Sane & honest version of Scientology?

pineapple

仮面の男
Because the "tech" ultimately does not work as promised. There are no clears or OT's. Those who devote years to scn are, in the end, no better off than anyone else -- possibly more impoverished and emotionally scarred. They get old, and sick, and die just as "wogs" do. Scn is a scam.
 

Cat's Squirrel

Well-known member
Three reasons I can think of (going from my own experience of the East Grinstead AAC here);

Firstly, once people are out of the CofS's penumbra they start questioning things more and more and everything's up for grabs (I once had an auditor who questioned the notion of case, for example). Auditors start looking more critically at what does and doesn't work in standard tech and making innovations that they think might work better.

Secondly, because the Church sues anyone who breaches their "copyrights" there is a strong incentive for people auditing outside the CofS to call the subject something other than Scientology and to also change the names of the terms used. "Has there been an ARC break?" becomes "Has there been an upset?", for example.

Thirdly, next to no training goes on. The CofS produced auditors because it was cheaper to take courses than it was to pay for blocks of auditing, so people would train as an alternative to receiving auditing and every org had a course supervisor who could at least say, "What do your materials state?". In the freezone, not so much of this happens because people want auditing more than they want training and can afford to pay for it.
 
Last edited:

Paul Adams

(Dulloldfart on ESMB)
15 years ago, as an experiment, I got (over the phone) R3X auditing from Robert D, at $30 an hour. It was adventurous, both as to method and reach (very whole track, probably mostly fantasy). It got deeper into stuff than regular Scn/Dn and just bypassed the whole idea of BTs/Clusters. It had SIZZLE! After about 50/60 hours I decided this did release charge but wasn't reaching the overstated EP and didn't do any more.

Robert told me he had lots of non-Scn clients referred to him. They knew nothing of the theory/background of the procedure. They got a session or two, resolved whatever they were worried about, were happy with the result, and he never heard from them again. They didn't have their eyes on OT powers, or saving the universe, just wanted to get over their lost girlfriend or whatever.

Nowadays I'm not trying to develop "OT powers." I find this amusing, because:
(1) I believe it's possible to perceive the subtle-energy aspects of a person's extended anatomy and the world around us, and
(2) Two of my PaulsRobot3 modules are directly aimed at drilling and increasing such perceptions
PaulsRobot3 RAW4: Home and PaulsRobot3 SpotAnAngel: Home

I've had these available online free of charge for maybe 10 years. I can't remember one person who's even asked me about them, let alone tried them out and written about it. I guess everyone thinks I'm nuts! Oh well. After several hours of trying out both of these modules I realised this was a long-haul job, no instant gratification, and didn't do much more.

My point is people today generally aren't interested much in things beyond their everyday life.
 

Xenu Xenu Xenu

Well-known member
If you took all the bad away I doubt there would be much left over. Since I left, I have come to the conclusion that most of the "tech", the red HCOB stuff, is harmful and bad. Even the insistence that a student must spend a certain minimum hours a week "on course", is bad. It smells of culty stuff.
 

Paul Adams

(Dulloldfart on ESMB)
Thirdly, next to no training goes on. The CofS produced auditors because it was cheaper to take courses than it was to pay for blocks of auditing, so people would train as an alternative to receiving auditing and every org had a course supervisor who could at least say, "What do your materials state?". In the freezone, not so much of this happens because people want auditing more than they want training and can afford to pay for it.
I worked with Rey Robles at his Reno FZ centre Dec 2004 - April 2005. One service I delivered to a paying customer was the FZ equivalent of Level 0, using Clearbird's official printed pack. It went OK, but mainly because I was familiar with the regular tech volumes and how things were done "properly" in the CofS.

I had long realised that there were big problems with using photocopied HCOBs, not only copyright threats, although because of the copyright threats and Ray's centre not being under the radar I refused to use photocopied packs. Using Clearbird materials side-stepped these problems, but introduced another problem that I only became aware of when actually sup'ing a CB course.

One wonderful improvement -- at the time I considered the lower-level materials useful -- CB made is he put into comprehensible English the then-current tech and edited out any non-applicable historical rubbish, so the pack was like a regular (more or less) textbook. The student was Israeli but spoke good English, had enough money for Rey, we got on ok, and I thought this would be easy. Until the student asked a question ....

Now, I was never a rote course sup. I would try to see why a student asked a particular question. If it seemed a reasonable question with the answer not earlier in the pack, and I had found from experience similar questions resolved easily by reference to another issue in the pack or elsewhere, I would dig up the reference, show the part that answered the question, the student would grok it and be happy to continue studying, the whole thing maybe taking 5 or 10 minutes.

So, this time it seemed a reasonable question, and I knew a perfect reference in the pack to answer it ... except I knew the reference only in the regular Scn pack and hadn't a clue where it was in the CB pack. After a minute thumbing vainly through the pack I dug up a tech volume online, showed the relevant part that fixed it and then back to the CB checksheet no problem.

This happened several times throughout the course. I didn't need any photocopies, but the tech volumes were invaluable. Note that doing an entire course using only tech volumes is incredibly annoying hunting up the next issue, or going back in "the pack." It's not workable, although it might seem feasible in theory.

-----

TL/DR version: Course materials are a problem in FZ courserooms if one is at all scared of the cult's copyright threats.
 

Paul Adams

(Dulloldfart on ESMB)
Paul's Robot...

That is not wholly inaccurate in that the individual does get to make certain evaluations along the way in the session, but it doesn't show the whole picture. I'll give an example from the (more or less) entry-level www.paulsrobot.com. Let's say you (the reader) are sessionable, know how sessions go, and are addressing some hot topic (incident, series of incidents, item, whatever came up). You have chosen, out of 3 options, to run Reach & Withdraw on the topic. I know Hubbard didn't specify using it on mental/emotional stuff but it actually works excellently as a light approach fully under the user's control as to how close an approach is acceptable. It's all detailed out at the site. Off we go...

  • A screen shows "OK. Reach to your topic." [optional voice too]
  • User does so.
  • User decides he has executed the command, and selects a button labelled "I reached to my topic -- let's keep going with this"

  • A screen shows "All right. Withdraw from your topic." [optional voice too]
  • User does so.
  • User decides he has executed the command, and selects a button labelled "I withdrew from my topic -- let's keep going with this"

  • A screen shows "Thank you. Reach to your topic." [optional voice too]
  • ....

At some point the user decides to choose one of the other buttons available. The options are:
  • Change procedure
  • SHUTTING DOWN (= going anaten, boiling off, doping off, falling asleep etc)
  • This topic seems flat now
  • Don't want to continue
  • Realization
Choosing one will present a screen with instructions, usually with an appropriate set of buttons where the user gets to decide which one best fits at that exact moment.

So that's a bit more of the whole picture. A link to the actual R&W screen is here.

Questions?
 
Last edited:

Bill

Well-known member
Scientology is not all bad, but no attempt to salvage the non secretive, non devious,
and non abusive parts has amounted to much.

Why does Scientology fall apart and disappear - over time - when the cult aspect is removed?
That's a good question. I believe the answers are obvious when one thinks outside of the Hubbard mindset:
  1. The fundamental "truths" of Scientology are false. There are no "engrams" as defined by Hubbard. There is no "erasure" as defined by Hubbard. There are no "Mental Image Pictures" as defined by Hubbard. They haven't been proven and cannot be proven. They are re-labeled and redefined things -- misdefined, actually.
  2. Any "benefits" people get are, for the most part, minor and temporary. No better than Placebo Effect as far as I can see. Which makes sense, given the fact #1.
  3. Hubbard made a big deal about "Standard Tech" and never looking elsewhere or trying different things so any possibility of the "tech" discarding unworkable stuff was impossible. Granted that Independents aren't necessarily constrained by that but, even today, that attitude of Hubbard-is-perfect (at some year) still pervades the culture.
  4. And, finally, who would be qualified to determine what parts of the "tech" is "workable" and which not workable? No one -- because no one can prove their version of the "tech" is "workable".
 

HelluvaHoax!

Well-known member
Because scientology creates more problems, issues, stresses, mental and spiritual upsets and other assorted dramas for anyone unfortunate enough to become involved ... than it ever solves!

Yes, exactly.

I ran into this phenomena quite recently when I visited a zoo and got in very good telepathic 2-way-com with an uptone chimpanzee that had excellent TR-O. From that I deduced that this was an able being that I could help to become more able.

So, using theta com, I ran them on some processes to move them from Homo Simians up to Homo Sapiens. Later I can additionally move them further up the line from Homo Sapiens to Homo Novis. I routinely do this, and so on and so forth, on this planet.

In any case the results of that session were less than I had postulated. The chimp went totally out of session while I was repetitively running them on the command: "BE 3 FEET IN BACK OF YOUR IMPEDIMENT". They started screeching and running around their enclosure, so I just kept using tone 40 commands to get back in session. . Finally they calmed down and approached the viewing window, so I TR-4'd the command again. Then they threw poop at me.

Naturally, I ended off the session and wrote up a KR.

Obviously we were dealing with an NCG being here, so that explains why the tech didn't work. It doesn't work on NCGs because they are stuck in an incident down the time track. It only works on able beings who are not stuck on the track, which is why they are able enough to audit OT III thru OT VIII . All of us, on the other hand, are able beings , even though we have been stuck on the track in that Xenu thing which happened 75 million years ago.

FYI: You should all know that NCG is the same as SP---so please be sure to check your social network lines and un-friend Jerry The Chimp.

.
 
Last edited:

HelluvaHoax!

Well-known member
And, finally, who would be qualified to determine what parts of the "tech" is "workable" and which not workable? No one -- because no one can prove their version of the "tech" is "workable".
.
ANSWER: There should be strict protocols & qualifications before anyone is allowed to state whether the tech worked or not. A substantially high standard of scientific proof should be required, such as whether the person "felt good about it" or not.

.
 

Dotey OT

Dis-Membered
Is anyone here willing to testify that the depths have been completely plumbed, in regards to the treachery employed by one LRTubturd to make an individual more susceptible to anothers wishes, intrinsically installed through hidden means? Is it I'm jaded? Or is anyone willing to sign?
 

Veda

Well-known member
That's a good question. I believe the answers are obvious when one thinks outside of the Hubbard mindset:
  1. The fundamental "truths" of Scientology are false. There are no "engrams" as defined by Hubbard. There is no "erasure" as defined by Hubbard. There are no "Mental Image Pictures" as defined by Hubbard. They haven't been proven and cannot be proven. They are re-labeled and redefined things -- misdefined, actually.
  2. Any "benefits" people get are, for the most part, minor and temporary. No better than Placebo Effect as far as I can see. Which makes sense, given the fact #1.
  3. Hubbard made a big deal about "Standard Tech" and never looking elsewhere or trying different things so any possibility of the "tech" discarding unworkable stuff was impossible. Granted that Independents aren't necessarily constrained by that but, even today, that attitude of Hubbard-is-perfect (at some year) still pervades the culture.
  4. And, finally, who would be qualified to determine what parts of the "tech" is "workable" and which not workable? No one -- because no one can prove their version of the "tech" is "workable".
Aleister Crowley wrote in his 1911 'Batra': "B. It is assumed that he (the student), has conquered the elementary difficulties of Dharana [concentration], and is able to prevent mental pictures from altering shape, size, and color against his will."

That, as I recall, is similar to what is in Hubbard's 1957/1958 Clear procedure booklet.

So, perhaps mental pictures do exist, in a sense, or least for some people. Other things may also exist but that is not this discussion.

In any event, Hubbard left Scientologists with a whole lot of loose ends, each tightly shrink-wrapped in cellophane as "LRH datums." (sic)

This can become perplexing to Independent Scientologists.

Turns out that loose ends are just a MEDIUM, used as means to an end.

Hubbard's system of "mental healing" needed only to '"work" up to a point, since it was only a means/front to something else.

That somehing else is, "asserting and maintaining dominion over thoughts and loyalties, through mental healing."

So Independent Scientologists are left with the decorative twinkling ornaments which they think are the subject.

When the subject is much more that that, and has a hidden agenda - a hidden agenda they choose to ignore.

Of course, this makes intelligently reforming the subject unlikely.



Change of pace

 

ILove2Lurk

Lisbeth Salander
I've always suspected that a person's imagination is the most powerful and
nearly unlimited capability of a mind. Some having more imaginative skills
than others, of course. Over a lifetime, I've found my imagination to be nearly
limitless. But that's just me. (Until get another episode of writer's block.)

Writers can imagine and write hundreds of books. Jazz musicians can imagine
and play thousands of improvisations. All begins with imagination, if you will.
The fundamental "truths" of Scientology are false. There are no "engrams" as defined by Hubbard. There is no "erasure" as defined by Hubbard. There are no "Mental Image Pictures" as defined by Hubbard. They haven't been proven and cannot be proven. They are re-labeled and redefined things -- misdefined, actually.
Could it possibly work like this?

One imagines an engram, as told to. One imagines a chain, as described in the writings.
One imagines the erasure, being an obedient and willing participant in all this.
Any "benefits" people get are, for the most part, minor and temporary. No better than Placebo Effect as far as I can see.
One imagines the suggested EP. One imagines and creates the suggested levels EPs.
I mean it all cost so much how are you not gonna. And everyone else is getting the EPs
as part of this mass "imaginative" delusion of sorts.

One could conclude that the whole subject of Scientology is one of drilling, improving
and working with the imagination. It did help me create a more ideal personal world or
"mental universe" to live within somehow. Have to give some credit where credit is due.

Don't ask me how though. Can't really explain it other than what I just said.

I mean something kept me and other people around for years and decades.

Or maybe it's simply this:
"I guess we keep going through it
because most of us need the eggs."


 
Last edited:

Scooter

Active member
Personally I believe that $cientology is a belief system with a few mildly therapeutic effects IF the target is gotten to the point of wanting to honestly look at themselves. Everything else is a totalitarian system designed to enforce obedience within the group. Hubbard hated anything that exposed his inherent dishonesty.

It all falls apart if you take the core away. And that is the totalitarian system of enforcing beliefs.
 

cleared cannibal

Well-known member
I am not so sure Scn didn't change the way my mind works. It may be just aging or impatience though. May also be the generally poor translations of Chinese to English too present on most products today.

Used to be I could read a set of instructions and understand them perfectly well. I have problems now but if they have illstrations(pictures) I am better than I have ever been. I have noticed I tend to see in pictures at times now vs just thoughts. All the processing of trying to see these pics may have just trained me to do this?

I like it in a way. Makes ones dreams and fantasies much more real.
 

Caroline

clerk #2
Personally I believe that $cientology is a belief system with a few mildly therapeutic effects IF the target is gotten to the point of wanting to honestly look at themselves. Everything else is a totalitarian system designed to enforce obedience within the group. Hubbard hated anything that exposed his inherent dishonesty.

It all falls apart if you take the core away. And that is the totalitarian system of enforcing beliefs.
I accept that there are "targets" to whom the Scientologists seek to deliver supposedly therapeutic processing, but the targets, to begin with, apparently do NOT want "to honestly look at themselves." To me, this supposed state of affairs, i.e., the Scientologists' indoctrinated assumptions about their targets, the Scientologists' necessary entitlement, ethics presence, etc., are more evidence of the totalitarian nature of the system and necessary mindset of the people who "Keep Scientology Working."

Auditors must exert control over virtually every aspect of the session: the physical environment, the pc's attention, thoughts, etc., and must enforce compliance in getting their questions answered. (Ref. The Auditor's Code.) I think the auditing relationship is an extension of and representative of the overall totalitarian system.
 

Scooter

Active member
Caroline my apologies. I didn’t explain properly.

When I first joined the kult I was 22. Looking for something better than sex and drugs and rocknroll. I had the usual OCA and “ruin” found but there was stuff that I didn’t tell the reg. that was the reason I wanted to explore what $cientology might be able to do for me. I wanted to better myself and the world.

And that was the main thing that I had in common with the many other exes that I have spoken to about joining the kult. Aged between 18 and 25, wanting a better self and a better world. That I believe was the target demographic of Hubbard.

Once one is hooked and landed, then the kult goes totalitarian by degrees. Constantly reading KSW etc., constantly being sent to Ethics, getting audited and trained - the whole mind-bending mess we went through.

But it starts with the therapeutic effects that somehow alleviate some of life’s problems. Once that has happened, you’ve nibbled that bait and your next step is getting the hook firmly stuck and you get reeled in. Then the slow boil until you’re cooked.
 
Top