The “History of Man”

Karen#1

Well-known member

EXCERPT from blog:
“A History of Man” is one of the more bizarre scribblings of L. Ron Hubbard. This so-called “Antediluvian Technology” (antediluvian is defined as: of or belonging to the time before the biblical Flood, so not sure what this “technology” is supposed to be) is not considered “outdated research” or “theoretical. ” It is part of what every scientologist must study to even be considered a real scientologist. I was reminded of this when I saw a recent post on Tony Ortega’s blog that included this FB post:
 

freethinker

Controversial

EXCERPT from blog:
“A History of Man” is one of the more bizarre scribblings of L. Ron Hubbard. This so-called “Antediluvian Technology” (antediluvian is defined as: of or belonging to the time before the biblical Flood, so not sure what this “technology” is supposed to be) is not considered “outdated research” or “theoretical. ” It is part of what every scientologist must study to even be considered a real scientologist. I was reminded of this when I saw a recent post on Tony Ortega’s blog that included this FB post:
It looks like they used John Travolta as the model for the face on the cover.
 

Karakorum

Broke ranks over 10 years ago, never looked back

HelluvaHoax!

Well-known member
,

Great article by Mike, every sentence is quite thought provoking!

The conclusion pulls it all together brilliantly!

" As he so often did, Hubbard’s “proof” of his “research” and “discoveries” is that he declares they are true and verified. It is interesting that not a single “police lie-detector expert” or any other expert for that matter has ever been able to verify any of the claims made by Hubbard. It’s a complete bait and switch. He promotes his “discoveries” as rigorous science, able to withstand the scrutiny of any unbiased and independent observer, but dismisses every other “expert” in the field of the mind or healing or even science as ignorant fools, unworthy of any credence. Thus, the ONLY person who can verify his claims, is L. Ron Hubbard himself. And he repeatedly offers up statements like “the best argument for this is that it is factual. Huh?"
.
 

Riddick

I clap to no man
gotta love the rhetoric:

This is a cold-blooded and factual account of your last sixty trillion years.
The test of any knowledge is its usefulness. Does it make one happier or more able? By it and with it, can he better achieve his goals?
This is useful knowledge. With it the blind again see, the lame walk, the ill recover, the insane become sane and the sane become saner. By its use the thousand abilities Man has sought to recover become his once more.
Like all useful knowledge it was hardly won. I began search into the back track of Mankind some years ago. There was no actual knowledge of it in existence. There were numberless superstitions, countless guesses, as many theories in favor of one thing as in favor of another. People believed, some of them, that Man had lived before. They had no proof. Others believed that Man was born innocent and died and went to a place called Hell. Most believed that when you had lived once, that was all, fellow.
Such a number of conflicting theories must have truth in them. It became my business to discover, against considerable odds, that truth.
In the first place, there was something wrong with Man. An animal such as a cat, even a reptile, a lizard, had habit patterns which carried him through his early days. Not Man. Why not? As usual, a lot of vagueness answered this. The very schools of ‘thought’ that said Man was just another animal bogged utterly on why it was that babies, the young of this very intelligent animal, are much more stupid than kittens. That was only one thing wrong with Man that wasn’t explained.

Further, it is very hard to argue with a miracle. Today, Eleanor has arthritis. She is audited “whole track” with 1952 techniques. Tonight she doesn’t have arthritis. Miracles, using “whole track” are plentiful. By using this data an auditor can obtain a MEST clear rather easily.
But the best argument which can be advanced for “whole track” is that it is factual. By using this knowledge, more is obtained than auditing results. A preclear suddenly recovers the ability carefully learned eighty years ago, to play a piano; an electronics engineer, doing poorly before suddenly wraps up formulae that would puzzle Einstein and which may get man off Earth; and a thousand details in a hundred sciences become clear.
The search of this track began some years ago and was conducted sporadically on many preclears. Various instruments such as the electroencephalograph and the police lie-detector, were used to further this search, but these were inadequate and limited for my purposes. Finally, Volney Mathison applied his electronic genius to the problem and invented the Electropsychometer. This instrument had a range and ability greatly in excess of anything before known; it compares to itself only in the field of physioelectrical mensuration and to existing devices as the electronic microscope compares to looking through a quartz stone. As soon as this instrument was turned loose on the problem, the problem ceased to exist. By adding up and checking probabilities on scores of persons, the character, extent and content of the whole track was mapped.
Once the E-meter gave reliable data, the main problem became the estimation of intentions, of sources, of the reasons behind the reasons. Most of this work has been done.
It comments poorly on Man’s dullness that this project was impeded and slowed greatly by lack of funds and by very active efforts on the part of some to acquire and own the copyrights of Dianetics— may the ill of the world forgive them. Thus the map is not as complete in this issue as it might be.
This work is honest research, done with considerable care. And it will bear up under survey by any competent auditor or investigator.
The most amusing aspect of the “whole track” is that this work bears up under the onslaught of police lie-detector experts: these, hard-eyed and uncompromising, become startled half out of their wits to discover that some of the crimes they find on their machines were committed two or three “lives” ago by the criminal under test, and that, most alarmingly, the crimes so discovered are discoverable again to the last detail in the police archives. This is very upsetting to these operators, to be informed so bluntly that Man lives many years, not three score and ten, and that today’s lifer may again be on their hands tomorrow as a juvenile delinquent!
Gravestones, ancient vital statistics, old diplomas and medals will verify in every detail the validity of “many lifetimes.” Your E-meter will tell you.
L. RON HUBBARD, 1951"


Here hubbard uses pathos, logos and ethos. How many can figure it out?

for example, this said by hubbard:

"This is a cold-blooded and factual account of your last sixty trillion years."

Is that an emotional appeal, a logical appeal or a creditability appeal? or maybe a few?

What about this statement:

"The test of any knowledge is its usefulness. Does it make one happier or more able? By it and with it, can he better achieve his goals?"

That statement is a logos or logical appeal, to persuade.

One can go thru the whole thing and analyze the rhetoric to persuade, sentence by sentence..
 

Riddick

I clap to no man
This sentence:

"This is useful knowledge. With it the blind again see, the lame walk, the ill recover, the insane become sane and the sane become saner. By its use the thousand abilities Man has sought to recover become his once more. "

Is a rhetoric appeal to logic and emotions, logos and pathos.
 

PirateAndBum

Administrator
Staff member
This sentence:

"This is useful knowledge. With it the blind again see, the lame walk, the ill recover, the insane become sane and the sane become saner. By its use the thousand abilities Man has sought to recover become his once more. "

Is a rhetoric appeal to logic and emotions, logos and pathos.
Could this be Hubbard's uncle?


I heard that this guy became a prime candidate for Chief Reg at LA Org. They tried very hard to recruit him.
 
Top