What's new
By:
Filters

Dean Wilbur Rhetoric Hubbard dianetics sicientology

Gib

Gib

Crusader
Hubbard, the creator of illusions, a writer who learned English Rhetoric from Dean Wilbur.

Back in the beginning of the creation of the Sea Org, the Commodore created title illusion as well by hisself, Hubbard even created the illusion of his ships known as The Athena, The Diana, The Apollo, and the Excalibur.

ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Org

"The Sea Org was established on August 12, 1967 by L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Dianetics and Scientology, initially on board four ships, the Diana, the Athena, the Apollo, and the Excalibur. The Apollo served as the flag ship of the Sea Org."

1.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diana_(mythology)

"In Roman mythology, Diana [djˈaː.na] was the goddess of the hunt, the moon, and nature being associated with wild animals and woodland, and having the power to talk to and control animals."

2.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athena

"Athena (/əˈθiːnə/; Attic Greek: Ἀθηνᾶ, Athēnā, or Ἀθηναία, Athēnaia; Epic: Ἀθηναίη, Athēnaiē; Doric: Ἀθάνα, Athānā) or Athene (/əˈθiːniː/; Ionic: Ἀθήνη, Athēnē), often given the epithet Pallas (/ˈpæləs/; Παλλὰς), is the goddess of wisdom, craft, and war[SUP][2]"[/SUP]


3.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo

" Apollo has been variously recognized as a god of music, truth and prophecy, healing, the sun and light, plague, poetry, and more."

4.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excalibur

"Excalibur or Caliburn is the legendary sword of King Arthur, sometimes attributed with magical powers or associated with the rightful sovereignty of Great Britain. Sometimes Excalibur and the Sword in the Stone (the proof of Arthur's lineage) are said to be the same weapon, but in most versions they are considered separate"

Copy that, and don't forget Hubbard said in the beginning of Dianetics that his work was based on all the old ancients, the Greeks.

If it were only true, and in the end Hubbard tells Sarge he failed, copy that.
 
Gib

Gib

Crusader
From Le Bon book II chapter 3 The Leaders of Crowds and their means of Persuasion, under Prestige.

Did Hubbard get the idea and perfected as time marched on to implement what Le Bon wrote about how Prestige is worn away?

"Prestige lost by want of success disappears in a brief space of time. It can also be worn away, but more slowly by being subjected to discussion.

This latter power, however, is exceedingly sure. From the moment prestige is called in question it ceases to be prestige. The gods and men who have kept their prestige for long have never tolerated discussion. For the crowd to admire, it must be kept at a distance."
Click to expand...

What did Hubbard do to implement this, he through his rhetoric turned one viewpoint into another to protect hisself from discussion, turn the tides and attack and fair game, there can be no discussion.

Hubbard's scriptures (LOL, even Judges fall for this) known as HOC PL's and HCOB's state there is no allowing of talking about or discussing the tech, and no talking about case. No discussion allowed. Hubbard's rhetoric is that this will harm you, it will stir up your case and make you worse, LOL.

Hubbard went to great lengths to prevent discussion and all matter of means of subterfuge to do so:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?43893-Alleged-Scientology-OSA-Network-Orders-549-pages



One past example of Paulette Cooper who called into question, or discussing scientology in a book. I'm also reminded of Leah Remini asking "Where's Shelly?" and she doesn't have the rank (prestige) to ask that question or discuss. No discussion allowed.
 
Last edited:
Gib

Gib

Crusader
OMG, I luv it when Mike Rinder makes posts like this:

http://www.mikerindersblog.org/deadline-earth/#comments

Here's Ron's rhetoric speech:

deadline.png
 
Gib

Gib

Crusader
In Hubbard's Deadline speech, how many sentences begin with the word "We"?

How many times did Hubbard use the word "us" and "we"?

The Crowd

BUY%2B_%2BThey%2BLive.jpg
 
TheOriginalBigBlue

TheOriginalBigBlue

Gold Meritorious Patron
Only a 12 hour day and 60 hour week??!

These Scientologists get the whole weekend off??!

No wonder these namby-pambies come a cropper!! It's the soft bigotry of low expectations.
 
Gib

Gib

Crusader
Some of Hubbards affirmations:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmations_(L._Ron_Hubbard)

"Hubbard also expressed his ambitions for the future:
  • "Material things are yours for the asking. Men are your slaves."
  • "You will make fortunes writing."
  • "You will live to be 200 years old."
  • "You will always look young."
  • "Money will flood in upon you."[SUP][14]"[/SUP]
[SUP]​
Make fortunes writing, ie ASI. The rhetoric is books make booms.

PL's such as get staff to make money, that's the real story. We can do it. LOL[/SUP]
 
Gib

Gib

Crusader
http://www.european-rhetoric.com/ethos-pathos-logos-modes-persuasion-aristotle/

"Of the modes of persuasion furnished by the spoken word there are three kinds. The first kind depends on the personal character of the speaker [ethos]; the second on putting the audience into a certain frame of mind [pathos]; the third on the proof, or apparent proof, provided by the words of the speech itself [logos]. Persuasion is achieved by the speaker’s personal character when the speech is so spoken as to make us think him credible.
–Aristotle 1356a 2,3"

If you google search Ethos, it says ethics as one of it's definitions. Hubbard did a nice job of redefining that word, and deflection from it's true meaning so as to keep in hiding his real life history instead of the illusion he created, a magicians trick I do say.
 
guanoloco

guanoloco

As-Wased
Gib said:
further expanding what Caroline quoted above from hubbard, the next paragraph is :


so what this tells me looking thru the lens of rhetoric, hubbard implies the government is using agent provocateur and agent sabotage to stop dianetics, and yet hubbard uses the same technigues later on fully with his pts/sp/GO tech. ( in one of the Campbell/Heinlein letters in 1949 Campbell tells Heinlein about how the government is trying to stop Dianetics).

The last line in red is of course complete bullshit as hubbard just wrote a book where he supposedly cleared 270 people, and he never did, he lied his ass off from the get go.

Further along in hubbard's speech he speaks this:



Sounds familiar, first you sell him the idea of "clear" and what a "clear" can do, and then you sell him the cure, the glorious state of "clear" thru dianetics auditing and then scientology auditing. The very last sentence of dianetics is "better build a bridge"
Click to expand...


First you sell the single source of all aberration...the engram...the reactive mind...the dramatization. Then you sell him Clearing technology to erase the engram...empty the reactive mind...lifting and Clearing the dramatization.
 
guanoloco

guanoloco

As-Wased
Hi, Gib,

I've never read this thread until now and wanted to quip in.

You stated rhetoric was supposed to be used for good. I've never gotten that before.

Philosophy is, literally, the love of wisdom...the love of truth. As in Socrates it is an inquiry into the nature of something...a truth...beginning from a state of knowing nothing. This is opposed to rhetoric which is an assumed air of knowledge in an effort to persuade instead of or inlieu of discovering an actual or any truth. It is false knowledge. It is superficial fact finding and truth. It is the opposite of the love of truth.

If you look at the definition of a rhetorical question you can see the entire concept. A rhetorical question is not posed as a sincere inquiry for information. It is posed to make a statement, i.e. a conclusion about whatever.

That is what rhetoric is.

Hubbard used it all of the time as in "self abnegation has filled southeast jungles with stone idols and corpses and democracy has given us inflation and income tax"...therefore dismissing any ideas along those lines. If you look at this it is an appeal to persuasion and not a true conclusion from a hypothesis, premise(s), etc.

It is the opposite of philosophy...and you thought Scientology was an "applied philosophy". HaHa!!! It's actually applied rhetoric!

Great thread, btw.


PS Terril gives excellent examples earlier. I just wanted to add to it the juxtaposed theories of rhetoric to philosophy. Greek schools of rhetoric were considered shallow to Socrates...who felt students learning to persuade was of negative worth and that the pursuit of truth was divine.
 
Gib

Gib

Crusader
guanoloco said:
Hi, Gib,

I've never read this thread until now and wanted to quip in.

You stated rhetoric was supposed to be used for good. I've never gotten that before.

Philosophy is, literally, the love of wisdom...the love of truth. As in Socrates it is an inquiry into the nature of something...a truth...beginning from a state of knowing nothing. This is opposed to rhetoric which is an assumed air of knowledge in an effort to persuade instead of or inlieu of discovering an actual or any truth. It is false knowledge. It is superficial fact finding and truth. It is the opposite of the love of truth.

If you look at the definition of a rhetorical question you can see the entire concept. A rhetorical question is not posed as a sincere inquiry for information. It is posed to make a statement, i.e. a conclusion about whatever.

That is what rhetoric is.

Hubbard used it all of the time as in "self abnegation has filled southeast jungles with stone idols and corpses and democracy has given us inflation and income tax"...therefore dismissing any ideas along those lines. If you look at this it is an appeal to persuasion and not a true conclusion from a hypothesis, premise(s), etc.

It is the opposite of philosophy...and you thought Scientology was an "applied philosophy". HaHa!!! It's actually applied rhetoric!

Great thread, btw.


PS Terril gives excellent examples earlier. I just wanted to add to it the juxtaposed theories of rhetoric to philosophy. Greek schools of rhetoric were considered shallow to Socrates...who felt students learning to persuade was of negative worth and that the pursuit of truth was divine.
Click to expand...

I know what you saying about "rhetorical question", but it's usage came about in the late middle English period. I don't think Aristotle came up with rhetorical question, there is a difference.

And , oh yah, scientology is rhetoric. It's, that is both scientology and rhethoric, is the art of writing and speeches ( how many lectures did Hubbard give?, why he gave more speeches than books?).

I really love this lecture series by Hugh Blair, it's beautiful writing. https://archive.org/details/lecturesonrheto31blaigoog

What's interesting is Dean Wilbur's book is actually quite similar, and Hubbard corrupted what these two said. And as far as I'm concerned, Hubbard used additionally Le Bon work's to create a crowd instead of independent thinkers. And of course he used others as well, The warp and woof, a spiders web one might say, and Hubbard's org board is exactly that, anybody that gets invloved in scientology is plugged into Hubbard's org board of scientology. or his woof and warp.
 
Last edited:
Gib

Gib

Crusader
Hubbard first said Woof and Warp I believe in the PDC's, but I forget now w/o looking up. DM has come up with a new to sell to the Crowd scientologists a lecture series called "Scientology and Tradition", which is part of "The Basics" that all members were ordered to buy and listen to and go "on course" at a local Mission or Org, gotta luv DM's marketing bullshit pulling one over the sheeple, LOL.

Anyways, this the official COS website talking about Hubbard's rhetoric of culture and fabric and woof and warp.
https://www.scientology.org/store/item/scientology-and-tradition-classic.html

Here is a quote in the name of fair usage from the above link:

"To that end, Mr. Hubbard delivers a comprehensive, 360-degree account of how Scientology basics correlate to the customs, mores, policies, laws and traditions that make up the fabric of a culture. Here is a technology on how to communicate Scientology that is not only essential to dissemination, but may well determine the woof and warp of future civilizations."
Click to expand...
 
Gib

Gib

Crusader
I think this link is a pretty good analysis of KSW, thanks to Knows who posted on the Stupid thread. :thumbsup:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeping_Scientology_Working

It's a good analysis of Hubbard's rhetoric actually, whether or not known to the wiki link writer.

What the hell is analysis? from google search:

"a·nal·y·sis
əˈnaləsəs/
noun
Click to expand...

What the hell is rhetorical analysis?

https://tutorial.dasa.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/2015/06/RhetoricalAnalysis.pdf

Simply put, how does a writer persuade by using the 3 means of persuasion of ethos (character), pathos (emotions) and logos (logic), (you'll have to google those terms to get a wider understanding)?

The wiki link correctly points out the 10 points of KSW wherein Hubbard already established himself as ethos or character or the authority or guru or leader of a crowd, in the mind of scientologists:




1. "Having the correct technology": Which Hubbard asserts has been done.
2. "Knowing the technology": He claims many do know this.
3. "Knowing it is correct": Hubbard says this comes from application and observation.
4. "Teaching correctly the correct technology": He claims this is being done worldwide.
5. "Applying the technology": Again, he says this is already happening.
6. "Seeing that the technology is correctly applied": He says instructors and supervisors do this.
7. "Hammering out of existence incorrect technology": The first problem area according to Hubbard, where he says it is a "weak point" and is only handled by a few.
8. "Knocking out incorrect applications": Hubbard says this isn't worked on hard enough.
9. "Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology": Hubbard says this is "impeded by the 'reasonable' attitude of the not quite bright."
10. "Closing the door on incorrect application": Hubbard says this is "seldom done with enough ferocity."

When I first read KSW back many years ago, I was sublimed in reading it, it was beyond words, this guy figured it out, and I was sublimed. Little did I know at the time about the art of writing and rhetoric.

And, of course, Le Bon states the leaders of crowds use repetition as one of their means of persuasion, hence KSW is at the beginning of every course a scientologist pays for and does.

Corollary: repetition of whistle blowers also is true. Hubbard banked on Fair Game to stop whistle blowers.
 
Gib

Gib

Crusader
guanoloco said:
Hi, Gib,

I've never read this thread until now and wanted to quip in.
Click to expand...

I find this quite interesting that you made that statement.

I am spinning my wheels. It's time for me to leave, my friend. The identity known as Gib will no longer be.
 
Jump

Jump

Operating teatime
Gib said:
I find this quite interesting that you made that statement.

I am spinning my wheels. It's time for me to leave, my friend. The identity known as Gib will no longer be.
Click to expand...

WAT?

That was a complete non sequitur. :/

Maybe someone will explain..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Gib
Dean Wilbur Conversation vs Hubbard Communication TR's
Replies
7
Views
2K
guanoloco
guanoloco
mockingbird
Gibs Great Find
2
Replies
35
Views
7K
Gib
Gib
ILove2Lurk
Sara Northrup . . . touching the third rail
2
Replies
28
Views
7K
Cat Daddy
C
mockingbird
WHY HUBBARD NEVER CLAIMED OT FEATS
2
Replies
23
Views
5K
mockingbird
mockingbird
CommunicatorIC
Scientology: A Monotheistic Religion
Replies
10
Views
2K
Demented LRH
Demented LRH
Top