Ron the Hypnotist

[KKS]

IMO, no hypnotic trance induction techniques are required to produce brain-endorphin effects (cog, VGIs, F/N).

(BTW, I am not defending Hubbard's DMSMH.)

 

[KKS]

If you are a pretty girl I want to date you

 

[KKS]

Okay Let's Go:

Scientology Video: What is Scientology? (part 1)

 

[KKS]

And then:

Scientology Video: What is Scientology? (part 2)

 

[Riddick]

Here's Hubbard talking to Scientologists about how to use ARC to get what they want in interpersonal relations, by installing confusion to the depth of hypnosis, and by diversion tech. Later this would become Dissemination Drills, PR drills and Reporter TR drills.

In interpersonal relations, you will notice that when you have a person agreeing on a decision, you will get action. If a person agrees on a decision, you will get action if it's an action decision, and if it's a "not to be" or an inaction decision, you will also get the inaction. ​

​

In other words, you get what you want by bringing to pass an agreement. This is very, very important in interpersonal relations and is actually the one problem of interpersonal relations. You'll find all arguments are based upon an inability to agree. You will find that all friction which occurs between an individual and a group, an individual and another individual, or a group and a group, is simply on this basis of disagreement. And this disagreement comes about because of a divergence of decision.​

​

Now, decision is very difficult, sometime, to reach. But this is one of these hidden things, actually, in an argument. You are arguing with somebody. If you will isolate out of the argument the decisions for action or inaction – you see, a decision can be for action or a decision can be for inaction – and if you have selected out the action and inaction decisions which you want effected, the argumentation will be minimal, because you have clarified the problem of interpersonal relations before you have tried to practice interpersonal relations on this problem. You've clarified the problem. "Exactly what do I want this person to do?" or "Exactly what do I want this person not to do?" And from there you base your arguments. ​

​

Now, if it comes to a pass where it's very important whether or not this person acts or inacts as you wish, in interpersonal relations one of the dirtier tricks is to hang the person up on a maybe and create a confusion. And then create the confusion to the degree that your decision actually is implanted hypnotically.​

​

The way you do this is very simple. When the person advances an argument against your decision, you never confront his argument but confront the premise on which his argument is based. That is the rule. He says, "But my professor always said that water boiled at 212 degrees."​

​

You say, "Your professor of what?"​

​

"My professor of physics."​

​

"What school? How did he know?" Completely off track! You're no longer arguing about whether or not water boils at 212 degrees, but you're arguing about professors. And he will become very annoyed, but he won't know quite what he is annoyed about. You can do this so adroitly and so artfully that you can actually produce a confusion of the depth of hypnosis. The person simply goes down tone scale to a point where they're not sure of their own name. And at that point you say, "Now, you do agree to go out and draw the water out of the well, don't you?"​

​

"Yes-anything!" And he'll go out and draw the water out of the well.​

Hubbard, L. Ron, (1952-05-20) Decision. Technique 80 Lectures. Phoenix, AZ
Emphasis added.

good post!

Hubbards ARC triangle, you know ARC = understanding.

I'd probably title this tread Ron the Rhetorician. Definition being
an expert in formal rhetoric.

a speaker (writer) whose words are primarily intended to impress or persuade.


People may think it's hypnotism, but it's persuasion. Yep, people have affinity for each other, people have reality or agreements for each other, people communicate these things with each other and yep you now have a friend or understanding, but if you don't agree you no longer have a friend or understanding..

Hubbards endless writings and recorded speeches were to get agreement, or hypnosis, if you will. Don't you see?

Hubbards ARC triangle is persuasion (understanding) to get one involved in dianetics and scientology and keep the show on the road,

but yet nobody gone clear or OT.

I clap to no man.

 

[Riddick]

from the scientology website:

What is the state of Clear?

The full body of knowledge that comprises the Scientology religion is contained in more than forty million spoken and written words on the subject—all by L. Ron Hubbard, the source and founder of Scientology.

www.scientology.org

WHAT IS THE STATE OF CLEAR?


Clear is the name of a state achieved through auditing and describes a being who no longer has his own reactive mind, the hidden source of irrational behavior, unreasonable fears, upsets and insecurities. Without a reactive mind, individuals regain their basic personality, self-determinism and, in essence, become much, much more themselves.
The full glory of the state of Clear has no comparable description in any writings existing in our culture. It is a goal Man has dreamed of achieving for more than 2500 years, yet the state of Clear is far above anything anyone even conceived of previously. Indeed, that one could become something far higher and better than a human being, personally and in a single lifetime, is a brand-new concept.
The state of Clear does exist today and is attainable by all. Thousands upon thousands of Scientologists all over the world are Clear and more achieve this state with every passing day.

LMAO

 

[programmer_guy]

IMO:

1. Hypnotic trance induction techniques are used to bypass the prefrontal cortex in an attempt to reprogram the back part of the brain.
(However, there is a lot of variation between people being hypnotizable.)

2. Creating a brain-endorphin effect by going backwards on some AESP does not require hypnosis (but an e-meter would make it easier).

 

[Riddick]

from the scientology website:

What is the state of Clear?

The full body of knowledge that comprises the Scientology religion is contained in more than forty million spoken and written words on the subject—all by L. Ron Hubbard, the source and founder of Scientology.

www.scientology.org

WHAT IS THE STATE OF CLEAR?


Clear is the name of a state achieved through auditing and describes a being who no longer has his own reactive mind, the hidden source of irrational behavior, unreasonable fears, upsets and insecurities. Without a reactive mind, individuals regain their basic personality, self-determinism and, in essence, become much, much more themselves.
The full glory of the state of Clear has no comparable description in any writings existing in our culture. It is a goal Man has dreamed of achieving for more than 2500 years, yet the state of Clear is far above anything anyone even conceived of previously. Indeed, that one could become something far higher and better than a human being, personally and in a single lifetime, is a brand-new concept.
The state of Clear does exist today and is attainable by all. Thousands upon thousands of Scientologists all over the world are Clear and more achieve this state with every passing day.

LMAO

this is Rhetoric, don't you see?

 

[programmer_guy]

@Riddick

A person can do a successful e-meter pinch test with no rhetoric tricks required.

I agree somewhat with your rhetoric position but there is more to it than just that.

 

[Riddick]

IMO:

1. Hypnotic trance induction techniques are used to bypass the prefrontal cortex in an attempt to reprogram the back part of the brain.
(However, there is a lot of variation between people being hypnotizable.)

2. Creating a brain-endorphin effect by going backwards on some AESP does not require hypnosis (but an e-meter would make it easier).

I think you have malfunctioned, I'm gonna call Hal.

 

[Riddick]

@Riddick

A person can do a successful e-meter pinch test with no rhetoric tricks required.

but none have gone clear or ot.

 

[Riddick]

@Riddick

A person can do a successful e-meter pinch test with no rhetoric tricks required.

I agree somewhat with your rhetoric position but there is more to it than just that.

there isn't more to it,

 

[Riddick]

but none have gone clear or ot.

nope, nor has anybody else.

 

[Riddick]

Cross-posted from the Bunker:

Kansas City going Ideal! Scientology’s grand opening is tomorrow — will Dave be there? | The Underground Bunker

tonyortega.org

“I hypnotized, one time, the staff of St. Elizabeth’s. Told them they’d heard a good speech and left the stage. They all came around afterwards saying, ‘What a good speech that was you gave!’ That was a mean thing to do. That was certainly backing out of it, wasn’t it? But it was in the early career of Dianetics and I felt very much like backing out of it. I was preceded by someone who told all of them how bad it was over ‘Ron-ward.’ They might afterwards have suspected my knowledge of the mind, but certainly not my knowledge of hypnotism. It’s very easy to hypnotize groups.”
— L. Ron Hubbard, November 1, 1956

“I hypnotized, one time, the staff of St. Elizabeth’s. Told them they’d heard a good speech and left the stage. They all came around afterwards saying, ‘What a good speech that was you gave!’ That was a mean thing to do. That was certainly backing out of it, wasn’t it? But it was in the early career of Dianetics and I felt very much like backing out of it. I was preceded by someone who told all of them how bad it was over ‘Ron-ward.’ They might afterwards have suspected my knowledge of the mind, but certainly not my knowledge of hypnotism. It’s very easy to persuade groups.”





[/QUOTE]

“I hypnotized, one time, the staff of St. Elizabeth’s. Told them they’d heard a good speech and left the stage. They all came around afterwards saying, ‘What a good speech that was you gave!’ That was a mean thing to do. That was certainly backing out of it, wasn’t it? But it was in the early career of Dianetics and I felt very much like backing out of it. I was preceded by someone who told all of them how bad it was over ‘Ron-ward.’ They might afterwards have suspected my knowledge of the mind, but certainly not my knowledge of hypnotism. It’s very easy to hypnotize groups.”

It's very easy to "persuade" groups

 

[pineapple]

Cross-posted from the Bunker:

Kansas City going Ideal! Scientology’s grand opening is tomorrow — will Dave be there? | The Underground Bunker

tonyortega.org

“I hypnotized, one time, the staff of St. Elizabeth’s. Told them they’d heard a good speech and left the stage. They all came around afterwards saying, ‘What a good speech that was you gave!’ That was a mean thing to do. That was certainly backing out of it, wasn’t it? But it was in the early career of Dianetics and I felt very much like backing out of it. I was preceded by someone who told all of them how bad it was over ‘Ron-ward.’ They might afterwards have suspected my knowledge of the mind, but certainly not my knowledge of hypnotism. It’s very easy to hypnotize groups.”
— L. Ron Hubbard, November 1, 1956

Note that "St. Elizabeth's" is easily confused with Elizabeth, N. J., which was the site of the first Hubbard Dianetic Research Foundation. St. Elizabeth's Hospital is where Hubbard claimed to have spent time as a patient while "crippled and blinded" after WW II. (In fact, I confused the two the first time I read this myself.)

It's quite plausible that he might have addressed the staff at the HDRF in Elizabeth, N. J. -- but would he as a patient have been addressing the staff at St. Elizabeth's Hospital, from a stage? Not likely.

I think Hubbard himself probably confused the two and said "St. Elizabeth's" when he really meant Elizabeth, N. J., or he's just plain lying. And he's probably lying in any case.

Although he was by all accounts an able hypnotist, it's a bit much to swallow that he could hypnotize an entire group of people so thoroughly that they would believe they'd heard a speech when they hadn't.

There are levels of hypnosis. Putting a group into a light trance (relaxation, lethargy, eyes closed) might be doable, but making the entire group think they heard a speech they didn't (positive hallucination) is a different story. That requires a much deeper level of trance.

I think hypnosis plays a large role in scn, but I also think Hubbard is full of shit here.

 

[Barney Bear]

Note that "St. Elizabeth's" is easily confused with Elizabeth, N. J., which was the site of the first Hubbard Dianetic Research Foundation. St. Elizabeth's Hospital is where Hubbard claimed to have spent time as a patient while "crippled and blinded" after WW II. (In fact, I confused the two the first time I read this myself.)

It's quite plausible that he might have addressed the staff at the HDRF in Elizabeth, N. J. -- but would he as a patient have been addressing the staff at St. Elizabeth's Hospital, from a stage? Not likely.

I think Hubbard himself probably confused the two and said "St. Elizabeth's" when he really meant Elizabeth, N. J., or he's just plain lying. And he's probably lying in any case.

Although he was by all accounts an able hypnotist, it's a bit much to swallow that he could hypnotize an entire group of people so thoroughly that they would believe they'd heard a speech when they hadn't.

There are levels of hypnosis. Putting a group into a light trance (relaxation, lethargy, eyes closed) might be doable, but making the entire group think they heard a speech they didn't (positive hallucination) is a different story. That requires a much deeper level of trance.

I think hypnosis plays a large role in scn, but I also think Hubbard is full of shit here.

Can I correct that even further... Hubbard often deliberately confused his many cover stories... Saint Elizabeth's Hospital in New Jersey was a psychiatric hospital where good friend Doctor SULLIVAN presided. Hubbard went there often at night to conduct research into proto-DIANETIC Techniques on patients. (He was never a patient). He also used to cross over the road to The CHESTNUT INSTITUTE where the severest schizoid case were sent. Hubbard mentions it all in an early 1954 taped lecture. (He covertly called it the "WALNUT INSTITUTE" as a joke). Hubbard was only ever an in-patient at OAK KNOLL NAVAL HOSPITAL around 1945 where he may have been under cover for the Office of Naval Intelligence. There is a filmed documentary about the OAK KNOLL PTS research in 1946. Ron did tell us that he secretly read the research files on PTSD circa 1946 He always used cover stories and fake dates all the time to hide his role as an agent. The McClaughry's Blog have finally researched and documented his entire ONI/ ONR / MI6 career. (2020).

 

[Barney Bear]

Explain thy self please

Please remember that Don Rogers, who worked as an org executive for LRH in the 1950's, was in fact really Charles John Morgan, a CIA covert operative. (The McClaughry's Blog) see the documentary proof. Helen O'Brien was LRH's Fixer in Washington. She was possible also working for the people LRH worked for. The HASI being a cover group for his researches.

 

[Barney Bear]

2020: We really should be taking a new higher-level vantage point on the whole LRH subject now that the FOI documents reveal that he was part of the huge USA / UK research program following on from the Nazi MK Ultra and PDH experiments, sanitised by the OSS and ONI, for dealing with the damaged servicemen and servicewomen suffering from Post Trauma Stress Disorder. Hubbard found a better way to heal them which was considered as impossible and he has been attacked by them ever since by his former boss Navy Rear-Admiral in charge of all military medical research projects around 1946.Hubbard was allowed to run with it by the CIA (Copeland 1954). Many ex staff have told me they personally saw the millions in cash rolling in from mail bags and cheques that was way out of proportion to the weekly student fees. We all forget that he had several millions in a Lichtenstein Bank as of 1978.

 

[Deleted member 51]

Can I correct that even further... Hubbard often deliberately confused his many cover stories... Saint Elizabeth's Hospital in New Jersey was a psychiatric hospital where good friend Doctor SULLIVAN presided. Hubbard went there often at night to conduct research into proto-DIANETIC Techniques on patients. (He was never a patient). He also used to cross over the road to The CHESTNUT INSTITUTE where the severest schizoid case were sent. Hubbard mentions it all in an early 1954 taped lecture. (He covertly called it the "WALNUT INSTITUTE" as a joke). Hubbard was only ever an in-patient at OAK KNOLL NAVAL HOSPITAL around 1945 where he may have been under cover for the Office of Naval Intelligence. There is a filmed documentary about the OAK KNOLL PTS research in 1946. Ron did tell us that he secretly read the research files on PTSD circa 1946 He always used cover stories and fake dates all the time to hide his role as an agent. The McLaughry's Blog have finally researched and documented his entire ONI/ ONR / MI6 career. (2020).

How interesting. Do you have any documents on this?

 

[Barney Bear]

Hello! I am just relaying the huge amount of documentary releases from a good web page from two former Class 7 Auditors and SO Staff on their amazingly informative web page The McClaughry's Blog. When one accepts that LRH was working for the US government (although secretly a recruited British Agent in 1927) it all makes sense. The confusing dates and locations, and muddled stories were deliberately obfuscated by LRH because they were cover stories for his real research projects. Scientologists were The Test Group.
{Subject to minor corrections as I am dyslexic but attained Cleared Theta Clear in 1982} (Whatever that is worth! LOL)