Why do intelligent people join?

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation.
Social scientists (you can decide for yourself if Sociology is a science) studied cult recruiting methods in San Francisco in the late 60's including Scientology and Moonies and suggested that people join groups like that when they are mentally vulnerable and distanced from family, elders, community members. This happens to travelers, students attending schools away from home, run-aways, and the like.

They found when people are alone in unfamiliar surrounds and getting love-bombed, they are more susceptible to persuasions.
That is exactly why I got dragged into the cult.

Thank you for posting that ... when looking back it is kind of obvious, but I rarely look back too deeply and hadn't thought of it that way.
 

Veda

Well-known member
That is exactly why I got dragged into the cult.

Thank you for posting that ... when looking back it is kind of obvious, but I rarely look back too deeply and hadn't thought of it that way.
No doubt many fit the profile described above: lonely, away from home, vulnerable.

But many did not. I was young, but never abandoned my "wog" friends and my interest in other subjects.

Many involved were older. Burroughs was 45 when he became involved.

Cohen was 34.

Mike Heron and Robin Williamson were 34.

Hal Puthoff was 34. Ingo Swann was 37.

All were successful in their respective fields.

And they all saw something that made them want to explore Scientology further.
 
Last edited:

Riddick

I clap to no man
Social scientists (you can decide for yourself if Sociology is a science) studied cult recruiting methods in San Francisco in the late 60's including Scientology and Moonies and suggested that people join groups like that when they are mentally vulnerable and distanced from family, elders, community members. This happens to travelers, students attending schools away from home, run-aways, and the like.

They found when people are alone in unfamiliar surrounds and getting love-bombed, they are more susceptible to persuasions.
well, that's not my story. I think it's also a lot of peoples not story. I didn't join, I only wanted to go "clear" by reading Hubbard's persuasive book DMSMH. I was sucked in and my lack of logic, actually, failed me. It's kind of funny, Hubbard in his logic series said Look, don't listen", and yet we exmembers while in never did really Look, are there any clears?

Did the social scientists research more on why people left the moonies or scientology?
 

Riddick

I clap to no man
No doubt many fit the profile described above: lonely, away from home, vulnerable.

But many did not. I was young, but never abandoned my "wog" friends and my interest in other subjects.

Many involved were older. Burroughs was 45 when he became involved.

Cohen was 34.

Mike Heron and Robbin Williamson were 34.

Hal Puthoff was 34. Ingo Swann was 37.

Al were successful in their respective fields.

All they all saw something that made them want to explore Scientology further.
In the very beginning, in the Heinlein letters, Hubbard and Campbell tried to get Heinlein involved, he was curious and very interested in Hubbards/Campbells ideas of dianetics. Heinlein questioned them both and said he had a wait and see attitude. Smart man, he never "joined".
 

programmer_guy

True ex-Scientologist
This is what enlightened me:


"Of the modes of persuasion furnished by the spoken word there are three kinds. The first kind depends on the personal character of the speaker; the second on putting the audience into a certain frame of mind; the third on the proof, or apparent proof, provided by the words of the speech itself. "

The first was Hubbard's personal character. Before the internet, we didn't really know the character of Hubbard. And many before during the early years didn't know either, they relied on his personal character by words, spoken or written. Little did all these very early people know the facts of Hubbard's life, they were persuaded by his words. He said he was scientists, a philosopher, a engineer, etc.

The second we all know of Hubbard putting the audience into a frame of mind. The first was putting the audience into the frame of mind that one could erase aberrations of the mind, dianetics, the modern science of mental health.

Scientology is a follow up on the soul or spirit and putting one into the frame of mind of OT, operating thetan, or past lives and one could have recall of past lives and also return from death.

The third is the endless success stories given by members and by hubbard in his endless words, these I would classify as apparent proof.

'seeming real or true, but not necessarily so.'
In the past, I have agreed with you a lot on these points. :)

However, the one point that is missing in this explanation is the brain endorphin effect from SCN auditing.
 

Riddick

I clap to no man
In the past, I have agreed with you a lot on these points. :)

However, the one point that is missing in this explanation is the brain endorphin effect from SCN auditing.
How do you explain the dianetic auditing?
 

HelluvaHoax!

Well-known member

.

Veda posted this photo.





That promo piece makes no sense whatsoever.

The last thing Scientology management wants Scientologists to do is to "DARE" do anything that is not already "approved in writing".

And even more ferocious opposition would greet any Scientologist who even thought of "thinking for yourself". Scientology's end product is the diametric opposite of that. You get candy, love-bombing and applause only when you "think like Ron".

Just for a creative calisthenic, I tried to imagine in what world that propaganda poster could actually be factual. I think I figured it out.

SCENARIO: The ideal orgs across the planet have been ravaged by covid shutdowns. Scientologists are blowing like mad and refusing to come into the org. Because of the lowest-ever level of Ethics, the ethics-gradients need to be ramped up to highest-ever ferocity! However, but even lower conditions assignments and com evs are not scaring the public enough to get them to resume making donations and continuing their Bridge. The cult is desperate to generate money, more money and much more money. They need an even higher ethics gradient, something that will generate money! Ergo, Scn management invests half of the reserves ($1.5 billion) to acquire an international company that owns/manages the largest portfolio and chain of pet cemeteries. This creates an unprecedented investment windfall for Scientology!!!

Do I really need to explain why? LOL.

.
 
Last edited:

Veda

Well-known member
In the very beginning, in the Heinlein letters, Hubbard and Campbell tried to get Heinlein involved, he was curious and very interested in Hubbards/Campbells ideas of dianetics. Heinlein questioned them both and said he had a wait and see attitude. Smart man, he never "joined".
Campbell joined but didn't hang around for long.

By March 1951 he was already disaffected, writing: "In a healthy and growing science, there are many men who are recognized as being competent in the field, and no one man dominates the work... to the extent Dianetics is dependent on one man, it is a cult. To the extent that it is built by many minds and many workers it is a science."

A.E. van Vogt, also in Campbell's circle, was involved with the California Association of Dianetic Auditors, later becoming its president. In 1951, a dispute arose over what words to use on course certificates. The CADA wanted Certified Dianetic Auditor, and Hubbard insisted upon Hubbard Dianetics Auditor. Finance was also an issue. The CADA was probably the first "squirrel" group, providing auditing without Hubbard's authorization, and, inevitably, was slandered as "communist," etc. to both the Scientology membership and in, at least, one of Hubbard's many bizarre letters to the FBI.

A. E. van Vogt's 1948 novel, The World of Null A, seems to have inspired Hubbard. Link to a concise synopsis

Another novelist, Aldous Huxley, along with his wife, was audited by Hubbard in 1950. Huxley's Doors of Perception - an account of his experience on mescaline - was published 1954. Hubbard, soon after, in his Professional Auditors Bulletin, recommended Doors of Perception as "a good book."

Years later, by inference, and retroactively, Huxley would be classified as an "LSD zombie."

There were some intelligent people who found some of the ideas and techniques, presented in Hubbard's writings, to be interesting, and, one after the other, they were, eventually, denounced, attacked, and/or officially erased.

Meanwhile, Hubbard continued building his cult.
 

Riddick

I clap to no man
Campbell joined but didn't hang around for long.

By March 1951 he was already disaffected, writing: "In a healthy and growing science, there are many men who are recognized as being competent in the field, and no one man dominates the work... to the extent Dianetics is dependent on one man, it is a cult. To the extent that it is built by many minds and many workers it is a science."

A.E. van Vogt, also in Campbell's circle, was involved with the California Association of Dianetic Auditors, later becoming its president. In 1951, a dispute arose over what words to use on course certificates. The CADA wanted Certified Dianetic Auditor, and Hubbard insisted upon Hubbard Dianetics Auditor. Finance was also an issue. The CADA was probably the first "squirrel" group, providing auditing without Hubbard's authorization, and, inevitably, was slandered as "communist," etc. to both the Scientology membership and in, at least, one of Hubbard's many bizarre letters to the FBI.

A. E. van Vogt's 1948 novel, The World of Null A, seems to have inspired Hubbard. Link to a concise synopsis

Another novelist, Aldous Huxley, along with his wife, was audited by Hubbard in 1950. Huxley's Doors of Perception - an account of his experience on mescaline - was published 1954. Hubbard, soon after, in his Professional Auditors Bulletin, recommended Doors of Perception as "a good book."

Years later, by inference, and retroactively, Huxley would be classified as an "LSD zombie."

There were some intelligent people who found some of the ideas and techniques, presented in Hubbard's writings, to be interesting, and, one after the other, they were, eventually, denounced, attacked, and/or officially erased.

Meanwhile, Hubbard continued building his cult.
good post Veda, that's what I'm saying also, but from the rhetoric angle, as an addition.

Interesting, Heinlein questioned Campbell, before Dianetics was published. He questioned Campbell if dianetics auditing cured his problems and the people Campbell was auditing. My guess is that Heinleins questioning finally got thru to him. Although I think Campbell was still into woo woo after he left.

And ya, Hubbard eventually figured out how to wove into his so called tech, getting rid of people who had a open mind (PTS, and maybe converting them or changing their minds) and too critical thinking people (SP's) by using reverse rhetoric.

I also don't think Campbell joined, he was part of the development of dianetics and wanted in on the money and fame that he could get.
 
Top