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

Dean Wilbur Rhetoric Hubbard dianetics sicientology

Discussion in 'Scientology Technology' started by Gib, Feb 17, 2015.

  1. mockingbird

    mockingbird Silver Meritorious Patron

    Justsheila :
    I hate to disappoint but I think rhetoric is strictly for humans . :duh: Unless you persuade yourself otherwise .:coolwink:
  2. Jump

    Jump Operating teatime

    So far research has only been conducted on the tomato.
  3. AnonyMary

    AnonyMary Formerly Fooled - Finally Free

    IMHO, I think it's important for people, in, out and never in, to understand that Hubbard's use of rhetoric in his Dianetics and Scientology writings contributed greatly to convincing people of things that were 'made of of whole cloth' or that had been mixed with threads of truth' ' while being spun out of whole cloth. because they rang true.

    How else were we willing to believe that Scientology was a religion, that the psychs were the enemy for eons, that radiation could be removed with vitamins and sauna, that auditors could audit others with out their own case kicking in because they were superior to the bank, that 'no case on post' meant that staff could and would be made to work and not allow personal issues or considerations to get in the way to the point where they would endure atrocious amounts of neglect and abuse.... and so on.

    He persuaded us, whether by written or oral works, that only he held the answers, that only he rose above the bank to see the truth, because he told us so. L Ron Hubbard was a man who lived and breathed to use the power of words and the art of persuasion with the intent of controlling the reader, the listener. And if he could not convince those really in the know, he could at lest convince those not in the know. And he did. He sold us a Bridge to Total Freedom that went no where. Many of us bought it, believing what he stated was truth. He convinced us enough to believe what he said without inspection, to believe that critical thinking was not necessary. He convinced us there was a war and we had to fight it with Scientology. We believed that Scientology worked and was the only hope of mankind. That we had a planet to clear and only with Scientology could it be done.

    Most were not stupid when they read these things he professed. Vulnerable or ignorant, yes, but not inherently stupid. There was enough bits of truth and temporary sensation of gain to keep the lot of us in far longer than we ever intended when we walked in the door. We were persuaded enough by the written works and the insistence that only they contained the truth to believe. And that is because his use of rhetoric came to be an integral part of the belief system.

    We word cleared nearly everything we read because he told us we had to in order to understand. We studied stuff until it became truths for us at that time. We even studied it the way he told us to study it. He convinced us that if we didn't understand what he wrote or said, that it was our misunderstanding and not his. We believed a lot of baloney because he made it convincing through his use of rhetoric. Add to that the hypnotic effects of auditing, the temporary elation of 'wins', the promise of more, more, more and that we, too, would become gods. Add to that the insanity of his administrative policies followed by equally if not more so believers in his bullsh*t and what you get is Scientology.

    This may not be how others see it but it is how I see it, I may not have had the term rhetoric to define how he did it but I saw the effects as I was evolving out and knew I'd been sold a 'prison of belief'.

    So I would not minimize his use of rhetoric in how he accomplished this.
  4. JustSheila

    JustSheila Crusader

    True, AnonyMary. :goodposting:

    Yet we hear and read rhetoric countless times a day and yet are somehow mostly immunized to it. It barely affects us, if at all.

    Hypnotism combined with rhetoric and group controls were a deadly combination.

    Just as we shouldn't undermine the rhetoric, we should not undermine Hubbard's use of social manipulation. It is a basic instinctual drive to want to get along well with a group and fit in, and a common enemy really seals that group cooperation. Scientologists constantly reinforce this. We are love-bombed and accepted and treated as friends by one who claims to intimately know us from the very beginning, with a personality test - and the person claims to have the tools and desire to help. Worse, they are sincere about it! Then the group rules are set and the enemy named. We are kept in a state of exhaustion and challenged constantly to be better in the group, our attention diverted from our personal lives, goals and needs, believing what we are doing is so much MORE important, and it feels so good to be part of such an elite team, all working together.

    Instincts run deep. To access that human drive and manipulate it through hypnotic techniques and rhetoric is brutal.

    This movie clip really demonstrates how easily and naturally we fall into a common group pattern. That's our socialization instinct at play - and Hubbard knew exactly how to play us:

  5. AnonyMary

    AnonyMary Formerly Fooled - Finally Free

    I agree, Sheila. Thanks for the excellent video example. Group 'think' and agreement are central to the glue sticking. Some of the most fun times in my younger years were as a scientologist among other scientologists and had a few of my then close fellow scientologists been in agreement together and had told me to join them in looking to that something was wrong with Scientology, I would have been influenced by them. Unfortunately, it was against the rules to do so. The threat of an SP declare and of the loss of one's eternity, scared even the least trained of scientologists.

    BTW, I want to make clear that I was not stating in my comment that rhetoric was the sole reason, just one of several key tools Hubbard used to manipulate us.
  6. thanx for starting a rhetoric thread gibby. i was hoping you would. i'll probably get back to you here sometime...
  7. whoops!

    i was tired and pressed for time and failed to mention i recently discovered the universal life church has been declared a "suppressive group"
  8. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    Thank You, Mary.

    I wish I could write like you and some others here.

    I am missing the ability, it is no god given right I have.

    If one examines this write-up and subs argument with convincing or persuasion,

    and looks at "when used poorly........"

    it helps to explain, how Hubbard crossed the the line from poorly to correctly, and vice versa, thus creating confusion.

    and I am not communicating to those that have long left the organization, for I believe you know. Argument.pdf
  9. You're writing is fine, Gib.

    I read your posts. They are certainly thought provoking and interesting.

    The Anabaptist Jacques
  10. AnonyMary

    AnonyMary Formerly Fooled - Finally Free

    You do just fine, as TAJ wrote!

    Me, I can only write from stream of consciousness on things I feel passionate about to respond to. And unfortunately, they are rarely short streams. Ask me to read a document and summarize it and it's a whole other story. Over at Narconon Reviews we get many lawsuits and agency documents that require I summarize them and it's torture for me. The backlog is ever present. I responded to what you wrote because it struck a chord that I could relate to and have written about before, though from a different perspective. What you presented here in this thread helped me put my thoughts together. It was a catalyst.

    You are digging into unchartered territory and providing us with other points to view. Can't ask for anything better. :thumbsup:

    Very true. And your posts are as well, and I equally appreciate your contributions to the forum.

    Last edited: Feb 23, 2015
  11. Terril park

    Terril park Sponsor

    By and large I agree with most of your post. Whatever his bad points
    His work was often infused with genius. With tech he achieved some
    brilliance, I know others MMV, but I and many others have had lasting gains from the auditing. Yet in DMSMH he says everyone will get
    eiditic memory. Everyone could observe that was false yet we and others,
    many very smart still followed his ideas. Here is an example of something miraculous using dianetics from a PC of Phil Spickler:-

    When it came to influencing others he showed great talent
    and genius.

    His admin stuff had some brilliance but there was too much and
    contradictions were many.

    Here's a thought. Suppose LRH, DM, CO$ actually followed the Creed,
    first policy, "maintain friendly relations with the environment and
    ones public", really did away with disconnection and fair game, and kept the good and workable policy and codes and got rid of the bad policies. Suppose LRH wasn't a paranoid narcissist. What would Scn be like today? It could have actually truly expanded as the missions did when left alone.

    Possibly a scary thought.
  12. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    Thanks for your comment Terril. And I have had the same thoughts too, what if, but then I learned Hubbard studied and used Rhetoric.

    We can all read Success Stories of the Scientology tech everywhere, and of course on the COS website, and our own little "success stories". And even your Freezone.

    But, this tread is about Hubbard's use of Rhetoric, namely the 3 means of persuasion.

    And I have conclusively shown Hubbard studied Rhetoric, what you say about that? Have you studied Rhetoric? Compared?

    Can you give examples of Hubbards use of any one of the 3 means of persuasion?

    Or do you believe he did not use them?
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2015
  13. Terril park

    Terril park Sponsor

    These successes were I consider the greatest example of Ethos
    for Hubbard. For a simple example someone going ext on TRs
    is usually blown away. Marty for example. Thus one is then very predisposed to accept further things Hubbard says.

    I've studied very little about rhetoric. I note that from Hubbards old
    school reports rhetoric was universally studied in the US at least.
    [see Tony O today] I think one could make a good conspiracy theory
    as to why its not taught today, least in the UK.

    I believe he used them and went beyond them. First being economical with the truth to outright big lies, and even beyond that in ways I've
    been effect of but can't define exactly. One thing he created the data series, exellent IMO, but didn't really get far into critical thinking.

    As an example HCOPL 5 april 1965 "Scientology makes a safe environment"

    " The dangerous environment of the wog world, or injustice, sudden dismissals,war, atomic bombs, will only persist and trouble us if we
    fail to spread our safe environment across the world."

    This relies on previously established ethos, very strong appeal
    to pathos and ZERO use of logos. Here Hubbard shows himself to be a merchant of chaos. Perhaps the word I might use is propaganda. He
    was a master of it.

    The "wog" world is far safer than the environment of scientology,
    which has shown itself to be very dangerous.

    Scientology is riddled with injustice and the "wog" world has far better justice protections than CO$. CO$ majors on sudden dismissals, list 1 rockslammers anyone? Spreading it to friends and family [disconnection,
    advocates fair game].

    Wars? Scientology has shown a predilection for war, see attacks on Alex Gibney and of all things film reviewers, not to mention decades of attacking anyone doing Scn without paying tithes to CO$. Then their is wars against critics.

    The pen is greater than the sword, and this is where CO$ stages
    its wars.

    It dosn't only use rhetoric it uses "black" rhetoric in the form
    of propaganda for unseemly purposes.
  14. mockingbird

    mockingbird Silver Meritorious Patron

    Um I hate to burst any bubbles but Hubbard to my knowledge never came up with anything except how to hide things well . Anything he has I have if I look in the right places found an earlier source he stole it from . No matter what . Persuading people he came up with the stuff is a use of ethos . And lying is a rhetorical method . Rhetoric is a lot more broad than it may seem at first blush . I am going to put a quote here from another thread to show an example how Hubbard used lying to make seeing the truth not occur . It relies on accepting his ethos and it is a slick kind of logos - very subtle . In it he calls something the opposite of what it really is and that can make seeing it as what it really is feel too extreme or absurd and so be rejected if considered at all . It has many names and Arnie Lerma and psychologists have stuff on it and various names like Reverse Blockade :

    Anyway here is an post with a very detailed example and how to find it in Hubbard doctrine :
  15. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    That was excellent.

    Can you give me a rhetorical analysis of "success story"?

    as far as your statement:

    I believe I have a reason, but I am not sure. I will present my thoughts in a few days, and it has to with the sublime, for your consideration.
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2015
  16. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    OK, I found more data.

    I dedicate my subsequent posts to Face, aka A Face In The Crowd, TAJ, Mystic, Gadfly, and actually the many posters here who have posted their experiences & insights of being involved in scientology, for they have seen the truth, one way or another, and got me to see the truth.

    I have trepidation from a personal point of view, but the chips have to fall where they fall. I just wish to share info, and anything I say in my following posts are of course from my POV and open to discussion, debate, and not with me, for they are Hubbards influences that influenced us as members of the COS.

    Well, Face has mentioned several times here on ESMB about reading the Heinlein letters between Hubbard and Heinlein.

    Finally got around to it, flunk on my part for the comm lag. LOL

    I do know as well Tony O posted recently about the Heinlein letters here:

    But Tony O wrote that post from his POV and missed an important letter, which I will explain, from my POV, since I was a member as well as many of you.

    But I do'in the Charlie Brown Christmas Snoopy happy dance again.

    Let's just say to some it up we became a face in the crowd.

    And here's a sneak preview, and I hope to make this cogent, but it will require the reader to read the links. I can summarize, but full understanding will not take place.

    "Lesson #2: Crowds Create Bulldozer-Like Momentum
    …the individual forming part of a crowd acquires, solely from numerical considerations, a sentiment of invincible power which allows him to yield to instincts which, had he been alone, he would perforce have kept under restraint.

    A crowd …is not prepared to admit that anything can come between its desire and the realisation of its desire.

    Clarification: The feeling of being part of a movement larger than yourself gives you unshakable confidence. When applied to speculative activities this manifests itself in a crowd’s unshakable confidence in the course of an asset price. This can create immense momentum at times."
    Last edited: Aug 16, 2015
  17. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    Let me summarize,

    What got me started down this rabbit hole was reading the Dean Wilbur letter from Hubbard to Dean Wilbur, and then discovering he Hubbard was taught Rhetoric, which led me to research Rhetoric, which landed me on this website:

    In the very beginning of that website I latched onto this to statement below so as to you might say I wanted to know what influenced Hubbard to do what he did, how did he come about to write Dianetics, create scientology? Or what the hell happened to us that we fell for dianetics and then scientology. Well, I hope to present that influence in my following posts.

  18. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    The Heinlein letters between Hubbard can be found here. They are all copyrighted so I can not copy them, but thru "fair use" I can point out paragraphs or sentences.

    You can click on the the highlighted blue in the link and a more detailed description is provided.

    I purchased the package having all three sets of correspondence. It was $7.00 which consists of part 1, 2 & 3. I didn't find to much of interest in parts 1 & 3. Part two has the bulk of Hubbard.

    It's simple to get the letters, you just register, add to cart the files you want, then pay. In about 1/2 hour you'll get the letters in PDF format thru your email addy. Then you just download to save to your computer.
  19. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    There are a couple of letters that caught my attention. There is one letter dated Mar 26, 1949 from Heinlein to Hubbard and said:

    Hubbard replies back in a letter dated Mar 31, 1949. It's a long type written letter of 7 pages. The beginning is some chit chat, and then Hubbard writes this:

    Hubbard also capitalized all the book titles in his letter to highlight them to Heinlein. The rest of the letter Hubbard then goes into explaining dianetics and it's actually the same generalized sales pitch we have all read. No specifics per se, but it sounds like there are.
  20. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    So, yep, you guessed it, I do a google search of all those book titles. I'll take up the last one first.


    And here is what you find:

    (which by the way is the exact opposite of Ethos in using Rhetoric to establish character)

    Of course, we know that Fair Game and even PTS/SP tech is the same thing, really.

    But I also looked up "agentes techniques" and "agent saboteur" mentioned in the Heinlein letter. Somehow I stumbled on "agent provocateur", and I can't find the original link I stumbled on explaining both.

    Karen's recent video of sec checks is a perfect example of "agent provocateur" and if you revolt, then "agent saboteur (or the GO, or now called OSA steps in with Fair Game).

    All this has been said before by many people, I'm just providing a another piece of the onion.

    Agent Provocateur, or gathering of information, aka sec checks, life history questionnaire, etc :

    Church of Scientology Bird Dogging your Crimes $800 an hour - YouTube

    Agent Saboteur = OSA, fair game, pts/SP tech

    And hopefully all of this will tie into The crowd, A Study of the Popular Mind, TBC.
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2015