The Best in Scientology

Chuck J.

"Austere Religious Scholar"
I appreciate the nomenclature. It's a framework to view existence with. In a lot of instances it aligns pretty good with what I've experienced / know. In many cases it does not however.

Most $cientologist's take this framework as THE ONLY ONE they can ever use. Which is unfortunate.

Whenever I compare some $cn. datum with some other practices' idea / explanation, I usually come away feeling I've learned more than if I only took the $cn. definition / idea.
 

Paolo1

Member
Hubbard tried his best. Perhaps at the beginning he had higher motives. As time went by he lost it. The general theory is not bad and even some of the lower levels processes like Grades and some of the Objectives. He lost it when he started to think to be "the only one" and he didn't build a modern Research and Development department. He lost many great people as time went by: Alan Walters, Mayo, Werner Erhardt, the great american Mission Holders and, when reading your posts, even though I dont know you, I believe you were also one of them. He replaced those great people with the likes of Miscavige, Marty Rathbun, the GO, OSA, I mean people who had no idea what the tech was supposed to be about. From time to time he still had some good insight (part of Nots, part of the Data Series, the Suppressed Person RD, etc) but the technical architecture crumbled. The managers he had on post to manage it were definitely not up to the task since they were not old timers and decided to replace their technical and delivery failures with ethics and justice, like a country that uses policing and harsh measure to quell economic protest. Thus having sent away the very people who could help him, he failed.
 

Bill

Well-known member
Hubbard tried his best. Perhaps at the beginning he had higher motives. As time went by he lost it. The general theory is not bad and even some of the lower levels processes like Grades and some of the Objectives. He lost it when he started to think to be "the only one" and he didn't build a modern Research and Development department. He lost many great people as time went by: Alan Walters, Mayo, Werner Erhardt, the great american Mission Holders and, when reading your posts, even though I dont know you, I believe you were also one of them. He replaced those great people with the likes of Miscavige, Marty Rathbun, the GO, OSA, I mean people who had no idea what the tech was supposed to be about. From time to time he still had some good insight (part of Nots, part of the Data Series, the Suppressed Person RD, etc) but the technical architecture crumbled. The managers he had on post to manage it were definitely not up to the task since they were not old timers and decided to replace their technical and delivery failures with ethics and justice, like a country that uses policing and harsh measure to quell economic protest. Thus having sent away the very people who could help him, he failed.
The problem with this is that is assumes the "tech" is good but the execution failed. That's what many newly-out Scientologists believe.

That just isn't supported by the facts. The "tech" was fake and never could have succeeded. Dianetics simply didn't produce the fantastic results promised -- what little there were in results could easily be explained by Placebo Effect (or "faith healing", if you will). The "Grades" never produced the promised "Abilities Gained". And so on.

The "tech" was based on Hubbard's unproven theories that COULD have been true -- but actually weren't -- or, to be honest, have NEVER, in 70 years, been proven. In fact, nobody has ever TRIED to verify Hubbard's theories.

As Scientologists, we all just agreed that Hubbard's unproven, unverified, untested theories were TRUE!!! Yet the consistent lack of actual, promised results would indicate the theories could not be true.

All the results have been anecdotal and far, far less than what was promised. It really didn't matter who was trying to apply the "tech".

Scientology failed because it was based on fictional "tech" that couldn't hold up under real world conditions.
 

mimsey borogrove

Well-known member
I think he always had a big ego and a know it all mentality.
An excellent example is the Purif - he had these erroneous ideas about how the body functioned, such as drinking oils would get the body to use them to replace tainted fats. In his narcissism he and his confirmation bias he passed on what could have been a really purif program. He had the organization and the finances to hire some medical researchers and devise a really good workable program.

But he didn't.

What can you conclude from this? That his narcissistic mind set got in the way?

Or that he didn't care a wit if it worked or not - he felt it was a benign income source that relied on the health benefits from exercise and sauna for it's apparent results. And at that, it wasn't benign - taking massive amounts of vitamins way beyond their recommended amounts has proved to be harmful.

He had the opportunity to make a good self help based religion that gave people a benefit, but instead it is parasitic and toxic.

That shows you who he really was, and certainly not man's best friend.

Mimsey
 

Paolo1

Member
He had the opportunity to make a good self help based religion that gave people a benefit, but instead it is parasitic and toxic.

That shows you who he really was, and certainly not man's best friend.

Mimsey
Sometimes even if we had good intentions (I still give Hubbard the benefit of the doubt - at least at the beginning), when we dont do the right thing, we fuck up royally. And that is the history or the attempt of Scientology. Hubbard failed and - if there is any truth to reincarnation - when he comes back he should make use of some of the overt and withhold technology he devised. Sometimes when you fuck up, many many people get hurt and that is the sad part of the story. People who attended Scientology were damaged in the same way the shareholders of Enron or the investors in Bernie Madhoff. These last ones were raped financially. People who attended scientology - if they didn't make large use of the "critical websites" - they ended up being raped both spiritually and financially. Yet, we can add that the indicators that something was wrong, particularly after the year 2000 were all over the place.
 

Sctntist1

New member
Is there anywhere I can find work packets? Im looking for the ethics book work sheets and the management series work packet sheets if at all possible? Im Brand new to the forum and this tech post seemed like an appropriate place to ask. Thanks in advance!
 

Veda

Well-known member
Is there anywhere I can find work packets? Im looking for the ethics book work sheets and the management series work packet sheets if at all possible? Im Brand new to the forum and this tech post seemed like an appropriate place to ask. Thanks in advance!
Are you referring to correspondence course packs, and check sheets? with lists of things to read, clay demos to do, etc.?

Not familiar with the latest rendition of the Introduction to Scientology Ethics, but it appears to have been puffed up. Originally it was a tiny book.

The Management Series, way back when, was one large Green volume that consisted of the Data Series, the Public Relations Series, the Personnel Series, the Organizing Series, the Finance Series, the Executive Series, and the Establishment Officer Series.

The Management Series excludes all confidential issues, such as confidential Policy Letters, which would include "sensitive" issues on public relations, propaganda, finance, etc.

All issues re. Scientology Intelligence (spying and dirty tricks) tech would also be excluded.

This is mentioned to let you know that these books (or related publicly available courses) do not provide a complete picture of Scientology.

In any event, there are a few places you could look, or people you could consult, such as the Advanced Org of the Great Plains, or Ron's Orgs. These are both "independent," and are preferable to dealing with Scientology Inc. (the "Church.")

Strongly recommend not giving either your mind, or too much of your money, but either might be helpful in assisting you to locate the materials you're seeking.
 

Veda

Well-known member
Sometimes even if we had good intentions (I still give Hubbard the benefit of the doubt - at least at the beginning), when we dont do the right thing, we fuck up royally. And that is the history or the attempt of Scientology. Hubbard failed and - if there is any truth to reincarnation - when he comes back he should make use of some of the overt and withhold technology he devised. Sometimes when you fuck up, many many people get hurt and that is the sad part of the story. People who attended Scientology were damaged in the same way the shareholders of Enron or the investors in Bernie Madhoff. These last ones were raped financially. People who attended scientology - if they didn't make large use of the "critical websites" - they ended up being raped both spiritually and financially. Yet, we can add that the indicators that something was wrong, particularly after the year 2000 were all over the place.
Have you seen this?

Link to the complete August 1938 Skipper letter, from Hubbard to his first wife, written in the wake of the writing of the unpublished manuscript Excalibur.

Hubbard reveals his "real goal."
 

Veda

Well-known member
Thanks! Was interesting! So basically Hubbard had an ambitious goal when he was 26... I mean, who didnt have one?


"I have high hopes of smashing my name into history so violently that it it will take a legendary form...
That goal is the real goal as far as I am concerned.
Things which stand too consistently in my way make me nervous.
It's a pretty big job.
In a hundred years Roosevelt will have been forgotten - which gives some idea of the magnitude of my attempt.

And all this boils and froths inside my head."


Scientologists give a standing ovation to the giant L. Ron Hubbard signature.




Happy Hubbard fan(atic) club members gather beneath the giant LRH monogram.
 

Sctntist1

New member
Are you referring to correspondence course packs, and check sheets? with lists of things to read, clay demos to do, etc.?

Not familiar with the latest rendition of the Introduction to Scientology Ethics, but it appears to have been puffed up. Originally it was a tiny book.

The Management Series, way back when, was one large Green volume that consisted of the Data Series, the Public Relations Series, the Personnel Series, the Organizing Series, the Finance Series, the Executive Series, and the Establishment Officer Series.

The Management Series excludes all confidential issues, such as confidential Policy Letters, which would include "sensitive" issues on public relations, propaganda, finance, etc.

All issues re. Scientology Intelligence (spying and dirty tricks) tech would also be excluded.

This is mentioned to let you know that these books (or related publicly available courses) do not provide a complete picture of Scientology.

In any event, there are a few places you could look, or people you could consult, such as the Advanced Org of the Great Plains, or Ron's Orgs. These are both "independent," and are preferable to dealing with Scientology Inc. (the "Church.")

Strongly recommend not giving either your mind, or too much of your money, but either might be helpful in assisting you to locate the materials you're seeking.
Ya I been through narcanon and worked for a church so that's why im trying to get the packets from outside of actual comm with the church that way no one's hounding me for money or signing up for working anywhere, trying to keep dev-t off of my line haha. I wanna implement some of the tech things in my business stats conditions and figured management series might be helpful but if I had the work sheets to do the practicals and written work I think it would be helpful.
 

onceuponatime

Well-known member
Ya I been through narcanon and worked for a church so that's why im trying to get the packets from outside of actual comm with the church that way no one's hounding me for money or signing up for working anywhere, trying to keep dev-t off of my line haha. I wanna implement some of the tech things in my business stats conditions and figured management series might be helpful but if I had the work sheets to do the practicals and written work I think it would be helpful.
The conditions and management tech stuff is completely worthless. Look at the organizations that apply it the most and adhere to it the strictest. Scientology orgs, missions, narconons, etc. They are all failing.

Maybe it's better than having nothing but I doubt it. The obsession with weekly stats, conditions, etc. is harmful in my opinion.

Spend some time searching for business management/structure stuff on youtube, I'm sure it will be more useful. I don't know what specific issues you're running into, but you can search for help with that specifically and I'm sure it will be more useful than anything Scientology has to offer.
 

Bill

Well-known member
Ya I been through narcanon and worked for a church so that's why im trying to get the packets from outside of actual comm with the church that way no one's hounding me for money or signing up for working anywhere, trying to keep dev-t off of my line haha. I wanna implement some of the tech things in my business stats conditions and figured management series might be helpful but if I had the work sheets to do the practicals and written work I think it would be helpful.
I have over 15 years experience in the Sea Org, I've run my own business as a True Believer in Hubbard's Admin Tech. I have lots of experience trying to make that tech work. I speak from experience : It is a great way to destroy your business. Successful? Not a chance.

I wrote about it in Scientology's Admin Tech.
\
It was tried, in the real world, by Allstate Insurance. Read about it here. The more you try to apply it exactly as written by Hubbard, the worse it gets. His Admin Tech can destroy any business.
 

Paolo1

Member
"I have high hopes of smashing my name into history so violently that it it will take a legendary form...
That goal is the real goal as far as I am concerned.
Things which stand too consistently in my way make me nervous.
It's a pretty big job.
In a hundred years Roosevelt will have been forgotten - which gives some idea of the magnitude of my attempt.

And all this boils and froths inside my head."


Scientologists give a standing ovation to the giant L. Ron Hubbard signature.




Happy Hubbard fan(atic) club members gather beneath the giant LRH monogram.
He did it 😂
 

guanoloco

As-Wased
I have over 15 years experience in the Sea Org, I've run my own business as a True Believer in Hubbard's Admin Tech. I have lots of experience trying to make that tech work. I speak from experience : It is a great way to destroy your business. Successful? Not a chance.

I wrote about it in Scientology's Admin Tech.
\
It was tried, in the real world, by Allstate Insurance. Read about it here. The more you try to apply it exactly as written by Hubbard, the worse it gets. His Admin Tech can destroy any business.

Umm...yes.

But did you do the PR stuff?

If you really want to see just how magnanimous the tech is look at how BIG the Div 6 volume is and then look at Scientology's public image and how the public view it.

It's such a smashing success!!
 

The_Fixer

Bent in all sorts of ways..
Sometimes even if we had good intentions (I still give Hubbard the benefit of the doubt - at least at the beginning), when we dont do the right thing, we fuck up royally. And that is the history or the attempt of Scientology. Hubbard failed and - if there is any truth to reincarnation - when he comes back he should make use of some of the overt and withhold technology he devised. Sometimes when you fuck up, many many people get hurt and that is the sad part of the story. People who attended Scientology were damaged in the same way the shareholders of Enron or the investors in Bernie Madhoff. These last ones were raped financially. People who attended scientology - if they didn't make large use of the "critical websites" - they ended up being raped both spiritually and financially. Yet, we can add that the indicators that something was wrong, particularly after the year 2000 were all over the place.
I think you will find a classic example of your statement there using Jim Jones of the Jonestown infamy.

There are accounts of him being a very decent human being doing quite a lot of good in his earlier days of preaching and later things started taking a turn for the worse.
 
Last edited:
Top