Knowledgism - Alan C Walter - Info needed

Cat's Squirrel

Well-known member
I was in comm(unication) with the Knowledgism people in the mid-90s, and have picked up a bit from from both Dart Smohen and Alan about how the organisation worked as well as reading Roger's comments both here and elsewhere.

I think there are differences in the data, but for me there were other, for me worrying similarities between the two. For me, the price charged per session was something like $1,000 per session, and according to DS if you didn't go for it you were "psychotic on money", and also, at the time I knew them, they were always introducing new levels instead of having a completed handling of whatever may come up.

To be fair to Alan, the old AAC I knew was an a example of what happened when you don't do that because their client base eventually shrank and they went out of business. One of the Knowledgism people (I forget whom) also offered to give me a session for free if the prices were a problem.

All the same though, is this really the way out? I just can't see it.
 

Reyne Mayer

Pansexual Revolutionary
I think there are differences in the data, but for me there were other, for me worrying similarities between the two. For me, the price charged per session was something like $1,000 per session, and according to DS if you didn't go for it you were "psychotic on money", and also, at the time I knew them, they were always introducing new levels instead of having a completed handling of whatever may come up.

To be fair to Alan, the old AAC I knew was an a example of what happened when you don't do that because their client base eventually shrank and they went out of business. One of the Knowledgism people (I forget whom) also offered to give me a session for free if the prices were a problem.
thanks for that perspective.

to me that encapsulates the indy quandary, unless you duplicate a lot of what 'works' in a certain way in the CofS does to compel and control people, 'kinder, gentler' approaches or whatever just inevitably dissipate over time.
 

Is-Was

Member
Hi @Rockycharles,

* * * If you know anything about scientology you also know about knowledgism because they are basically one and the same. * * *
:tobed:
Yet if I evaluate Knowledgism against a laundry list of abusive practices commonly attributed to Scientology I don't come up with any correspondences:

Examples: Any forced abortions in Knowledgism? Religious cloaking? Staff or customers restrained from leaving the Knowledgism premises? Forced disconnection or disruption of families? Restriction against use of the internet or other contact with non-Knowledgists and outside world? SP declares? Sleep deprivation? Rice and bean diet? Rehabilitation Project force (Gulag)? Abusive regging practices? Bait and switch between lower and upper levels, with confidential upper levels devoted to implants, Xenu and mass exorcism of attached spirits? Enforced re-dos of previously completed courses? Ideal Org program? Blackmailing with confidential session disclosures? Culture of physical violence at executive level? Assignment of "ethics" conditions to staff or clients, with enforced remedial or amends projects? Degrading penalties such as cleaning dumpsters with toothbrushes, "overboarding," confinement to a ship's chain locker, or pushing a peanut around a ship's deck with ones nose? Private detectives or fanatic cult members carrying out fair game programs against critics, journalists or others who speak out against the organization? Executives sent to federal prison for committing crimes in covert Knowledgism operations involving infiltration of government offices? Knowledgists intervening to prevent receipt of conventional mental health treatment by its clients or staff? [And the list goes on . . . .]

That's a very incomplete list, but I have not heard reports or accusations of Knowledgism engaging in any of this flavor of activity.
 
Last edited:

TheSneakster

Well-known member
Yet if I evaluate Knowledgism against a laundry list of abusive practices commonly attributed to Scientology I don't come up with any correspondences:

Scientology (a set of spiritual teachings and techniques) is not the Church of Scientology (an organization which engages in the entire laundry list of abusive practices you list above).

Knowledgism (a set of spiritual teachings and techniques) is being compared by "I told you I was trouble" with Scientology (a set of spiritual teachings and techniques). The comparison of those two things is perfectly valid and mostly accurate according to my own review of Knowledgism
 
Last edited:

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation.
Yet if I evaluate Knowledgism against a laundry list of abusive practices commonly attributed to Scientology I don't come up with any correspondences:

Examples: Any forced abortions in Knowledgism? Religious cloaking? Staff or customers restrained from leaving the Knowledgism premises? Forced disconnection or disruption of families? Restriction against use of the internet or other contact with non-Knowledgists and outside world? SP declares? Sleep deprivation? Rice and bean diet? Rehabilitation Project force (Gulag)? Abusive regging practices? Bait and switch between lower and upper levels, with confidential upper levels devoted to implants, Xenu and mass exorcism of attached spirits? Enforced re-dos of previously completed courses? Ideal Org program? Blackmailing with confidential session disclosures? Culture of physical violence at executive level? Assignment of "ethics" conditions to staff or clients, with enforced remedial or amends projects? Degrading penalties such as cleaning dumpsters with toothbrushes, "overboarding," confinement to a ship's chain locker, or pushing a peanut around a ship's deck with ones nose? Private detectives or fanatic cult members carrying out fair game programs against critics, journalists or others who speak out against the organization? Executives sent to federal prison for committing crimes in covert Knowledgism operations involving infiltration of government offices? Knowledgists intervening to prevent receipt of conventional mental health treatment by its clients or staff? [And the list goes on . . . .]

That's a very incomplete list, but I have not heard reports or accusations of Knowledgism engaging in any of this flavor of activity.

I didn't mention staff or the SO, which is where most of the above list occurs, I was referring to the "tech" and I was addressing someone who has a family member currently not doing well after apparently being involved in Kn for 5 years.

Whenever there are guru like (all knowing, all seeing, all singing and all dancing) people swanning around in any organisation or group I think it's probably best to avoid it and find other ways to manage your life ... I suppose I have an aversion to people who have all the answers because I believe they are more likely to have none at all and be FOS.

Happy Christmas.
 

The_Fixer

Well-known member
I didn't mention staff or the SO, which is where most of the above list occurs, I was referring to the "tech" and I was addressing someone who has a family member currently not doing well after apparently being involved in Kn for 5 years.

Whenever there are guru like (all knowing, all seeing, all singing and all dancing) people swanning around in any organisation or group I think it's probably best to avoid it and find other ways to manage your life ... I suppose I have an aversion to people who have all the answers because I believe they are more likely to have none at all and be FOS.

Happy Christmas.
Agreed.
It's still drinking from the same poisoned chalice.
 

Cat's Squirrel

Well-known member
thanks for that perspective.

to me that encapsulates the indy quandary, unless you duplicate a lot of what 'works' in a certain way in the CofS does to compel and control people, 'kinder, gentler' approaches or whatever just inevitably dissipate over time.
Yes, I think you're right.

One of the things I hoped for after I left the CofS was that it would turn into a kind of McDonalds of therapy.

This is a very loose analogy, but you know what you're getting when you go into a McDonalds and order a Big Mac, fries and an apple pie (which always came out with the filling far too hot, but I digress). It's not the best or even the tastiest food you can buy, but it's 100% reliable; you know that wherever you go in the world, it'll be the same experience.

The same with the Tech, or at least it was when I was "in" - wherever you go in the world, if you go into an org you know that the procedure will be exactly the same.

Well, the indy field is essentially equivalent to what happens when a lot of McDonalds short order cooks decide they don't want to work for such a controlling organisation any more (I read somewhere that not only does the coffee in McDonalds have to be heated to a specific temperature, but the meat patties have to be grilled for exactly 108 seconds each), and want to strike out and open their own burger restaurants, cook burgers and make coffee on their own.

For a while it works and business is good, but then some decide that they don't want to cook burgers any more because they don't like cooking meat so they use their cooking skills to open a pizza place. Others get fed up with cooking altogether and retrain in something like nursing or bookkeeping and accountancy. Some, the older ones, eventually retire.

Meanwhile, McDonalds carries on, doing what it's always done.
 
Last edited:

RogerB

Active member
By the way, I noticed in among the various comments on this thread a false statement that will be the line of nonsense that the cult of Scientology would want promulgated . . . all in an effort to enforce or continue the idea that Hubbard's technology is right, the best, proper and needed for everyone else to prosper.

The falsehood as written is that Alan asked for or sought permission from Hubbard to use Scientology tech in or as part of Knowledgism. I can assure you this is absolutely false, not so and BS.

Those of you who have read Alan's posts in the original ESMB know that there ended up being a war between Hubbard and Alan . . . I wrote briefly on it and cited the exact thread on ESMB in my Bio of Alan noted earlier.

Alan and I discussed the relative differences between Kn and Scn in the lunch we had together in November, 1994.

I was pointing out that Scn went negative in April 1963, when Hubbard announced that, "All goals found and processed to-date, were not your own, but implants." And we went off following Hubbard to "Heaven" by way of "Helatrobus."

And the fact was, that then Scn became an exercise in chasing down the negatives to "get rid of."

Alan's response was that, "Well thanks to Scn we now know what's wrong tech to not follow!"

The only similarity between the two "techs" is that they both ask a question to which the client provides an answer.
 
Last edited:

Is-Was

Member
Scientology (a set of spiritual teachings and techniques) is not the Church of Scientology (an organization which engages in the entire laundry list of abusive practices you list above).

Knowledgism (a set of spiritual teachings and techniques) is being compared by "I told you I was trouble" with Scientology (a set of spiritual teachings and techniques). The comparison of those two things is perfectly valid and mostly accurate according to my own review of Knowledgism
Well, the terms Scientology and Knowledgism are both trademarks registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The use of the two terms to refer to the respective trademark owners, their products, services, delivery systems and practices is also "perfectly valid and mostly accurate," just as the term "Pfizer" could be used to denote a legal business entity, a legal business name, a trademark, a company including its people, facilities, operations etc., or a particular Covid19 vaccination.

I referred to "abusive practices commonly attributed to Scientology." I have no personal experience or special knowledge that would support a claim that Scientology has in fact engaged engaged in these practices. However, the quantity of fairly consistent allegations of such practices in Scientology is, from my "wog" viewpoint, a huge "red flag." So far as I know, Knowledgism may have similar issues, but I have not encountered any specific allegations of that sort.
 

Inanna

Arriving fresh from Callahan’s Crosstime Saloon
Hello,
Looking for anyone that might have experience with Knowledgism.

It was started by Alan C Walter who worked closely with LRH until he left to start his own operation.

He ran a ranch till his death in 2009 where his predecessors have taken it over.

Our family has a member that’s been in there grips for 5 years & is now in a facility due to mental health issues. They refer to these as ascensions.

The Ranch - Advanced Coaching & Leadership Center | How to be in the Zone

Any infomation would be great.
I know Alan was well thought of. He reached out to me after I left Scientology, but later reproved me publicly a couple times.

He charged very large sums of money for Knowledgism. As I recall, it had levels that I think were named after colors.

Meh. Whatta putz.
 

Reyne Mayer

Pansexual Revolutionary
The only similarity between the two "techs" is that they both ask a question to which the client provides an answer.
there have to be more parallels than that in something so grounded in its founders long-term experience with something else, even if it is some sort of departure.

what i find for example definitely suggests common bases:

LRH and Scientology...gave us some right answers
Alan C. Walter

scanning Knowledgisms' website i see familiar terms and concepts like 'Games Playing', and the hubbardian neologism 'Out-ethics' (very tone deaf for a public website, as to anyone without prior history with scientology it would sound like culty in-group jargon).
 
Last edited:

ILove2Lurk

Lisbeth Salander
Alan's response was that, "Well thanks to Scn we now know what's wrong tech to not follow!"
Proof is in the results. How did Alan end up after all his "processing" in K? Where is he now? Doing what, if anything?

So many Hubbard "spin-offs" and many mental practices in general, I have to classify as simply navel gazing
(continual self-absorbed introspection) or ivory tower Feng Shui (a continual rearranging one's "mental furniture").
Just not seeing end-points with tangible real-world results. Sorry. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
Last edited:

ILove2Lurk

Lisbeth Salander
Hate to repeat myself. (This is like my mantra.) :LOL:

Many people put their faith in and get wisdom and wins from the writings and talks of many gurus and teachers
along the way. A few would include: Manly P. Hall, Khalil Gibran, Madame Blavatsky, Alan Watts, Carlos Castaneda,
and Deepak Chopra. So many more.

I love some of Manly Hall's lectures. (They're all on YouTube or other places on the Internet.) Hall did approximately
8,000 lectures in the United States and abroad, authored over 150 books and essays, and wrote countless magazine
articles. Many more hour-long lectures than Hubbard and spanning decades. Fascinating at times and a great speaker.
All without written notes. Just incredible.

At the end of his life, Hall was asking others about what would happen to him after he died. Looking for reassurances
after a life of selling -- and believing in -- his spirituality topics and immortality.

Likewise, Deepak Chopra in a candid and private moment of doubt -- off script -- in the film documentary about him,
Decoding Deepak, wondering what happens after we die. Yes, he too has doubts in private, but a $80-150 million net
worth from selling spirituality makes him feel better, I'm sure. :whistle:

How do these wise people -- who know more than I do maybe -- end up?

Excerpt
Master of the Mysteries: New Revelations on the Life of Manly Palmer Hall
Second Edition by Louis Sahagun​
There was a time while writing the first edition when I was sorely tempted to scrap the project. I questioned​
the very idea of focusing more attention on yet another self-styled mystic with all-too-human flaws who made​
a career out of telling people how to live right.​
. . .​
Manly P. Hall had serious personal issues. Khalil Gibran was a chain smoker who died of cirrhosis of the liver.​
Madame Blavatsky was exposed as a fraud, and had such bad personal hygiene that there were ulcerous​
sores on both her legs. Alan Watts spent his last years in a stupor, guzzling warm vodka by the quarts.​
Carlos Castaneda was a fraud and a jerk. Edmond Szekely’s wife told me that he never discovered Essene​
documents in the Vatican—he made that up.​
Do these people deserve a moment of our attention?​

Trouble is we all read about the early parts of these people's lives -- the public parts -- and seldom do we read the final
chapters of the books, which for many are the most revealing parts about what they really have or don't have.

I think it's probably best to go to the the final chapters of the books and skim them for the "reveals" before spending a life
married to any gurus. Then read on accordingly. At least, you'll know what you can and shouldn't expect. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 

Is-Was

Member
@RogerB:

Hi Roger. FYI, earlier today I tried the link you provided for the Knowledgism Practice Group, and found it to be a dead link. Google search results included tidbits from the site, indicating some sort of legal action taking place as recently as last month, but the links provided there were dead also. One could speculate, but can you provide any clarification? Thanks!
 

RogerB

Active member
Yep, Issy . . .
@RogerB:

Hi Roger. FYI, earlier today I tried the link you provided for the Knowledgism Practice Group, and found it to be a dead link. Google search results included tidbits from the site, indicating some sort of legal action taking place as recently as last month, but the links provided there were dead also. One could speculate, but can you provide any clarification? Thanks!
If you go to the "internet way back machine" you will see the following last post on this issue:

October 14, 2021, 10:20:04 AM


There was an earlier post I made on this topic in the confidential area of the Forum. It was taken down by Carmel George in a hissy-fit as you Practicing and Premium members already know.

In any event, here is the up-date I want you to know.

OK, an update on the suit from Ceil and ACLC about taking our Practice Group site down.

More betrayals, as usual.

For you guys who have been to the ranch, whether when Alan was alive or after his death, and bought training to be a processor on the understanding that you had purchased your training based on the understanding that you would then be entitled to use what you purchased to set up and run a Knowledgism Practice, this is a cautionary tale.

This linked video of a Zoom call between Ceil and me, and the her follow-up email, says it all.

Meeting Ceil & Roger July-08-2021.wmv

Meeting Ceil & Roger July-08-2021.wmv

Note that she initiated the offer to send me a list of all the offending "course materials and ACW copyrighted materials that she wanted taken down . . .

Then, on July 9 Ceil sends this email . . . note the reneging on her agreed undertaking to provide a list of the offending materials>

Ceil Stanford <[email protected]>
Fri 7/9/2021 5:29 PM
Forward
Dear Roger:

This email is to summarize our conversation, and to ask some additional questions:


1. You've asked me to give you a list of the things on your website to be removed. I don't understand this request because you know the Knowledgism materials on your website. Because this is your website and forum, you know and have access to the information that is to be removed.


2. As we discussed and as you agreed, the documents, processes and bulletins (and there are also lectures on your site by Alan) will be removed from the site. What is the date by which this will be done? Every day counts and your site is causing confusion; people who have bought courses and are going to start processing others for a fee are questioning this. I know these materials can be removed within hours so I ask that they be removed by June 16, 2021.

Ceil Stanford
Advanced Coaching & Leadership Center Inc,
****

The above was followed by me sending this below to Ceil and her attorney:

Dear David and Ceil,
As the linked video recording of the last communication between Ceil Stanford and me shows, Ceil knows that I and many other students of ACLC in fact bought and paid for training courses in Knowledgism technology based on the explicit understanding that we would be entitled to set up as practitioners of Knowledgism with the right to use the Trademarks now owned by Ceil.
Link to recorded conversation between Ceil Stanford and Roger Boswarva dated July 8, 2021
Meeting Ceil & Roger July-08-2021.wmv
I have earlier sent to you the explicit documentation of this offering by Alan C. Walter and ACLC when he was in control of the organization. David, a reply from your office to that material disappointingly showed whoever reviewed that material did not comprehend its significance and intent. The intent of the training relating to "How to Create and Run a Knowledgism Practice" was to make Knowledgism well known broadly and have society applying it to its benefit by vesting the right to use the Trademarks and intellectual property in trained individuals like me. Obviously, that cannot be done without gazetting the name of the subject matter that is Knowledgism.
The current action being brought against me is in fact a reneging on that agreement and a Breach of Contract of Sale.
In actuality, my wife and I paid in the order of $30,000 in training and other services in order to set up our Knowledgism center in New York . . . you have already been sent correspondence between Alan and me, on my stationery stating I and my company are "Practitioners of Knowledgism." This perfectly agreed with by Alan.
In actuality, the contractual arrangement I had with Alan have with ACLC goes back to 1994 in Dallas and predates Ceil joining Knowledgism at the ranch some years later.
David, in the linked video of the last conversation between your client Ceil and myself, you will see that she and I are in agreement that I should and will take down certain materials written by Alan Walter, and Ceil agreed to send me a list of the materials she has seen and identified as needing removal from my site.
Ceil has not as yet done that. I await that information from her so we can end this matter in accord.
As you will also see in the video recording, my wife died during the course of all this legal activity, and since that July 8, 2021, conversation with Ceil, my attention has been out of town on dealing with my late wife's mother and siblings . . . this while I awaited Ceil's promised document.
Ceil, you need to communicate to your attorney more accurately. He is being put in the position of threatening an abusive violation of my rights. And the tone of the threats against me could be construed as vexatious litigation.
The accuracy of my relationship with ACLC, and my rights are actually revealed in the linked video of our chat and agreements.
My Practice Group does not "sell services or product." It is an activity engaged in education on matters relating to our spiritual existence and the key members are engaged with me in research into furthering our knowledge in these matters. Indeed, Ceil, you did reveal in the video that you have misconstrued my writings on the spiritual case phenomena referred to as the "Games Matrix" as being Alan's material. I lectured on this material in September 2009 in Pasadena at the Scientology FreeZone Conference, wherein I showed the attendees the difference between the material I developed on this natter and that of Alan's, along with why my team and I see Alan's Games Matrix Procedure is in error. That lecture material and documentation of mine is on the forum, which you have obviously not studied properly or at all.
And just to be clear, the genesis of this material relating to the phenomena of opposing identities locking the Spiritual Presence in a Matrix goes back to 1962 in Scientology, which materials Alan and I directly studied at that time.
Ceil, ideally, my activities can and should be used to further the reach and use of Knowledgism technology and serve ACLC in its acquisition of clients.
While you currently attempt to make "nothing of" my contribution, as revealed when I mentioned Yuri and his activities in Ukraine and Israel, you should know that it was me that put Tom Diakun on lines at the ranch. He is the man who processed all of Alan's video lectures up to marketable standards. Tom had come to me as a Scientologist for help. My answer was to get him to the ranch. But he was eventually driven away by David when David was still there..
As it stands, since April 2017, my forum has been prominently directing folks to you for the purchase of all Knowledgism materials, as below.
· Roger Boswarva
·
·
· Administrator
Knowledgism Books
April 01, 2017, 02:32:04 PM
KNOWLEDGISM BOOKS
Earlier in the week, I had a chat with David Nelson and Ceil Stanford. These are the two folks who took over the managing of "the Ranch" after the passing of Alan Walter. Much change has occurred in the last year, and now "The Ranch" has completely upgraded its website and re-published Alan's books in new professional formats. Therefore, since "The Ranch" is "up and running" and Alan's books are now able to be purchased "from source," any books you need should be purchased via the website at: Bookstore - Knowledgism Roger
David,
In light of the above, your demands articulated in your email of Sunday, 9/26/2021 are abusive and unrealistic.
They are in essence, a demand that I abridge my First Amendment Rights. That is not going to happen.
Roger E. Boswarva

To be noted is the point that Ceil and ACLC are in violation of the Contract of Sale I entered into with Alan himself, ACLC and the earlier corporate entities, Institute of Applied Knowledge, Power Leasership, etc.

To be noted is that Ceil came to the Ranch in 2004 (as started by her in the video) . . to be noted is the fact that I purchased my first course materials from the Knowledgism enterprise in Dallas in 1994.

If any of you guys have experienced any similar betrayals please let me know.

Also, I had heard that after Alan's death, at the time some of you had real difficulty being able to buy books and were unable to make contact with the Ranch by phone or otherwise (get emails answered) in the year or so after Alan's death . . . let me know

To be honest, I am wrestling with the decision of whether it is worth it to defend the validity of my Contracts of Sale . . . note that Ceil's suit is on the spurious grounds that I am in Violation of Trademarks and Copyrighted materials . . . Ummm, I find it hard to fathom that she thinks one can run a Knowlegism Practice or Business without the use of the Trademarks and Copyrights . . .

So, any information or input you have on the above would help.

It is because of the above that we might lose our Practice Group Site , , , ,

I have just a few short days to decide whether it is worth it for me at my age (85) to go through the hassle (and try flying into Dallas and driving up to Wichita Falls in the winter to tackle this monster).

Roger

Last Edit: October 18, 2021, 01:33:04 PM by Roger Boswarva

I coach folks who actually attain their ideals



Re: The LAW SUIT AGAINST OUR PRACTICE GROUP -- ADVICE OR INFORMATION NEEDED Reply #1 – October 18, 2021, 01:25:50 PM



Ok, Folks, DECISION TIME.

I've decided to settle the fallacious claims levelled at me by Ceil and her lot.

Even though I do have strong proof that I (and many others) had purchased the rights to use the Trademarks and Copyrighted materials of Knowledgism and Alan C. Walter, and even had made gifts of my own technical developments to the body of work known as Knowledgism, I have decided that it is not worth it to end up still connected to a toxic group that wantonly betrays trust, renegs on agreements (see the above video undertakings by Ceil then see her follow-up reneg on her promise and undertaking) and who is screwing up the application of the technology.

I have had a number of folks coming to me, having suffered various abuses at the hands of the personnel at the "ranch" along with mis-application of the technology that I have had to repair.

As you all know Alan and I had known each other since our days in Melbourne
in 1962 (59 years ago). As it stands, it seems I am the last man standing of the old ex-Scientology troops who "did it all." And that "all" includes all of Knowledgism . . . hence I am rather uniquely qualified to render judgement and analysis of what is currently being done at the "ranch."

And so, I've decided to not waste the $200,000 I'd budgeted to defend my rights nor put myself through the drama of getting to Court in Wichita Falls (nearest airport currently reachable is Dallas) and spending my valuable time engaging with these people.

I am still researching (the work I love to do) and have made some wonderful advances that those close to me see as wonderful breakthroughs.

Further, based on my academic and professional career qualifications, I have been engaging with the academic community. On October 15, I presented my technical observations to members of the Scientific & Medical Network, a London based international groups of science types. I am also a member of other international professional and academic bodies.

I am fortunate to have collected a large number of friends and connections over the years I've been in this game of forwarding the knowledge of our spiritual existence, and so I have elected to cut my ties with anyone who is toxic to that ideal.

As I informed my Attorney over the weekend:

Roger Boswarva: PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS:

Retired as a Fellow of the British Institute of Management where he taught Management and executive performance for the BIM and also the Management Center Europe, in Brussels.

A Certified Performance Technologist (CPT) with the International Society for Performance Improvement

Retired as a Member of the International Chief of Police Association . . . this relating to his partnership in an international consulting firm that was featured in a major news article in the New York Times Business Section, that he later set up US operations for.

Currently he is a member of the Scientific and Medical Network (an international body of academics based in London) for whom he presented part of his research findings the evening of October 15, 2021.

He is also a member of the Institute for Noetic Sciences, (IONS) is a research center and direct-experience lab specializing in the intersection of science and human experience. Led by IONS scientists, educators, and partners, these free online webinars feature presentations on cutting-edge noetic research and experiential transformative practices.



Points of agreements with plaintiff I need in the Settlement.

I have and do agree not to use the Trademarks Alan C. Walter or Knowledgism to sell or market services or products. (In actuality, the organization has become too toxic to be associated with.)

I must maintain my ethical and ACADEMIC RIGHT to discuss in academic and educational forums the materials I developed that were gifted to Alan Walter, that he then included in his copyrighted materials. And I must maintain my ethical right to discuss, where necessary, in academia, my 59 year close friendship and association with Alan C. Walter . . . indeed, in ex-Scientology circles I was asked by the leaders in that fraternity to write for them the biography of Alan as I was THE one who best knew the history of his participation in Scientology.

My 1st Amendment Rights must not be abridged by any too broad or encompassing wordings in the settlement. (I have already warned the Plaintiff attorney of this)

I feel the above gives credence to my position.

Rog
 
Last edited:

Reyne Mayer

Pansexual Revolutionary
Trouble is we all read about the early parts of these people's lives -- the public parts -- and seldom do we read the final
chapters of the books, which for many are the most revealing parts about what they really have or don't have.

I think it's probably best to go to the the final chapters of the books and skim them for the "reveals" before spending a life
married to any gurus. Then read on accordingly. At least, you'll know what you can and shouldn't expect. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
thanks for all those examples, i hadn't realized quite how many of those figures had failed to be good examples in their own lives, though it seems pretty typical of guru types.

reading that brings to mind this cognitive bias:

The primacy effect is the tendency to remember the first piece of information we encounter better than information presented later on.
Primacy effect - Biases & Heuristics | The Decision Lab
 
Last edited:

Is-Was

Member
Yep, Issy . . .


If you go to the "internet way back machine" you will see the following last post on this issue:

October 14, 2021, 10:20:04 AM
[Snipped]

Roger - Thank you for your detailed response to my question. I haven't gotten all the way through the video yet, but will do so. My condolences to you regarding the loss of your wife.
 

The_Fixer

Well-known member
Well, the terms Scientology and Knowledgism are both trademarks registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The use of the two terms to refer to the respective trademark owners, their products, services, delivery systems and practices is also "perfectly valid and mostly accurate," just as the term "Pfizer" could be used to denote a legal business entity, a legal business name, a trademark, a company including its people, facilities, operations etc., or a particular Covid19 vaccination.

I referred to "abusive practices commonly attributed to Scientology." I have no personal experience or special knowledge that would support a claim that Scientology has in fact engaged engaged in these practices. However, the quantity of fairly consistent allegations of such practices in Scientology is, from my "wog" viewpoint, a huge "red flag." So far as I know, Knowledgism may have similar issues, but I have not encountered any specific allegations of that sort.
Knowedgism does not have its own church by the sound of things.

If it did like Scientology does, they would need to be busy expanding it and recruiting in order to keep it alive?

It would be a debateable point if it would be like the Scientology cult in that case, but you would never know unless it was put to the test in the same way I guess. Especially since it seems to generate from the same source.
 
Last edited:

Is-Was

Member
Knowedgism does not have its own church by the sound of things.

If it did like Scientology does, they would need to be busy expanding it and recruiting in order to keep it alive?

It would be a debateable point if it would be like the Scientology cult in that case, but you would never know unless it was put to the test in the same way I guess. Especially since it seems to generate from the same source.
AFAIK, Knowledgism is not a church or other tax-exempt charity (and I see no mention claiming otherwise on their web-site). If that's right, then there would be no tax deductions for "donations" made to it, and its personnel would have to be paid at least the minimum wage.

On the other hand, as the trademark implies, Knowledgism is, like Scientology, a commercial enterprise engaged in the sale of products and services, in particular, books and courses regarding it's teachings and techniques, and individual counseling services. Like Scientology, Knowledgism would have an ongoing motivation to enlarge its customer base, and to recruit staff as needed. That much is evident from the video RogerB linked above.

As a "wog," much of what I know about Scientology is what I've learned from watching all the episodes of Scientology and the Aftermath. Consequently, I continue to think that as practical matter, the quantity of alleged extremely abusive practices attributed to Scientology constitutes one of the most important factors, or even the most important factor, to be considered relative to any claim that Scientology and Knowledgism are "basically one and the same." I know of no evidence to the effect that they are equivalent in that respect.
 
Top