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

The Tech Error of ’62-’63—How it Went Negative: RogerB’s FZ Presentation in Pasadena

Discussion in 'Evaluating and Criticising Scientology' started by RogerB, Nov 9, 2009.

  1. FinallyFree

    FinallyFree Gold Meritorious Patron

    oooohhhh! I *like* it!
  2. programmer_guy

    programmer_guy True Ex-Scientologist

    Last edited: Nov 11, 2009
  3. Hubbard's Tech has never been about actually "Doing" anything, it has always been about making yourself "Believe" you are doing something and convincing others you are doing something, it's a con game, but this con game does have some temporary benefits. The belief stimulates neurotransmitters in your brain which make you feel temporarily euphoric and thus allow you to be more productive or think clearer.

    It's all about using delusion to be more productive, it's no different that the freaks who talk in tongues, handle snakes or get slapped on the forehead by a faith healer ... with some pseudo psychobabble thrown in to try and legitimize it.

    Most people can be happy and productive without diluting themselves and living in a trance, others need a crutch like drugs, gambling, highly emotion charged relationships, or a good old fashion Scientology circle jerk to stimulate neurotransmitters enough to get them moving.

    The bottom line is Hubbard's OT non-sense is nothing but trying to convince yourself and others that Hubbard's Tech has given you powers than other do not have. If you succeeded in convincing yourself in the fairy tail of OT powers, then you have gotten all there is to get out of it.
  4. archetypes

    archetypes Patron with Honors

    I did not understand everything you said but I found it very interesting. I always give more attention to those who speak from what they actually experienced in their processing -- who are actually using a tech. I'm curious, did you happen to reach the State of Clear running any certain processes?
  5. Smilla

    Smilla Ordinary Human

    I couldn't agree more. It's a role playing game that went too far. It's all fantasy.
  6. uniquemand

    uniquemand Unbeliever

    I couldn't agree less: I was only playing a role as a staff member. When auditing or being audited, there was no role-playing for me. I was either trying to help someone else, or get help myself. I got a lot out of BOTH of those, and so did the people I worked with.

    Whatever else happened, that did.
  7. So while you were in the cult, you didn't pretend that everything was simple wonderful, your life as a Scientologist was so much better that everyone outside the cult, and all these imaginary states and conditions which Hubbard fabricated existed and were obtainable?
  8. uniquemand

    uniquemand Unbeliever

    I suspended disbelief about states. I didn't pretend they existed, I studied the possibility. I didn't pretend about the quality of my life, I was struggling, and everyone knew it. Perhaps this is why I am no longer a scientologist, and why they declared me: no pretense.
  9. Fair enough, but you did say you couldn't agree less, and now you are saying your refusal to pretend is probably why you are no longer a Scientologist.
  10. Winston Smith

    Winston Smith Flunked Scientology

    Uniquemand, I do not understand you and what is more I do not want to understand you. I don't really wish to be a jackass, but I guess I might be. Exactly what is so great about auditing? It is a trap pure and simple.
  11. Leon

    Leon Gold Meritorious Patron

    Hi Roger,

    Well I have finally had the time to go through tis thread and watch your presentation on the You-tubes. Thank you for it. It is certainly most interesting. Please allo me to make a few comments.

    1. The big shift point you mentyioned on the first video - where the guy goes down the Tone Scale and he has this massive crisis (I can't remember the exact words you used for it) could be viewed better by recognising that as a person goes downscale in his chronic emotion he is, in parallel, going down the Ethics conditons. Mary Freeman's work is extremely valuable in sorting these out. Clearly when a guy goes down from pursuing his own survival into attemtping to destroy others there is a Ethics drop of him going through Doubt and into Enemy and below. These scales should all be studied and used in conjunction with each other.

    2. You mention: "My focus then shifted to unsticking these Beings from what they were hung up in. Routinely, I began addressing them with a question that addressed their ongoing or hung-up purpose and/or intention. Depending on the mood/emotional level of the Being the question asked as the process for them was: “What intention or purpose are you pursuing?” or “What intention or purpose are you hung-up in or dramatizing?”

    What I find interesting here is that this is pretty damn close to what Bill Robertson did in Excalibur. You find out what "hat" the fella is wearing, and you sort all of that out. The intention comes before the beingness of course, and so your version is probably a tad better in this regard, though recognising the beingness is important too. There are other possibilities here too.

    And 3. I've read a few versions of how the GPM tech "ought" to be done, as well as a huge study of the available materials on what LRH wrote and spoke on the subject. My iew is that the most best by far, the simplest, most obvious, most clarifying, etc etc etc is the write-ups done by Dennis Stephens in what he calls TROM. It embraces every other version I have seen and goes much deeper down to basic simplicities. So I recommend that.

    Vinaire has suggested that TROM is a comparable datum to Scientology itself, it reaches far beond it in scope and application, and is far simpler too. So that is what keeps me busy these days.

  12. uniquemand

    uniquemand Unbeliever

    1., above, is covered amply by UCP charts, given here. aligns most scientology scales with tone scale. even if you think it's bullshit, it's interesting bullshit. I think it is of great value.
  13. Mystic

    Mystic Crusader

    Bodhisattva Vow: "I assume responsibility for the freedom of all sentient beings."

    Believing in the "tech", the "admin" or the "ethsucks" of Lips Hubbard greatly retards sentience.
  14. Ted

    Ted Gold Meritorious Patron

  15. Hatshepsut

    Hatshepsut Crusader

    Check your PMs :coolwink:
  16. RogerB

    RogerB Crusader

    Archetypes, this is an earlier post of mine that answers your question.

    The issue, really, is clear what? Or clear of what?

    What happened in the session noted above was that I became free from being effect of and overwhelmed by certain aspects of "case" or recorded past experience.

  17. RogerB

    RogerB Crusader

    Nice Lucid Response

    Nice lucid response Divvy. :yes:

    Thanks. It should help others who are interested.

    I don't remember the "Flow Assessment R/D" on NOTs you refer to. I did NOTs quite early on, so it's possible that got added after my escapade with it:whistling:

  18. RogerB

    RogerB Crusader

    You're Allowed :)


    You're allowed, Mate. Your comments and responses are always well reasoned, responsible and lucid. :yes: And, or course, intended to contribute to the well being of others and to help.:)

    And yours above continue in that vein.

  19. Div6

    Div6 Crusader

  20. RogerB

    RogerB Crusader

    Thanks, Divvy.

    I found the HCOB. It is not one I had ever read that I recall. I was not trained as a NOTs Auditor. Only for solo NOTs. The issue contains some useful stuff.

    What I have found in some of my very recent sessions is some spiritual teammates hung up in dramatizing intentions that are long, long ago solutions to a prblem scenario or other unwanted:yes:

    Example, this from yesterday's session. The intention: "To be here and to limit and protect self." And that "limit" notion was in the context of making self small so as to be out of the way of what it did not want to experience.

    Errr, ummm, that was rather good to clean up:yes:

    The handling was to have the S. Teammate repeat the intention as per my note in the presentation. Thus, the condition the S. TM was stuck in evaporated. :happydance: