Ex members who still use pieces of Scientology.

Karakorum

Broke ranks over 10 years ago, never looked back
Willing to work 14 hours a day? That's all I got.
Been there, done that.

I can work 14 hours a day. I just don't want to be sleeping 5hrs a night again.,
 

Karakorum

Broke ranks over 10 years ago, never looked back

Chuck J.

Election Fraud Has Consequences
I take five minutes every night and make list of things I need to get done tomorrow. I don't dignify it with the title of B.P. or with any title. Is that $cientology ? ;-)


Usually I do not go out with the idea of using any piece of scn. tech but at times certain situations present themselves and I remember to, say, communicate to someone at a level of reality I sense they're at.

I find the idea of CRA useful especially in customer service situations, where I'm the customer, lol. IIRC, it's from the 17th ACC where Hubbard has one of his "Earth Shattering" break-through's he was prone to ;-) that's it's CRA not ARC, etc.

Nothing too crazy. I sense where they're at reality wise: disgruntled customer service rep. at Wall-Wart having a bad day with the people in line in front of me.....I don't wanna get into the shit with them, so, wow, rocket science! lol - give them a communication where they're at or a little above that point. Reality goes in a little, a bit of affinity, rinse, repeat if necessary, and handle my return.

I guess we can call that scn. But also it's just observing people, trying to get along, and sensing how to make my way thru my day with a minimum of hassle.
 

Karakorum

Broke ranks over 10 years ago, never looked back
Ok, I just realized I have one specific piece of scientology which I use almost all the time in the big world. That piece is: "using emotional reactions in a premeditated, deliberate as tools to complete a task."

I didn't mention it in my last post is because I haven't been thinking of it as a "piece of scientology". Because strictly speaking it is not a "piece of the tech", I do not remember Hubbard giving a lecture about it or explicitly . Rather it is a part of the "SO toolbox" - the "inv toolbox" in specific.

I described it in one of my previous posts:
(...) In inv you are never expected to just "get mad" at the suspect. You decide to deliberately get mad and then proceed to act in this manner to elicit the specific response you want to get from him/her. Nothing is done in a spontaneous manner just because you really feel like that. Everything is deliberate and effect-oriented.​
This isn't limited to just faking anger (though that's probably the most common one), same thing is used with fear, sadness, joy, curiosity etc.

Real life example:
I was in a corporate video conference with my superior and several analysts. My boss really lost his patience and started shouting. In my head I then gone through a list of possible reactions. I settled on one, then very deliberately I raised my voice slightly and in a premeditated tone of irritation said: "Stop shouting, all us us can hear you quite well!"

Because that was very different from my usual altitude (I almost never raise my voice in any corporate meetings), my boss immediately snapped back into reality and realized he was going to far and crossed a line. The meeting was very productive from that point and everyone's tempers subsided. After the meeting my boss even apologized for losing his cool.


Thing is: none of that was my "real" reaction. It was just a "design-for-effect" scientology act, exactly the same toolbox-emotion we used during interrogations and confessionals. That's probably my no.1 most used "piece of scientology". It sure is useful, although I am not sure if it is healthy.
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation.
Ok, I just realized I have one specific piece of scientology which I use almost all the time in the big world. That piece is: "using emotional reactions in a premeditated, deliberate as tools to complete a task."

I didn't mention it in my last post is because I haven't been thinking of it as a "piece of scientology". Because strictly speaking it is not a "piece of the tech", I do not remember Hubbard giving a lecture about it or explicitly . Rather it is a part of the "SO toolbox" - the "inv toolbox" in specific.

I described it in one of my previous posts:
(...) In inv you are never expected to just "get mad" at the suspect. You decide to deliberately get mad and then proceed to act in this manner to elicit the specific response you want to get from him/her. Nothing is done in a spontaneous manner just because you really feel like that. Everything is deliberate and effect-oriented.​
This isn't limited to just faking anger (though that's probably the most common one), same thing is used with fear, sadness, joy, curiosity etc.

Real life example:
I was in a corporate video conference with my superior and several analysts. My boss really lost his patience and started shouting. In my head I then gone through a list of possible reactions. I settled on one, then very deliberately I raised my voice slightly and in a premeditated tone of irritation said: "Stop shouting, all us us can hear you quite well!"

Because that was very different from my usual altitude (I almost never raise my voice in any corporate meetings), my boss immediately snapped back into reality and realized he was going to far and crossed a line. The meeting was very productive from that point and everyone's tempers subsided. After the meeting my boss even apologized for losing his cool.

Thing is: none of that was my "real" reaction. It was just a "design-for-effect" scientology act, exactly the same toolbox-emotion we used during interrogations and confessionals. That's probably my no.1 most used "piece of scientology". It sure is useful, although I am not sure if it is healthy.

I think it's very healthy if used to calm situations down or for any other positive reason ... but repulsive when used as hubbard wanted it used (to entrap, guilt trip, create fear and basically get more $ out of people for the 'privilege of being corrected'). I view what you've just described as a sales technique or something a therapist could use when dealing with serious mental health cases and perhaps even when parenting in certain situations ... I have no problem at all with it.

I still occasionally use TR's very deliberately ... and as @Chuck J. mentions I write a quick list each night of things I want to get done the next day.

:)
 

Karakorum

Broke ranks over 10 years ago, never looked back
I think it's very healthy if used to calm situations down or for any other positive reason ... but repulsive when used as hubbard wanted it used (to entrap, guilt trip, create fear and basically get more $ out of people for the 'privilege of being corrected'). I view what you've just described as a sales technique or something a therapist could use when dealing with serious mental health cases and perhaps even when parenting in certain situations ... I have no problem at all with it.
My question about the "healthiness" of it is from the point of the user, not the subject. Looking at it in a detached way, I feel it easily ends up much like a facsimile of autistic masking. There are moments where the vast majority of my emotional reactions end up being "toolbox emotions" to the point that I sometimes do not even know what would have been my "genuine" reaction.

This is compounded by the fact that the technique (by its very essence) was always geared to appear different depending on who you interact with. I would use very different "tools" for the public, different for SO peers, different for CMO girls... and even several different ones for "accountable units", depending how high their anxiety was.

So I sometimes find myself adopting different tools for different groups of people in my life and in my company. I often realize this only at a moment where suddenly all these groups appear at the same place at the same time and mix (IE: big company party).
That's where the confusion happens. Talk about a "chameleon on tartan" moment :unsure:

In scientology the various groups are always "neatly" pigeonholed. You do not interrogate an "accountable unit" in front of public members and talking to a CMO girl at the same time. The big world ain't that simple.
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation.
My question about the "healthiness" of it is from the point of the user, not the subject. Looking at it in a detached way, I feel it easily ends up much like a facsimile of autistic masking. There are moments where the vast majority of my emotional reactions end up being "toolbox emotions" to the point that I sometimes do not even know what would have been my "genuine" reaction.

This is compounded by the fact that the technique (by its very essence) was always geared to appear different depending on who you interact with. I would use very different "tools" for the public, different for SO peers, different for CMO girls... and even several different ones for "accountable units", depending how high their anxiety was.

So I sometimes find myself adopting different tools for different groups of people in my life and in my company. I often realize this only at a moment where suddenly all these groups appear at the same place at the same time and mix (IE: big company party).
That's where the confusion happens. Talk about a "chameleon on tartan" moment :unsure:

In scientology the various groups are always "neatly" pigeonholed. You do not interrogate an "accountable unit" in front of public members and talking to a CMO girl at the same time. The big world ain't that simple.
Fair enough ... I am but a simple soul though and if something is working for me and not harming anyone else, I'll keep using it until it doesn't.

:)
 

This is NOT OK !!!!

Well-known member
I use the half ack a lot.

Girlfriend talks, I half-ack.

One day she said, "What did I just say?"

I'm like, "How do I know, I wasn't listening."

More or less like every other homo sap male.

Would you say that's why OT 3 - OT 7 sucked for me?, because I'm a bypassed case from the TRs course?
 
Last edited:

F.Bullbait

Wise Guy
I use the half ack a lot.

Girlfriend talks, I half-ack.

One day she said, "What did I just say?"

I'm like, "How do I know, I wasn't listening."

More or less like every other homo sap male.

Would you say that why OT 3 - OT 7 sucked for me?, because I'm a bypassed case from the TRs course?

Sounds like you are no longer in the clubhouse.

No longer prey if they come calling...


 

Inanna

Arriving fresh from Callahan’s Crosstime Saloon
Not gonna lie. I did like some of the ideas. Eventually, though, I ended up going back to the belief systems from which Hubbard appropriated many of his ideas. This works better for me.
 

Karakorum

Broke ranks over 10 years ago, never looked back
Eventually, though, I ended up going back to the belief systems from which Hubbard appropriated many of his ideas.
Which ones? Buddhism, Crowley, Blavatsky or Plato?

Cause he sure "appropriated" from a lot of places.
 

La La Lou Lou

Well-known member
Planning ahead, to do lists, Benjamin Franklin apparently did them religiously. Way before Hubbard was twinkle in his father's eyes. I don't do Battle Plans, I don't think I ever did all the items on a battle plan in my cult daze. Occasionally when I really do have lots of things to do with a deadline, like before moving house I do list all the things that need to be done, and in what order and get them all done. It's bigger than a battle plan more of a program but it's common sense not cult.

I am forgetful and easily distracted especially when stressed so this is the only way, it helps overcome my natural chaos. It took me years of begging but eventually I had a diagnosis of Autism, I went willingly to see a Psychiatrist, imagine that! I was in my sixties by then, autistic people tend to have huge problems with executive function, so listing things to get done bypasses that and does lower the stress levels.

On the subject of the cult, I left, walked out, slammed the door behind me over thirty years ago and I still get dreams like last night when I was in and trying to get out. Even dreaming of my old boss who was my tormentor, and trying to work out how to help her to escape too.
 

Karakorum

Broke ranks over 10 years ago, never looked back
Planning ahead, to do lists, Benjamin Franklin apparently did them religiously. Way before Hubbard was twinkle in his father's eyes. I don't do Battle Plans, I don't think I ever did all the items on a battle plan in my cult daze. Occasionally when I really do have lots of things to do with a deadline, like before moving house I do list all the things that need to be done, and in what order and get them all done. It's bigger than a battle plan more of a program but it's common sense not cult.
I always plan. I have plans within plans within variant options for contingency plans. I drive some of my bosses crazy whenever they ask me to tell them what my plans are, because they end up- hearing about contingency plans that never get used.

But no, that's just how I roll. Doesn't really have much to do with Hubbard's tech. More of a wargamer's mindset.
 

marra

Well-known member
What does scientology say about pearsonal boundaries?
I think you need to define what you mean by personal boundaries. My first thought is there is no such thing in scientology. They do what they want with you. Even if someone is raped they are made to feel it was their own fault. See the Danny Masterson case.
 

He-man

Hero extraordinary
What does scientology say about pearsonal boundaries?
Scientology doesn't really cover "personal boundaries" as such, rather a Scientologist describes its "dynamics" and there is an idea around a beings ability to "confront" and an idea around ones "presence".

So I guess an idea of personal boundaries as such would be considered to be a part of ones 1st dynamic, your ability to confront and your presence.

:confused:
 

Karakorum

Broke ranks over 10 years ago, never looked back
What does scientology say about pearsonal boundaries?
In theory, this should be settled by the rules of "exchange", each person should be allowed as much as he/she is willing to offer.

But of course that is never the case and instead scientology slumps into a sort of quasi-altruism "The greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics". And that in turn slumps into a rapid spiral of demands for obedience and sacrifice. You are expected to be willing to take a bullet for the cause at a moment's notice and then say "thank you" when you get shot. Boundaries? Ain't no such thing when great sacrifices are needed.
 

guanoloco

As-Wased
What does scientology say about pearsonal boundaries?
It says that they can be penetrated. They're reactive. The bank has no "rights". Since the bank is all that people have in common bank agreement is reactive. Sanity is to break these false barriers in order to impinge and get them to need of change.

Not only can the be penetrated - they SHOULD be. Salvaging this sector can be a dirty business.
 
Top