ESMB has entered archive mode. All posts and threads that were available to the general public are still readable. The board is still searchable. 

Thank you all for your participation and readership over the last 12 years.

If you want to join in the conversation, please join the new ESMB Redux at

A Note for Vinaire

Discussion in 'Evaluating and Criticising Scientology' started by mate, Oct 15, 2007.

View Users: View Users
  1. nexus100

    nexus100 Gold Meritorious Patron

    People are upset with you because of your out-comm cycle, to use a SCN phrase. You can say anything to anyone if you use really good communication. You've chosen not to, for reasons of your own.
  2. Zinjifar

    Zinjifar Silver Meritorious Sponsor

    I don't see you being 'attacked' personally at all. Personally, I know nothing about you personally. I don't even see your 'viewpoints' being attacked; merely rejected. Which you seem to see as an attack.

    I guess you're confusing yourself with your viewpoints :)

  3. Vinaire

    Vinaire Sponsor

    Bull shit! If one knows the real reason one is never upset.

    You need to look again.

  4. Vinaire

    Vinaire Sponsor

    That's a personal attack!

  5. nexus100

    nexus100 Gold Meritorious Patron

    I rest my case.
  6. Tanstaafl

    Tanstaafl Crusader

    Certainly, some comments re Vinay recently have seemed personal to me.
    Allowances for differences in communication style and culture need to be made and I guess we all draw the line in a slightly different place.

    How well can you really know someone who you have communicated with solely through this forum? No voice, no body language, no evidence of what they do and how they do it or how they relate to others. Minds get busy filling in the blanks, which probably does none of us any favours.

    There are no true relationships here - we are talking with terminals we have mocked up. Whether this condition can be transcended I don't know. I hope so because I don't like what I just wrote.
  7. Alanzo

    Alanzo Bardo Tulpa

    You mean...

    this is all just....

  8. nexus100

    nexus100 Gold Meritorious Patron

    I've dealt with many East Indian people over the years during the highly emotional process of buying and selling houses. The greater part of Microsoft hiring is East Indians. They are remarkable in their directness, even keeled natures, language comprehension, and appreciation of another's work. Regardless of what else is going on here I don't believe the issue is cultural gap.
  9. Tanstaafl

    Tanstaafl Crusader

    That's your choice of word. BTW, can you see a cat anywhere around right now? :D

    A few years ago I was trying to figure out how I "knew" all about ARC breaks but I still got them. I had a cognition (Do cog's have to be true? - I guess not) that I could not ARC break with a person only with my mock-up of that person. As Byron Katie says: you can always trust another person 100% to be themselves.

    Get the idea that you truly know someone in the fullest (not biblical) sense and then try to get the idea of being ARC-broken by them. I can't.
    I'm not claiming this as some universal truth but it seems true for me.


  10. Alanzo

    Alanzo Bardo Tulpa

    I think it is a very good point.

    This is definitely some poop with the raisins still in it!
  11. Zinjifar

    Zinjifar Silver Meritorious Sponsor

    Ron's error (one of many) was equating 'ARC' with communications with agreement with reality and His invention of the term 'ARC Broken'.

    It's quite possible to completely understand a person and still dislike them. Or, disagree with them and still like them. Or share a reality with a person and disagree with some of their conclusions, and, like them *or* dislike them.

    The 'theory' that understanding bridges all gaps is silly. Sometimes it's the understanding that *causes* dislike, and, it often causes disagreement.

    As it happens, I tend to 'like' Vinnie, for whatever that's worth, and, I suspect I may 'understand' him more than he would like to admit. But, I can still disagree with him; say that the bull he's pushing is just that and suggest that it's his rationalizations that are keeping him from comprehending his own incomprehension.

  12. Tanstaafl

    Tanstaafl Crusader

    A man can wish for no higher praise! Thank you! :D
  13. Tanstaafl

    Tanstaafl Crusader

    I generally don't like to totally agree with people but I have to on this. :)
    ARC has limited workability. For me it's more along the lines of "how to win friends and influence people". Spending some time on this forum convinced me of that, especially early exchanges with yourself and Alanzo The Great.

    If you truly grant beingness, or love others, or see a person's true essence (however you want to phrase it) then ARC is not a factor. One might argue that such a thing is ultimate affinity but it doesn't stack up logically as communication requires distance (per it's "formula"). The Ultimate "R" is that the other being is a spiritual being and, in essence, beautiful. All other "Rs" are mesty and greatly inferior.

    It doesn't help that the term ARC is used very sloppily in general Scn conversation.

    There seems to be confusion with some Scns as to whether ARC is a one-way or two-way flow.


  14. nexus100

    nexus100 Gold Meritorious Patron

    FYI "ARC broken" doesn't mean disagreement. It refers to loss. One can like or dislike someone without having a feeling of loss. One can repair such a loss and still not like who it happened with. It takes one back to neutral.
  15. Zinjifar

    Zinjifar Silver Meritorious Sponsor

    However, the 'theory' is that if the 'reality' (agreement) and communications suffer, so will the 'affinity'. And, the 'intent' of the 'theory' is to insist that agreement is a necessary corrolary to affinity and communications. Terms like 'high ARC' describe intentional manipulation. Yes, the usage is sloppy, but, the intent is clear; you cannot have affinity without agreement (reality).

    One of the most common 'assumptions' in Scientology is that any disagreement involves an 'upset' (which is very low tone :) ) and something that can be 'cured' by more 'comm' and handling.

    Even Vinnie insists that anyone who disagrees with him has 'upsets'.

  16. beyond_horizons

    beyond_horizons Patron Meritorious

    Yes we know who he is and we know what he's doing!

    Actually, I tend to like him also, sept for the fact that I worry sometimes he might have created a secret RPF for his extracurricular Math Lab activities. :)
  17. nexus100

    nexus100 Gold Meritorious Patron

    A historic moment! Zinj is using Vinaire to support an argument! I feel faint. What were we talking about?
  18. Alan

    Alan Gold Meritorious Patron

  19. mate

    mate Patron Meritorious

    Hi Vinaire.

    I appreciate where you are coming from or at least, I believe I do. :eyeroll: By the way, I like to use the terms Western and Eastern rather than Vedic and Semitic, as the Semites were/are peoples in the Middle East who were named after the son of Noah, Shem. Of course, the three Western religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) emerged in this region, but we would need to turn to Europe and the United States (as well as Mecca) for what they have become. In fact most Catholics would not consider their religion Middle-Eastern. On the other hand, I personally have no objection to your use of the term Semitic. Just a thought. :whistling:

    The following is an extract from Jon Atack at .

    Now, I don't know where Hubbard got the Axioms of Scientology from, but I suspect that it may well have been a German philosopher. Be that as it may, I'm sure it wouldn't be difficult to track it down. My point though, Vinaire, is that with Hubbard you're looking at his interpretation of another's interpretation of Eastern philosophy, whereas source is at your finger tips. :happydance:

    Regards, David
  20. beyond_horizons

    beyond_horizons Patron Meritorious

    OK, well since nobody asked, :) ... let me return a favor by rendering my play by play account of the source of Vinnie's upset!

    Vinnie was doing just fine and holding his own against all the bantering up until the Class 12 incident.

    My bet is that when Ralph and Class 12 acknowledged Vinnie's data series expertise, to handle their ARC or hate break, seems Vinnie was launched into a new 'altitude' of orbit and all the prestige that comes with bringing together two titians of the freezone. He even postulated a reward with a fee.

    My bet is that they had no intention of mending their relationship in the first place.

    But , and to use Vinnie's terms, what a crush it must have been to his 'ego' when he discovered that all the kings’ horses and all the kings’ men couldn’t bring Ralph and Class 12 back together again.

    He let his ego take a chance, prematurely boasted his win. Now in light of his failure to accomplish his stated goal he now deflects his upset with typical scientological attempts to handle by introvertion by claiming 'projection' and blaming others with his favorite list of ad homs.