.How to Convince Scientologists to Leave
Here's what's kind of funny, at about the 2:31 mark Aaron talks about the confidential clear cognition. Now wait a minute, I thought any two people could clear themselves using Dianetics, how come it becomes "confidential" and when did it?How to Convince Scientologists to Leave
.Here's what's kind of funny, at about the 2:31 mark Aaron talks about the confidential clear cognition. Now wait a minute, I thought any two people could clear themselves using Dianetics, how come it becomes "confidential" and when did it? Maybe Jefferson Hawkins can answer since he created the Dianetics promotions back in the 1970/80's or maybe his brother Just Bill?
here's the original dianetics book, it's in the appendices..
That brings up an interesting question. Certainly nothing in DMSMH was "confidential", but I don't recall what the "END PHENOMENA" is in that book. We know it's the state of Clear.
But what does the book define as "Clear" and what is the test?
Interesting. I bet one could survey ALL ORGS & MISSIONS and ask all auditors and staff members and perhaps none of them could answer what the exact CLEAR EP is from book one and how the auditor and PC scientifically verified it.
Remember it's a "modern science" so there should be a scientific test to confirm Clear, right? LOL
I couldn't stand reading that book DMSMH any of the times I tried to read it. So I ain't gonna ruin my day by going into an online version in order to look up when the PC can "attest".
.here's the original dianetics book, it's in the appendices.
"The past acts of an individual who has been cleared should be stricken from his record even as his illnesses have been, for with the cause removed there can be no point in retribution unless society itself is so aberrated that it desires to operate on sadistic principles.* There is more than idealism here for it can be shown that aberration in individuals and the society rise in progressive ratio to the amount of punishment employed. "
The appendices of the original dianetics book are very rhetoric, if one cares to read them. They also explain Hubbard's master plan to go forward which something Veda doesn't know about.
.The appendices of the original dianetics book are very rhetoric, if one cares to read them. They also explain Hubbard's master plan to go forward which something Veda doesn't know about.
I'm sorry, it's in Chapter 10 of the pdf book. Here's the master plan and by the why, something to consider is the appendices of the original book are longer in any dianetics book presently, the COS deleted them, have to wonder why. I've also posted numerous times my findings on hubbard's rhetoric and yet you all think I'm bullshit. You just don't see how hubbard's rhetoric is in everything he wrote..
Sorry, you'd have to be more specific when making a claim like that. How would you know what Veda doesn't know about? LOL. Isn't that kind of language the attempt at rhetorical persuasion which you so often warn others about?
In fact, during the last 12 years of interacting on this message board, I have never witnessed ANYONE who has a greater understanding of "Hubbard's Master Plan" than Veda, who has taken extraordinary amounts of time and care fo historically reference and memorialize all the proof of such that appears in policies, bulletins, directives, advices, black-op publications and other arcane/hidden documents by both Scientology and governmental investigative agencies.
the problem with your theory is that the original people involved never continued and then denounced Hubbard. Those people were John Campbell, and a bunch of others who originally was behind Hubbards Dianetics Master Plan. So, if John Campbell had AESP's in auditing, why didn't he continue?@Riddick
I suggest that you add some study on brain endorphins to your knowledge (especially as could be used to understand Dianetic auditing).
Sticking with a particular AESP in auditing will eventually result in a brain endorphin effect for stress relief (not Hubbard's pseudo-science ).
If the PC gets off into some significance(s) then the auditor is supposed to use TR4 to get the PC back onto the particular AESP.
(No, I am not defending Hubbard nor Dianetics.)
On a final note, you Veda and you HH, actually explain Hubbard's rhetoric.Scientology is a collection of parts. These parts may already be separate (for a person). Or can be tactfully and patiently pried apart.
There are those who pledge their to allegiance only to Ron.
And those who only care only about the tech.
Both above typically have disagreements with the organization, and with Miscavige.
What has sometimes worked is saying that Miscavige betrayed Ron and altered Scientology, possibly in cahoots with the USA government . (I don't actually believe this).
The idea is to separate Miscavige from Hubbard and, if possible to, optimally, separate both from the auditing tech.
And then parts of he auditing tech can be separated from other parts of the auditing tech.
Ultimately, the person is left with remnants of Scientology. He may like these remnants, but these remnants are no longer Scientology but another subject.
On a final note, you Veda and you HH, actually explain Hubbard's rhetoric.
I don't understand the overblown emphasis over the years on the concept5. The resident self-appointed expert on rhetoric heavily dismissed, disliked & demeaned the people in #4 (above), because they are squirrels alter-ising the KRW* tech.