completes Staff Status II doesn't have a clue.

Anyone who does have a clue realizes that Scientology, by its founder's design, has been run as a criminal conspiracy since its inception.

They should have a clue about the operations of the Scientology enterprise, according to the policy that they have read to that point. As to a bigger clue that teaches them about what Scientology was designed for and why it operates the way it does (not an insider perspective, but an analysts perspective), I don't think there is express policy to describe it. For that, the affirmations of LRH and the Brainwashing Manual are good resources. A person who remains a dyed-in-the-wool scio, though, who doesn't understand issue types, seems truly lost to me. At any rate, the lack of transparency about issues and org actions should concern people who claim to understand power, responsibility, communication and integrity.
 

olska

Silver Meritorious Patron
They should have a clue about the operations of the Scientology enterprise, according to the policy that they have read to that point. As to a bigger clue that teaches them about what Scientology was designed for and why it operates the way it does (not an insider perspective, but an analysts perspective), I don't think there is express policy to describe it. For that, the affirmations of LRH and the Brainwashing Manual are good resources. A person who remains a dyed-in-the-wool scio, though, who doesn't understand issue types, seems truly lost to me. At any rate, the lack of transparency about issues and org actions should concern people who claim to understand power, responsibility, communication and integrity.

The book Introduction to Scientology Ethics published in the 1990s -- the big fat book, not the skinny one -- is a good overview of what scientology is really about.

Despite its title, it's not meant to be a "beginner's" book -- its intended audience is those who already "believe" in the "tech."

For those "outsiders" seeking to understand Hubbard's "word view" and how the cult operates, it's excellent.
 

Adam7986

Declared SP
This thread went totally off the rails. I meant it to be about the brainwashing mechanisms of the cult not the policy or operations of the church.

While I used to be in the sea org and I am very familiar with the inner workings of the church, I am not interested in discussing those.

LRH was a brilliant man in the way Hitler was a brilliant man. He knew how to use words, peer pressure, fear of loss and cognitive dissonance to motivate people.
 

Veda

Sponsor
They should have a clue about the operations of the Scientology enterprise, according to the policy that they have read to that point.

-snip-

"According to the policy that they have read up to that point" probably includes such lies as (to paraphrase) "There is no hidden data line," and "All policy is in the Green Volumes" (Image of eager Scientologist pointing enthusiastically to a set of the Green Volumes was unavailable at the time of the writing of this post), and "All policy is Green on White" (usually not mentioning that there's Confidential Green on White that's not in the Green Volumes, so as to not disorient the staff member).

The senior instructions from Hubbard, re. how to run Scientology, sometimes appear in Green Volume Green-on-White, somewhat more frequently appear in Non-Green Volume Confidential Green-on-White, but - in most basic terms - the idea of "policy," as in an official document that, for example, can be shown to a "wog," to say, "See?" (Such as the HCOPL that cancels the Fair Game Law, etc.) is a ruse, a trick.

This is difficult to explain to rank and file Scientologists, as there's enough that is used and enforced in the sliver of policy that affects him, that it seems as though policy must be serious, and it is, to an extent, until it conflicts with some senior (usually confidential) policy or other Hubbard instructions.

Within Green on White can be found things which are a reflection of the way Scientology is supposed to be run, per Hubbard. For example, buried in the back of Hubbard's rambling 'The Responsibility of Leaders' is some information that, ordinarily, would be in a confidential issue, such as "Real powers are developed by tights conspiracies..."

This has been gone over so many times, in so many ways, and I really don't want to spend much time on it right now.

Here are a few items anyway...

According to Jesse Prince, former senior Scientology executive:

"Miscavige is continuing to carry out LRH's orders...

"...Miscavige is doing his best to forward Command Intention, which is contained in the huge LRH orders database of the INCOMM computer system of Scientology..." http://www.ezlink.com/~perry/CoS/Theology/jesse.htm


From Larry Brennan:

"There was a real secret body of people directly run by Hubbard."

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=90246&postcount=1


From a 1986 interview of Martin Samuels, former Mission Holder, and founder of the Delphian School, from the 'Reflections' chapter of the book, 'L. Ron Hubbard, Messiah or Madman?' http://www.amazon.com/reader/0942637577?_encoding=UTF8&ref_=sib_dp_pt :


"Hubbard operated according to a couple of key patterns.

"The first pattern involved basically decent well intentioned people... no one was able to rise in the organization to a point of any real proximity to him, without being attacked and vilified...

"And of course the next person thinks he or she is immune [from this pattern]...

"The next pattern: It's reap and rape. Hubbard would let the reins loose. He'd let people believe they really could get on with it... He'd let people believe they really could prosper to the full extent of their own ability, and enjoy the fruits of their labor.

"And, with that kind of freedom, prosperity does occur, Inevitably, though, he'd come along and rape and pillage and rip off and take what had been produced. The most dramatic example of this was '82, '83, when he 'raped' his most decent people in management along with the mission holders, and looted the entire mission network.

"And look at this pattern... He surrounded himself with absolute hooligans as 'managers'; guys who beat the shit out of people. This man, who 'is this OT, the author of Science of Survival, completely able to predict human behavior', surrounded himself with ruthless people - like Miscavige - who got there because they emulated Hubbard's savagery. They emulated his total willingness to completely break, use, and discard another person.

"And then after their hands were so bloody - and the only reason their hands were bloody was that they were doing what Hubbard wanted - when it finally started to get to the point where it couldn't be tolerated by people anymore, Hubbard wiped them out. Then he said. 'My God! I didn't know!' Scapegoat. He even did that to his own wife, who went to jail in his place... [Note that Miscavige is now becoming the new scapegoat.]

"But the thing that's amazing, and to me terrifying, is the characteristic of the mind, my mind, your mind, and apparently many other people's minds, where I could buy this horseshit, where I could participate in it."



Jesse Prince, Legal Declaration, 1999: http://lermanet.com/reference/Jesse2inWoller.htm


As old time Sea Org exec and Class 8 John Ausley once said, "[non-confidential] Policy is mainly cover." "Sometimes cover" is probably more accurate.

There are layers of policy, and layers of Hubbard's instructions to his followers.

END OF THREAD DERAIL.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oRKvpZ7PjE

My apologies, Adam7986.
 

Veda

Sponsor
This thread went totally off the rails. I meant it to be about the brainwashing mechanisms of the cult not the policy or operations of the church.

While I used to be in the sea org and I am very familiar with the inner workings of the church, I am not interested in discussing those.

LRH was a brilliant man in the way Hitler was a brilliant man. He knew how to use words, peer pressure, fear of loss and cognitive dissonance to motivate people.

Here's a some info, in case you encounter any Scientologists insisting that Scientology is anti-Brainwashing, etc.:

Oddly enough, over the years, Scientology's (PR) responses to the accusation that Scientology is brainwashing have had some moderate successes.

One approach has been to select one piece of Scientology, or one piece of its "tech," and demonstrate that that piece (presented as being representative of the whole) is not brainwashing. Any number of benign common-sense ideas or actions, adopted by Scientology, can be presented as Scientology, thus "disproving" the accusation that Scientology is [fill in any negative accusation to be "disproved"].

Another approach is to make the subject of brainwashing about the word "brainwashing," and enter into a seemingly unresolvable debate about the meaning of the word. Since there are multiple definitions for the word "brainwashing" (as there are with the word "hypnosis"), an examination of the actions involved in what might be classified as brainwashing is avoided.

Origin of the word, "brainwashing":

http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/brainwashing/origin-and-use-of-the-term.html

One way to side step the Scientological ploy of having a tiny piece of Scientology, or its "tech," presented as reflective of the totality of the subject or its "tech," or the ploy of making an attempted examination of the action of brainwashing, not about actions, but about the word "brainwashing," is to go directly to a 64 page booklet that Hubbard himself called the 'Brainwashing Manual'. This manual was secretly authored by Hubbard in 1955, and used as a black propaganda vehicle to depict psychiatrists, Scientology dissidents, and critics, as Communist or Communist sympathizers.

Years later, when closely examined, it turned out to be one of Scientology's most revealing documents.

Brainwashing2.JPG


Only a tiny fraction of the text mentions (in no detail, but with great bombast) "PDH," and also shock treatment and lobotomy. And, typically, if a Scientologist has any response at all, it will be that the 'Brainwashing Manual' is about "PDH," etc., at which point it becomes necessary to remind the Scientologist that less than a page or two is concerned with such matters, leaving the bulk of the manual describing other things - Other things that, if one can keep the Scientologist from placing his fingers in his ears and shouting, "nanananana!" or simply running away, can be - point by point - shown to be part of the subject and practice of Scientology, with the seemingly benign parts of Scientology functioning as both a deceptive lead-in, and as a reassuring medium though which that "brainwashing" can occur.

"Use enemy tactics"

Hubbard sometimes told Scientologists what he was going to do to them, and in some instances what he was doing to them at that very moment, but disguised it as something that someone else (usually the bad guys) might do. This is close to the ultimate in "nothing-up-my-sleeve-ism" and the ultimate recreational cruelty for a sadistic practical joker: Explain the joke first, then watch as the person - who has complete confidence that the teller (Hubbard in this case) would never do such a thing - walk right into it and fall prey to (using some of Hubbard's favorite behind-the-scenes words) the gimmick, ploy, trick, caper, angle, etc.

While the date for Hubbard applying "enemy tactics" and "aberrative methods" to his own own loyal followers is sometimes 1965 - which was, undoubtedly, a major "shift" date in Scientology - it does appear, IMO, that Hubbard had this approach from the earliest days.

All Scientologist are Fair Game to Scientology.

Hubbard's 'Fair Game' instructions date from March 1965 through 1968, when a PR flap caused him to "cancel" the public use of the term "Fair Game," and most "Fair Game"-related and "Fair Game"-tech writings went underground, becoming "confidential." Yet this was only one expression of his own personal "war" - a "war" that had been ongoing much of his life, at least in his own mind.

IMO, the first target of Hubbard's personal "covert war" (other than his wives) were Scientologists themselves, and not "out ethics" Scientologists, but Scientologists "in good standing."

This was an extension of a state of mind revealed in his writings, going back to his 'Excalibur'-related 1938 statement; his 1946 'Affirmations'; his writings concerning ("erased") 2nd wife Sara Northup; his bizarre 1950s letters to the FBI; his "ruin utterly" May 1955 'Manual on Dissemination'; his Autumn 1955 fraudulent "Russian Communist Brainwashing Manual," which inveighs against ("patriotic") Dianetics (later changed, in the text to Scientology [!]), and contains ideas and methods many of which he would later use on Scientologists, and incorporate into the "tech" (some of it 'confidential') and have Scientologists use on each other and on outsiders ("wogs," "raw meat," and "SPs"); to his 1959 confidential 'HCO Manual on Justice' which seems tame in comparison to other writings; to his first use of Security Checking in the early 1960s for collection of potential "blackmail" and for thought-policing and to encourage (ideally happy) self-censoring in Scientologists; to his introduction of the secret and very "dangerous" yet vital to your survival "Implantology" levels, where the switch was made from primarily "asking the person" to primarily "telling the person" the contents of his own mind and/or space - with a little actual ("ask"/look) auditing around the fringes and used throughout as a kind of lubricant - just to confuse things nicely.

Did Hubbard know what he was doing when he mixed "White Scientology" and "Black Scientology," creating Scientology? Evidence indicates that he knew exactly what he was doing.

In a confidential issue of 1969, Hubbard wrote that "enemy tactics" should be used on "enemies" - the "enemies" in his personal "war." What's so difficult for some to accept is that Hubbard was at "war" (usually covertly) against his own loyal followers, and used "enemy tactics" on them.

One of many examples: Hubbard's description of psychiatry, from a lecture of 14 August 1963, describes what was soon to become a key element of the "upper levels": "...psychiatry is authoritarian and tells the person what's wrong with him, often introducing a new lie. Scientology finds out what's wrong with the person from the person." Well, that was soon to change.

An examination of 'Brainwashing Manual' Parallels in Scientology:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?2697-Table-of-Contents-Psychopolitics-revisited

Hope this helps.
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
. . . I know what Hubbard designed. However, the current church does all kinds of stuff that Hubbard did not design or envision so it's meaningless anyway . . .

ORLY - what is the current church doing that L Ron Hubbard did not design or envision?
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
ORLY - what is the current church doing that L Ron Hubbard did not design or envision?

Golden Age of Tech.
Sec checks on OTVII (C/S Series says not to do that)
Editing/bowdlerization of PDC tapes, such as PDC tape #20
The Basic Books
Putting the Basic Books on the Briefing Course

Think that'll do for starters....
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
Golden Age of Tech.
Sec checks on OTVII (C/S Series says not to do that)
Editing/bowdlerization of PDC tapes, such as PDC tape #20
The Basic Books
Putting the Basic Books on the Briefing Course

Think that'll do for starters....

L Ron Hubbard never envisioned that his tech would change with the times?
 

whoisxenu

Patron with Honors
Okay - never been in but...

LRH passed off the Xenu world as a carbon copy of '50's/'60's Earth. He described Xenu and companies last roundup before the mountain prison as displayed in glass/plexiglass? containers powered by locomotives across many planets - locomotives? And his airplanes are DC-8's but without propellers?

Sorry, I think he was a good pulp author. A great flim-flammer. But displayed incredible laziness describing the world of Xenu.

Loyal Officers? Really? Man could he get lazy doing pulp.:omg::mudkip:
 

Veda

Sponsor
Golden Age of Tech.
Sec checks on OTVII (C/S Series says not to do that)
Editing/bowdlerization of PDC tapes, such as PDC tape #20
The Basic Books
Putting the Basic Books on the Briefing Course

Think that'll do for starters....

You left out the redefinition of Floating Needle by the anti-Christ of Scientology, David Miscavige. Oh wait, it was Hubbard who redefined that. Oops. http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?16164-Rhythmic-Sweep-of-the-Dial:

Floating needle is a *rhythmic* sweep of the dial at a slow even pace of the needle. That's what an FN is. No other definition is correct." (HCOB 21 July 78.) From 'The Technical Dictionary'.

And according to Jesse Prince, from 'The ever changing tech of Scientology' and regarding six month sec checks:

"...this bulletin was effectively canceled by LRH himself... that's where it all started. All these actions were taken to increase income. It is the same with the six month sec checks...

"But I want to make it clear that the whole idea came from LRH not from Miscavige. Miscavige is continuing to carry out LRH's orders...

"...Miscavige is doing his best to forward Command Intention, which is contained in the huge LRH orders database of the INCOMM computer system of Scientology
..."

'The Ever Changing Tech of Scientology' By Jesse Prince::http://www.xenu-directory.net/accounts/prince20000718.html

And it was Hubbard who changed the OT levels, and - and there's no dispute about this, is there?, and changed the middle grade chart also.

As for "basic books," Dulloldfart examined this topic, comparing a new 'Scientology 8-8008' with an old one, and found the latter preferable.

Many of these books were dictated into sound recorders and, apparently, Miscavige, having these old recordings, listened to them again. No doubt, it was an opportunity to re-sell books to the faithful, but it may not be the sinister Markabian plot to destroy "Mankind's only hope," as envisioned by the silly Scientology Freezoners and Scientology Independents.

Changes to the lecture tapes have been minor. Miscavige is Hubbard's mini-clone, sans imagination. The idea that Hubbard wanted people to be free and Miscavige is afraid of that, is just dumb. (Sorry.) They're both blood suckers.

And, in its latter stages, Scientology moved into its monument buliding phase, per Hubbard's wishes and long range plan. Be, Do, Have. Hard granite with Hubbard's name engraved.

And money-grubbing didn't begin with Miscavige. It was Hubbard's speciality. Miscavige modified it after the 1993 IRS deal made it possible for Scientology to become, legally, a money-grubbing fund-raising "Church."

Scientology hasn't changed as much as you might like to believe.

And I think this thread is off topic again.
 

Veda

Sponsor
Ideal Orgs
Super Power Building
IAS
OTs re-doing the Entire Bridge
(just to mention 4 things that come readily to mind).

You omitted that Hubbard had told Scientologists (once he had made millions selling Total Freedom&Total Power with the enticement of the old - and its turns out, non-existent - final OT level of OT 8, which became then the FIRST OT level as in bait and switch), that there were many levels beyond OT 7 or OT 8, when there were not.

As was mentioned to me in hushed tones by a Scientology insider many years ago, "They don't have anything."

NO BRIDGE.

Miscavige knows that, the faithful don't.

Hubbard knew it too, and did he tell the truth? No.

He lied.

Miscavige is following in his mentor's footsteps.
 
Last edited:

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
You omitted that Hubbard had told Scientologists (once he had made millions selling Total Freedom&Total Power with the enticement of the old - and its turns out, non-existent - final OT level of OT 8, which became then the FIRST OT level as in bait and switch), that there were many levels beyond OT 7 or OT 8, when there were not.

As was mentioned to me in hushed tones by a Scientology insider many years ago, "They don't have anything."

NO BRIDGE.

Miscavige knows that, the faithful don't.

Hubbard knew it too, and did he tell the truth? No.

He lied.

Miscavige is following in his mentor's footsteps.
LOL, omitted, Veda? The thing you mentioned doesn't actually answer the question asked and it certainly didn't spring to mind when considering Infinite's question.

The question was,
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Infinite
ORLY - what is the current church doing that L Ron Hubbard did not design or envision?
My response is,
Ideal Orgs
Super Power Building
IAS
OTs re-doing the Entire Bridge
(just to mention 4 things that come readily to mind).
 

Reasonable

Silver Meritorious Patron
Good Morning folks!


It came to my attention that scientologists often hide behind the ideas of evaluation and invalidation. Anytime you try to question their beliefs or challenge their gains. For example my father who is OTIII has severe asthma. He almost died a couple of months ago. Were I to mention that in relation to his case level as proof that he did not gain what LRH promised, he would simply use the thought stopping words ” that's evaluation and invalidation of my case”.
• I always thought that Evaluation is when someone says “The reason that you are afraid of water is because your mother beat you in the bathtub”

He does not know why you are afraid of water. So in this case I would not welcome the other person’s evaluation.

Invalidation is when you say “I am afraid of dogs because I once was bitten by a dog” and someone says “No that cannot be the reason”

Again in this case I would not welcome the invalidation of my subjective feeling that I knew why I was afraid of dogs.

• In your case when you told your father that his asthma was proof that he did not get what was promised was not invalidation nor evaluation.

It was a factual comparison of what Hubbard promised to what was delivered and has nothing to do with his case. So this was neither invalidation nor evaluation.

• Now if he said “I feel better after doing OT3 “and you said “No you don’t” well that would be invalidation because how he feels is his own SUBJECTIVE REALITY.

• If he said “My white blood cell count came down after doing OT” and you said “ Did you take a blood test?” and he said “No”. That is not eval or inval because you are challenging facts.

• If someone says “Praying to Jesus makes me feel better” and someone else says “That can’t be possible” that is invalidating a “subjective reality” and in my opinion everyone has the right to his own subjective reality.

• However if you were just having a discussion about the subject “Are there such things as body thetans or not”. I think that is just a discussion and if both of you want to have that discussion then that is OK. But you can’t force someone to have that conversation if they don’t want to.

• It would be like going up to a Christian and saying “Jesus did not die for your sins”. No one asked you. But if they do ask you or if they try to convert you first then they started the discussion and anything you say is not an invalidation but rather a discussion of ideas.

So I think the idea of “not evaluating or invalidating” only have merit in the subjective world of personal feelings and emotions not in the world of facts.

Scientologists apply inval/eval to everything because it is easy and they don’t have to think.
 

Reasonable

Silver Meritorious Patron
Let's use Christian worship as an example. Catholicism and the Catholic church are the prevailing entity on earth which seek to control and organize the worship of Jesus and God. When a group of people disagreed with the Catholic church they simply formed one of the various protestant groups. The Bible itself does not require you to be in a catholic church to worship God.

I think when people first disagreed with the Catholic Church they were killed. Then after enough people got killed and there were enough dissenters they stopped killing non Catholic conformists. When there were enough Protestants to protect themselves the killing stopped.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
L Ron Hubbard never envisioned that his tech would change with the times?

Given the fact that he specifically forbade sec checks on the OT levels, given the fact that he repeatedly said no one but him could edit out stuff in his books, given the fact that he said "no more drills", yeah, I do envision that.
 
Top