Ron the Integral Thinker

I finally got around to watching several of the interviews of Phil Spickler that are posted on You Tube. What a breath of fresh air. A wise man who evolved through Scientology and lived long enough to speak about it with measure, intelligence, compassion and hard won experience. Clearly, Phil doesn’t have a horse in the race nor any agenda other than sharing his experience and what he took from it for the purpose of helping others. I am including one video in particular here where he and I share some observations. I am going to tell a back story to demonstrate why I think it speaks to Phil’s credibility and teaches an important lesson about Scientology.  Phil and I have never met, spoken nor corresponded.

For the past several months I have been studying sources that L. Ron Hubbard once credited as being influential on his thinking. Several of the critical ones he later eschewed and effectively denied had any connection or relationship to the development of Dianetics and Scientology. From my reading, it appeared to me that some indeed had little influence. That was particularly true for some of the more sensational ones that certain journalists have obsessed with because it made good copy, such as Aleister Crowley (note: in my final analysis though, Crowley’s influence was a dastardly one). However, after reading Alfred Korzybski, the founder of General Semantics, I found far more influence than Ron ever let onto, even if he consistently made more references to Korzybski than just about anyone else.

Korzybski’s 1933 opus Science and Sanity is as close to a template for Dianetics as exists anywhere. Science and Sanity is a 900 page foundation for the creation of a “Science of Man.” Korzybski finds the underlying principle aberration of the human mind is ‘identification.’ He isolates one of the most important foundational skills to develop as that of differentiation, which he calls ‘to distinguish.’ He begins by establishing the need for the use of infinity logic, and to eliminate two-valued logic and the belief in absolutes. Being the first general semanticist he puts extreme importance on knowing all definitions of words, and emphasizes the importance of creating an entirely new nomenclature. Central to a ‘science of man’ is revolutionizing the science of communication. He is the one writer I have ever read whose tone and voice closely resembles Ron’s. He repeatedly emphasizes, with unrestrained vehemence, the need to reject much of what has come before: scholarship, institutional education, mental health profession givens, politics.  He even preaches a heavy disdain for ‘democracy.’ That was the extent of my comparison by the time I ran into Phil’s talk below. He identifies another parallel between Korsybski and LRH that is probably more important than any of those I have noted.

I found the several videos of Phil that I have watched (the 5 part series and the 6 part series) to be chock full of credible information given in a credible manner. I chose the one segment below to introduce the idea that Ron was indeed influenced by his learning – and did not immaculately conceive Dianetics and Scientology, as miraculous as his discoveries were.  Though some might bristle at the suggestion his discoveries were ever represented in such wise, I believe such a reaction would be born out of denialism. It is critical for growth and transcendence to understand that the technologies of Dianetics and Scientology were evolved out 10,000 years of evolution in thought that preceded them.  Unless of course one desires to regress by holding to the idea one can, or must, cling to that which is already written to the exclusion of any other evolved or new original thought.  L. Ron Hubbard applied Integral Theory decades before Integral Theory was even conceived of.  And I agree with Phil’s assessment of and attitude about Ron, he is a hero for accomplishing what he did, particularly in the environment in which he did so.  At the end of the day, I believe what I am noting here, in combination with what Phil talks about, are validations of the credibility of Ron’s work.

Watch the rest of Phil’s talks when you get the chance. The ones I have watched are poignant and contain rich history and observations we all could learn from.

Thanks to Tatiana for having the foresight and for expending the time and effort to capture Phil on video and make it available.

Thanks to Phil for demonstrating that study and practice of Scientology can contribute to our evolution into wise folks.

198 responses to “Ron the Integral Thinker

  1. Yes this Phil guy is lovely and I had the pleasure of knowing him
    while he was at St hill and liked by many.

    • Tatiana, I watched about 15 of these videos on YouTube last night. What an incredible man Phil is. Thank you for your part in capturing this history and Phil’s viewpoint of it. All involved have provided a great gift in doing so! Doug

  2. I could not be happier to see you Marty forwarding the video-messages of Phil! Thank you from the bottom of my heart!! Seen this happening reassures me once again that Scientology works and communication flowing freely does dissolves the ridges between people, uniting us into a biger and stronger group! :)

    All videos of Phil, his articles, paintings and more can be found on Phil Spickler’s website “From Stanford With Love” at http://community.freezone-tech.info/phil-spickler

    The comments left on Phil’s website are forwarded to Phil’s e-mail, and he does answers some privatly by e-mail, but sure appriciates them all!

    Thank you again, Marty! You made my day! :)

    • Tatiana… Marty… And Phil…

      I don’t know what to say… But I’ll try.

      I truly believe that here on this day, on this blog something special has happened.

      Thank you to all three of you for your fortitude, persistance and authenticity.

      As a child of Ron’s “Yang Dynasty” I am one of the lucky ones who made it out with sense enough to learn from their journey. But to see this posted… For, I truly hope, all of those who’s lives have been blessed (or cursed) by Hubbard to see is… Well… Words fail me.

      If no one else says anything that gives you the acknowledgement you all sooooo richly deserve then please know that one soul out here is bursting with thanks and joy.

      This post, to my mind, is as seminal as the day I walked out the door knowing I would never be coming back.

      So thank you Tatiana.

      Thank you Phil.

      And thank you Marty.

      I hope everyone else accepts, in their own time, what you have all offered here.

      • chris,

        I too sense that “I truly believe that here on this day, on this blog something special has happened.”

        My take is that truth and understanding will continue to manifest itself.

        Onward and upward!

    • Tatiana, you my favorite Russian poet you! Very well done!

    • I’ve watched a couple of these so far, and yes, I agree Tatiana thanks to Marty for bringing Spickler and for that matter Korsybski front and center. Many thanks to you too Tatiana for putting these great interviews together, they are very well done!

    • first met phil in 68 ,doing power at asho. a real ot guy,i got in comm with him last year.he is a breath of fresh air.

  3. Ron did say that he was widely read and that he basically ‘culled’ information from other sources. i doubt there is any disagreement there. But the biggest contribution that Ron made which NO ONE before him did was the practical application and technology, the techniques of auditing and the bridge over which to travel to attain higher states of being in a measured and predicable fashion.

    • Very succinctly put. Criticizing Ron for taking ideas from those thinkers who went before him is foolish. What great thinker did not? Are they expected to live in a state of ignorance of and deny any validity in other philosophies in order to be valid themselves. Ron didn’t do that.
      There have been other practical applications of wisdom which have some workability.
      However, from my observation, the precise techniques he developed are without peer in their effectiveness according to people who have had them applied to themselves. The results are much more attainable by almost everyone. This was his genius.
      All 1950’s MADison avenue hype aside, Ron really did create something new in his Bridge which can and does bring a LOT of people up a LOT higher in a fairly predictable fashion.

      • martyrathbun09

        Who criticized him?

        • Nobody did here. Sorry if it sounded like I was saying that. I guess I was just defending Ron from criticisms for “stealing” someone’s ideas which I have occasionally read elsewhere.
          My intention is to express agreement with Michael when he says,
          “But the biggest contribution that Ron made which NO ONE before him did was the practical application and technology, the techniques of auditing and the bridge over which to travel to attain higher states of being in a measured and predicable fashion.”

          • Espritu…

            Can I humbly suggest that there might be a reason you “read” this post in such a way that you felt a need to “defend” Hubbard’s learning from others?

            It’s just a suggestion… Please ignore as you wish…😊

            • Thanks Chris. I can see how what I said was taken that way.
              All I was trying to say was that I agreed with what Michael said and then expand upon that a bit.
              Instead of saying, “Criticizing Ron for taking ideas from those thinkers who went before him is foolish”, I should have more gracefully and clearly said, “Using the ideas of others who went before one is not a bad thing. Plato borrowed from Socrates.” or something ….and then continued with what i said. Sorry that I gave the impression that I thought that Michael was unjustly criticizing LRH. Quite the contrary. He was not.
              I also appreciate Phil Spickler’s observations about his friend Ron, and the spirit in which he expressed them.

          • I have purchased (not stolen) many of Hubbard’s ideas and found them to be quite useful. I make it a point to add ideas of my own to them, which takes me into different universes.

            For instance, if you get the theory about why drugs are bad. O.K. it keys in pictures. it restimulates etc etc.. What happens when someone get’s through OT8 and there is nothing else there to restimulate? Can someone OT8 , be comfortable enough to smoke a joint and just relax and enjoy any benefits without any bad side effects?

            And who would be the first OT8 to test all of this? I can take theories and live with them and walk by them, but until I have tested the end product, It is something I am only considering as a [possibility, not taken as a truth, filed under “maybe”.

            “Maybe’s” are supposed to make a person crazy. But it’s better than taking someone else’s item as your own if it is not.

            The theories about drugs and all the hullaballo make perfect sense. I can live with it while I am getting up the bridge because is sounds rational. Because I have had a drug rundown and I know what it meant to get through that. Because the idea of taking drugs is kind of repelling.

            Still, when it is all done, and I have finished OT7, and OT8, and all three L’s.

            I know I’m going to light a joint because I just have to know.

            Technically speaking, a person with no case to restimulate, who is already as keyed out as is possible, would derive no benefit of release from a drug and certified as caseless, would not become restimulated.

            I really don’t have a big issue with “source”. I don’t care where the ideas come from. When people go into the grocery store and buy a tomato, it is considered an orphan until you purchase it. And you take it home and alter it this way and that until you have converted it in some way that is meaningful, beneficial , and useful to you.

            I see knowledge as the same thing.

            Sometimes I wonder if “ethics” is a prop to ensure nobody wanders. I know for a fact people in the Church who revert to drugs or fall off the wagon for a minute are expelled and denied further auditing.

            I mean , why?

            You aren’t supposed to know about these things anymore.

            If you are asked to disconnect from anyone who comes up on a pts handling, how do you know if you have de ptsed from doing the rundown? I would think after a “handling” you should be able to sit down and face, eat sleep or drink with someone you took up on the rundown.

            “Don’t read entheta”. Why not? If I am not in doubt I should be able to read anything and it should matter.

            Laws are funny things. Can’t haves actually when then are embedded in religion. Anyone in a workable and helpful religion should have no fear factor.

            Look at the fears and paranoia that FLOOD the hallways of the Church of Scientology! It is practically a type 3 entity.

            I remember in when I first started in the Sea Org at the Flag Land Base, I had been there a few months. Walked out one night late after post and just decided to walk back to the Hacienda. Clearwater Florida. That place is so tame I could have slept comfortably on a park bench.

            It was beautiful night and I was enjoying the quiet, the sounds of frogs, the thick sea air.

            SUDDENLY a car swerves over and the door flies open! OH MY GOD! A car full of Sea Org members! “GET OFF THE STREET! GET IN THE CAR!” I mean HYSTERIA!

            I did, but for real? I got an earful about security and how unsafe it was blah blah so after that, I took back roads so I wouldn’t get harassed by Sea Org Staff! THEY were the only people out there harassing Sea Org members!

            The point I am getting to, is that I don’t like to be told there are things I should be afraid of. And I don’t like warnings.

            Now, you start making a list of things Scientologists are supposed to be afraid of a.k.a. “avoid”.

            For the love of God fucking television sets are dangerous! Reporters. S.P.’s! Rogue staff members! Rogue members! Wogs! Police! Governments! Go on, the list gets wider, and wider, and wider. A person taking a snort of cocaine is doomed to cellular life! All the while Scientologists are “super people”. OT’s! Casue over matter energy space and time! BUT DO NOT TURN THE TELEVISION ON!

            I mean, this is kind of sick.

            Hubbard was the one in hiding. Not me. I’m not running around in disguises , using aliases, disguises, with secret locations.

            So, he was little paranoid. And you have to take that into consideration when you read what he wrote.

            You see now an organization which is type 3. And the upper management is protected by barbed wire fence and anyone stepping on the street needs two escorts.

            How free was Hubbard? To be Hubbard? Not free at all.

            How free are the people selling the bridge to total freedom? Not free at all.

            It is not the source of the information that counts. It is the math.

            YOU are the source on knowing. Whatever knowledge you bought from Hubbard or the Church, came about because you were in the right place at the right time, or not. You “got it”, or not.

            Everyone who visited, worked, purchased or donated to the Church of Scientology, authored it. It has been a co creation, and a co destruction.

            • If Hubbard was the only source, Scientology would have died the day he did. Not one more auditing session, clear or OT would have been made.
              Yet, against the backdrop of what has unfolded, there is a small thread of truth in that. Because for sure, the window of opportunity has been closing. Until OTHER people decide THEY are the source now, and they have to carry the torch, if it is to survive, it will continue to vanish.

              All of my respect and admiration, and hope this subject can survive, is manifested in the likes of Marty. Mike, Karen, Terril, Phil, Trey, Glen, Pat, and those that step into the boots of a source. Not a copy. Copies, fanatics and fundamentalists, are what is killing it off.

            • “It is not the source of the information that counts. It is the math.”

              That’s a showstopper for me, right there. Wow.

              And it reminds me that integration is actually a form of math.

              This entire comment is quite thought-provoking for me.

              Thank-you.

            • Oracle, that was one helluva a comment!! Very, very Cool!

        • Sometimes Marty – I think it’s hopeless :)

          But then I remember the words of Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche –

          “Never give up on anyone” —

          And I take a deep breath and keep on

          Thank you for posting this by Phil. Having known of him and having at one time been in charge of the Mission Network under Diana Hubbard, as her Deputy CS-6 for Expansion, I’ve been wary of “famous” Mission Holders. Very fixed point of view for SURE.

          I plan to spend a few hours watching all his interviews that Tatiana did such a wonderful job of doing.

          (This type of wow — always makes me wonder — what ELSE am I not willing to really look at :)

          Love,
          Christine

    • Hi Michael,

      I suspect you may be right. But personally I’m not so sure. It possibly isn’t that important but one thing I do know. He was not the only one. Again, possibly not important here and now, but worth exploring in my opinion if for no other reason than to “counter act” the belief that “one highway is the only highway”. If scientology is deserving of it’s “religion” badge then how can the world but look on at another horse in the “enlightenment race”?

      Like politics I believe true progress on this front will only occur when “sides” and “paths” are left to one side and “progress of all” is put firmly at the forefront of all “enlightening” endeavours. Regardless of what horse you and I ride it is the finish that counts, not who ran best.

      • martyrathbun09

        My bet is he doesn’t respond.

        • We’ll see…😄

        • My bet is that maybe he responds, maybe he doesn’t, and that it doesn’t necessarily MEAN anything. Some people around here seem to think that every person who posts here compulsively checks back to see if there is a reply. While I will admit to having done that a couple of times myself, sometimes people simply post to say what they wanted to say when they wanted to say it, and then leave it alone, and don’t even look back. I read this blog a LOT, yet I don’t see anywhere near every post. I tried once to set a post to notify me of replies, but it didn’t work. When, you don’t respond to a post, Marty, I expect sometimes that means something and sometimes it means nothing at all.

          Failure of a post to accurately convey the intent of the poster to the reader is rampant on discussion groups — no blame, just the way it is. Not everyone who posts proofreads repeatedly from the perspective of the average reader and successfully crafts a message that will reach through all language filters and bumps, and then we have the prejudices and agenda of the reader.

          It’s not the responsibility of a poster to scour the blog for replies and answer just because someone doesn’t agree with what they THOUGHT he meant.

  4. In my travels in the US Freezone around 5 years ago I met Phil. We hit it off very well. In fact I suggested he make some videos. For those interested he may still audit. Majors heavily in granting beingness
    and validation. He plays tennis with guys less than half his age so
    he probably still audits. He is a treasure. :)

  5. Thanks Marty,

    Phil is an Icon, imho.

    Since having seen many of his video recordings, I can assure you that he’s the real deal.

    Phil may be able to, and probably did, confirm that he was a feisty young man back during the Route to Infinity lecture series or generally thereabouts. Phoenix, Arizona comes to mind.

    Those were the best days of Scientology I’ve ever spent.

    I truly hope Phil sees his wishes come true. I share them.

    • martyrathbun09

      Actually, it is quite the impossible read. I forced myself out of curiosity along a line of study important to me. Don’t let me give the impression it is an enjoyable read. He is fully academic. One of the brilliances of LRH was his ability to make the complex rather simple.

      • LRH was a smuck like you and me, But he was a briljant smuck never the less, Yes he could make complex rather simple.

        Do you really want to know what is behind complots ??? GREED !!!

      • Something is missing here, wrong thread?

        • What the hell, roll with the punches! Once I found about Phil I thought he might shed some light on my “mystery’ years of the mid to late ’50’s.

          He filled in my blanks. Especially concerning LRH jr. and 1958.

          While we’re here I’ll link to another of Phil’s videos concerning an area I couldn’t understand without more information and observation that was first hand:

          • It’s seemed to me there was a bifurcation from the late ’40’s and early ’50’s to that period where Keeping Scientology Working, Enforcement (Ethics) ‘Tech” and the Brown Shirts (Sea Ogre) all came together.

            The rest is history.

            The resurrection will come and is occurring with the simple concept of getting back to basics. Beings love, want and seek the truth. It’s a simple matter of serving it up.

          • Pretty sure Marty was

            • oops, touch pad error – that part comment posted itself, anyway, pretty sure Marty was referring to Count Kryzoyski (sic – whatever) writing style from a reply 2 comments down.

              Re: Nibs – He was awesome and deserves mention. Helped create TRs and other tech. He needs a public embrace as to the value he truly had (see: http://www.lermanet.com/scientology-and-occult/tape-by-L-Ron-Hubbard-jr.htm ) , LRH slaughtered his own blood on that one, and he didnt treat Quentin much better.

  6. Korzybski”s “Science and Sanity” sounds very interesting read, especially for Scientologists.
    I also appreciated Phil Spickler’s mention of Korzybski’s purpose in developing his work and the practical applications he hoped for. Phil is a treasure.

    This also reminds me of the fact that LRH acknowledged Freud numerous times in the Tech for discovering that there was and is a hidden part of the mind that influences people’s lives and actions which people are usually not aware of.
    At one point Ron even developed a technique involving ink blots for the benefit of psychoanalysts to assist them in locating areas to address more quickly and thereby speed up the progress of a psychoanalysis.

    • Korzybski is boring as hell and immediately dives into “man is a body and a biological entity and the product of a prehistoric Viral-Match.com (only $29.95 a month).” Christ, you’d think no previous philosophy had ever been written and Jesus was blowing smoke to make a million dinars or whatever. That’s what I got out of it, but I don’t have much patience, throw some books away after reading the first paragraph, and have better items on my reading list. One man can have one idea – as Freud did – which opens a window on Creation – in the right hands. To us, the notion of reactive mind (which LRH developed) is dirt-common. How come no one noticed it out of the hundreds of men who worked on it for many thousands of years? (How come none of the recently-genius people here failed to notice it?) Freud is to pyschology as Newton is to physics as Copernicus is to astronomy, as Rembrandt is to painting, and LRH is to spiritual freedom as LRH is to spiritual freedom (there is no comparison).

      • Okay… Your loss though… In my opinion of course…😊

        • Yet Freud’s psychoanalysis remains an integral part of psychiatry – one of the ‘hated enemies’ of Hubbard. So did LRH have a bad experience with a psych himself? And “Korzybski … is the one writer I have ever read whose tone and voice closely resembles Ron’s”… um, wouldn’t that be the other way around?

    • LRH actually did more than simply acknowledge Freud. And he definitely changed his mind about any kind of association with prior knowledge acquired through college/university degrees.

      In 1954 LRH discussed having Scientology students acquire degrees as “Freudian Psycho-analysts.” He also set out a schema of Bachelor of Scientology, Doctor of Scientology, and Doctor of Divinity, laying out what should be studied to obtain those degrees. This is very well documented in the tech volumes, he speaks freely of this plan.

      The Anderson commission focused on his formal training and degrees in 1965, questioning their authenticity.

      On March 8, 1966, LRH ran the following announcement in the New York Times: I, L. Ron Hubbard of Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, having reviewed the damage being done in our society with nuclear physics and psychiatry by persons calling themselves ‘Doctor’, do hereby resign in protest my university degree as a doctor of philosophy (Ph.D.), anticipating an early public outcry against anyone called ‘Doctor’; and although not in any way connected with bombs or ‘psychiatric treatment’ or treatment of the sick, and interested only and always in philosophy and the total freedom of the human spirit, I wish no association of any kind with these persons and do so publicly declare, and request my friends and the public not to refer to me in any way with this title.

      This is further corroborated by his 1966 PL where he resigns his degrees, declaring that he will no longer be referred to as a Doctor of Divinity.

  7. This was enlightening.
    I recall reading a comment LRH made about Alfred Korzybski in the data series. If my recall is correct it was Data Series 1. In an early version Ron commented on Korzybski and S. I. Hayakawa. The comments were dismissive of both men.
    In a later edition of the issue there was no mention of Hayakawa but the comment on Korzybski was the same.
    I wondered about that for years, but now I think it was because Hayakawa had gone on to become a U.S. senator.

    Phil Spickler is a mensch, though truth be told I had, as a true believer of long duration, a tough time confronting what he had to say.

    Confront is good though and I came out the other end believing in myself, the tech and I still have all my admiration for LRH. Better yet I feel compassion for him.
    He is not the first great man to sin and certainly won’t be the last.

    I guess the folks who cast stones might profit from the words of Jesus Christ, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”.

    • Hayakawa and Ron were roommates in College. Apparently there was some falling out. Hayakawa was of course a strong proponent of Korzybski, and had written a book himself on General Semantics.

      Early days of Scientology, 1953, when Korzybski was mentioned by LRH I got his big book and read it through. Tried repeating a word over and over to myself, and sure enough, eventually one goes “blank.” Kind of like, what was that word I was repeating? It had erased from the bank.

      Really appreciate Marty’s attitude–there is caring there for Phil and respect. He is, by the way, a very different Phil than I knew in the 50’s. He mellowed. He also was trained in the “light touch” for heavy cases and it shows in his gentleness.

      Pat Krenik

      • martyrathbun09

        Small world; Hayakawa lived next door to my family when I was very young. His daughter was one of my first friends.

      • Sorry, Pat. That story sounds like something completely made up by the church. Where did you get it?

        From wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S._I._Hayakawa

        “Samuel Ichiye Hayakawa (July 18, 1906 – February 27, 1992) was a Canadian-born American academic and political figure of Japanese ancestry. He was an English professor, and served as president of San Francisco State University and then as United States Senator from California from 1977 to 1983. Born in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, he was educated in the public schools of Calgary, Alberta and Winnipeg, Manitoba and received an undergraduate degree from the University of Manitoba in 1927 and graduate degrees in English from McGill University in 1928 and the University of Wisconsin–Madison in 1935.”

        Hubbard did not go to those schools. Nor is there anything to suggest he ever had occasion to room with S.I. Hayakawa.

        One more reason why it is important to accurately report and reflect upone the true history of hubbard and the church and not merely repeat the old lies used to comfort the faithful.

        • Mark, I also have the data from a trustful source that they where the roommates. There is even written evidence to that.

          • Even if Hiyakawa had attended GWU (which I can’t find any evidence of in his online bios), if he did so at the same time as Hubbard it would have been two years into his PhD. It would be extremely unusual for a PhD student to be put in a room with a freshman.

      • The “falling out” that Hubbard had with Hayakawa did not necessarily result from their having met. The review that Hayakawa wrote of Dianetics in “Etc.”, an academic journal of general semantics was brutal, to say the least. It can be found here: http://www.lisamcpherson.org/hayakawa.htm.

  8. When I wrote,”Phil Spickler is a mensch, though truth be told I had, as a true believer of long duration, a tough time confronting what he had to say.” I wasn’t just referring to this video. I’ve watched several of them, though not all. This one I hadn’t seen.

  9. Marty, thanks for giving Phil this additional forum. I’ve been enjoying his videos for a while now.

  10. Hallelujah! Thank you, Marty! The bridge is being spun between the old-timers and the new Indies! I would like to see the KSW crowd, Free Scientologists, Independent Scientologists, Freezoners and Ron’s Orgers all totally united as simply Scientologists. The CoS Scientologists and SO members also belong in that union but they are unreachable at this time. There is no Truth in separatism and exclusion as these things don’t even exist, they are an illusion, a dramatization. The Theta universe, the Physical universe, all the postulates that work, God — these are all expressions of infinity, i.e, they are all-inclusive. So lets all get included!

    • HEER HEER! AMEN!!

    • Here here Michael, but lest we forget the dramatizations and criminal acts are quite real too. The CoS flying monkeys are no where near a part of us.

      • Alaska Ron, you speak righteously. Well, I don’t know about you but I and a bunch of others on this blog and Marty–we had all been flying monkeys before. Were we not Scientologists? Could you clarify how they are not a part of your dynamics?

    • “I would like to see the KSW crowd, Free Scientologists, Independent Scientologists, Freezoners and Ron’s Orgers all totally united as simply Scientologists.”

      I hear you brother!

      I wonder if I might offer my own wish without taking anything away from yours…

      I would like to see the KSW crowd, Free Scientologists, Independent Scientologists, Freezoners and Ron’s Orgers all totally united as simply…

      Themselves.

      Free and able to walk this earth following their true calling and leaving the world a better place for having so walked.

      😊

  11. I am going to have to read the book General Semantics.

  12. “It is critical for growth and transcendence to understand that the technologies of Dianetics and Scientology were evolved out 10,000 years of evolution in thought that preceded them.” One point of view.

    “It is useful for growth and transcendence to understand that the technologies of Dianetics and Scientology were evolved out 10,000 years of evolution in thought that preceded them.” Another (2nd) point of view.

    Being critical and being useful are not equal. And utility trumps emotion in spiritual affairs. At least as a second possibility.

    Larry

    ps: excellent OP and thread. I appreciate it. And thank you.

  13. Phil was my auditor on Power in 1969 at ASHO, and was one of the 2 best auditors I ever had.

    After watching this video, the question I have for Phil or anyone else who knows, is what caused LRH to change from the early “good” Ron to the later “mean dictator” he became? That would be getting to the bottom of the actual 3rd dynamic engram we still suffer from.

    • I think the answer to this question could be found only by Ron within himself, We and even the witnesses can only guess. It might be what Phil talks about it in the video “Help and Admiration are the keys” in the part 4 “What happened to Hubbard in 1958 that never got handled” http://community.freezone-tech.info/phil-spickler/2010/12/29/phil-spickler-talk-on-dec-18th-2010/

      • If I may…

        Firstly though… Hi Tatiana… Thank you for being here and doing what you have…😊

        I would suggest that what Phil describes is a real life tragedy but to my mind the experience of it does not explain why he subsequently behaved the way he did and ultimately left this world with his legacy destined for further tragedy in the hands of a spiritually dead person.

        The is a reason beyond what Phil describes in my view. When I finally figured it out to my own satisifaction everything fell into place. And I do mean EVERYTHING.

        • I understand what you are saying, thank you for sharing! And I am curious to know more what you have to say about it I also have my explanation or better to call it understanding of the universe that explains lots of things by placing (or using the word Phil used to describe the process – mapping) them in order and in perspective in general. Applied to a particular situation or person, it helps to gain understanding in that particular area. Though I don’t have great knowledge of it in details, I have a good sense of an arrangement of it’s parts. As if my vision was out of focus, but enough to get an idea of a sight. I think ability to perceive should be limited (or monitored to safeguard) by the ability to handle and control the area one is aware of. As for me, I feel I get more that I can handle. Which is fine, it is just a potential for farther development. :)
          I’d love to exchange the ideas and viewpoints with people on different subjects, including this one. But I am not sure that it would be appropriate place and form for that – here, in comments, on Marty’s blog.

          • Indeed.

            I have no doubt we’ll get to do just that at a more appropriate time and place.

            For now though I am very much enjoying this blog and all that you, Phil and Marty have been kind enough to share…😊

    • martyrathbun09

      That is a major focus of my next book, probably out in May.

    • I can’t answer it for you but… If I may… When I answered it for myself… Well… Night turned to day and my life has never been the same since… Expontentially growing every day.

      As a someone who wanted to answer that question desperately for sooo many years I do know how important it is to keep going until you do indeed answer it.

      For me it was as complex as it was simple.

      Good luck and don’t give up.

      😊

      • C’mon, Chris, don’t just tease us. What was your realization?

        • I must apologise. I hate being “teased” as you put it. Not my intention at all.

          I merely wanted to acknowledge your obvious insight into the importance of that question as I have experienced the same.

          I truly believe that my journey and my answers are only of value to myself and that to try and “convince others” is not only misguided but can in fact be harmful at times.

          The sweetest of victories are the ones won by oneself with one’s own efforts. To that end I can only say that if you want the answer to that question you will find it.

          Marty has done so much to offer up his findings I doubt I can add much of any significance. Saying that I think he has alluded to penning more on this particular subject in his next book.

          I look forward to reading it as I hope you do to.

          If you want to discuss things further off this blog by all means ask Marty for my details and if he is comfortable passing them on I am happy for him to do so…😊

          • Yep.

            You are of course right.

            Mine was perhaps a digression of your original comment.

            But seeing as we’re here…😉

            You mentioned “Their dramatizations win out”… Spot on observation without a doubt.

            You then mention a serious of dramatizations along the line of “whole-track religious incidents”.

            Now. If I’m wrong about your point here ignore the rest of this but… Here’s a question.

            What if Hubbard, DM, etc where not dramatising “Religious/power/messiah aberrations”?

            For most of my life I have heard a rather silly phrase banded about when someone was acting out, reacting inappropriately at work, etc… The phrase was; “Jeez, did your mother never hug you or what”?

            Now… Silly ignorant comment as that is I took the time to find out where it comes from.

            It is entirely personal to me but my conclusions as to why Hubbard did what he did, I believe, have for more to do with what occurred in his own lifetime than on the “whole track” (religious or otherwise). And, again, for me, why so many scientologists behave the way they do lies in the legacy he left them with.

            It’s just an offering. I wouldn’t dare impose this line of questioning on anyone but if it is of interest I would say that any effort spent investigating it would not be wasted.

          • A secret? Wow! Whats the point of having a secret if you can’t even tell the whole blog about it\? You figured out for yourself why LRH turned. I have my own idea too. We are all the sum total of our postulates up to that point. The problem is always in wrong postulates. In this case, I think, LRH thought too much in the direction of what he DIDN’T want happen, thats too NEGATIVE. He fought AGAINST some things too much, he was working out too much how to correct the wrongs organizationaly and in auditing. Those are WRONG postulates. When you postulate something you don’t want, you still get it, you get what you don’t want. The subject of postulates, their true energetic nature, their mechanics, the way they work is not adequately covered in Scientology. That is what got him, I think, and that is the major weakness of Scientology. It is way too dedicated to HOW of things and even that is almost all for negative gain. Too much NEGATIVE and LRH who WAS SCientology, represents that. Too radical?

            • Yep, I agree. I would describe it as his simply being unable to “be wrong” at a critical juncture of his journey and that continuing exponentially from there on.

              It’s my own view of course but I find the timing of his penning the reference “You can be Right” not the least bit “coincidental”.

              No secret though. Just hate spelling things out for others when it is only my opinion. It’s infinitely more important that one figures out answers to questions as significant as this one oneself.

              In my opinion…😊

    • You never cease to amaze me! I had no idea Phil audited you on power!

  14. Marty this is totally off topic and you can ignore it if
    you like, but I keep looking at the family picture at the
    top of your blog and I really don’t think the picture of
    Mosey is a good one – I have seen beautiful
    pictures of her on your blog and the one above does
    not do her justice.

    • Every now and then I read a comment that says more about the commenter than the comment itself.

      I’ll assume you meant well but… Really?

    • Dear Mosey, if you have read the above comment, please read mine too. I look at the mentioned picture and see a presentation of a beautiful being you are. I love the smiling, radiant with kindness eyes that I see, the healthy glowing skin, and the way you all embrace each other united in one family. And if I was to criticize the picture, I would say “Where is the cat?!”

      • Yea, looks like a nice Christmas Hollidays Picture.
        Soon comes the Easter bunny. :-)

      • YES! Just add the cat. Mosey is utterly beautiful and Marty cleans up OK.

      • Mosey & Marty, this was not an appropriate comment and I am sorry. I only meant that Mosey is very beautiful and I had seen that in other photo’s & video. I have great admiration for both Mosey and Marty for all the sacrifices they have made and all they have done for everybody.

      • LOL! I am also a cat lover. So where is the cat!? ;) Monique, your pic on this site is beautiful!…… But not to slam Heather……. she was complimenting you on something that she perceived. Hey, if we all look back on our life track, can’t we all find a situation where we gave an honest compliment that also could have been received in a negative way?

        • Indeed. No judgement needed here. Heather meant well, I’m sure everyone knows that. And of course we all love Mosey regardless of the photo competition.

          But wouldn’t it be nice if every time we “Mis-communicated” something we then learned from that the reason we did so. I do this all the time. And I learn from it every time. Hence my question to Heather. Again, no judgement, just suggesting Heather ask why she felt the need to “help” Mosey with a photo choice that she (I think we can all agree) was in complete control of making.

          Anyway… Maybe too deep given the matter at hand?

          If so please ignore and carry on with the next comment…😊

      • Yes, where is the cat?????

  15. Thanks Marty, very fine video (as was yours the other day, by the way). Of course, Phil Spickler was a very famous person in Scientology for so many years, and although I was involved in the CoS for over 35 years, I never had the pleasure of meeting him. Didn’t even know what he looked like. So now it is great to have the benefit benefit of his many videos. Thank you Tatiana.

    A shame that the CoS has discarded all the wisdom of Phil, you, Karen DLC, myself and so many other folks who have decades of practical experience and success in Scientology. Maybe all for the best though for the next stage of Scientology, such as it will be.

    Really no good reason for Ron not to have actively through the years given credit to others, as the complete package of auditing processes and procedures was indeed very new and original as put together by LRH. It would not have diminished his own new contributions at all to have done this. Heck, just the insistence on running each process to an EP and keeping in the Auditor’s Code were very original and wonderful ideas.

  16. One quick comment on your video of the other day. Even with all the bloated policy, and all of the yang, you know, there WAS a saving grace that COULD have made it all palatable and even sometimes fun (as it was on occasion in the 70s) and that secret ingredient is ……. ARC. If done with a light hearted high tone level (affinity at cheerfulness or above), a course supe can get folks through clay demos on all 40 plus items on the dev-t summary lists and even have a good time doing it. An exec could do the same with thursdays at 2 or high targets, etc High tone level, games, really acklnowledging others, having compassion, caring about them, MAKING SURE THEY WIN AND GET THROUGH THINGS, etc etc etc You can be tough as nails on your demand and flunk folks a lot, IF, you care about them and make DAMN sure they get through the drill or process or course beaming. And yes, it can be a LOT of fun too!

    But the militaristic, cold as steel tone levels .. ,, I really don’t think though you can have a high toned game when ESSENTIAL PARTS of that game are composed of threats, force and punishment. I’ll add to that a complete mis-alignment in regards to MEST (continual forceful demands for money, which is a MEST game from start to finish).

    So, though I think the Miscavige CoS is quite incapable of doing the ARC dance as above, it IS an option and one that COULD have been chosen. Every person who chooses to disconnect still has a choice to remain in ARC. You can add the Yin by just the way you communicate.

    • Indeed.

      I would agree accept that those who don’t “chose to use ARC” (or love, embrace their yin, etc) are behaving in such a manner for a reason.

      I disagree that you can simply “chose ARC” like you can the right screw driver.

      Equally I contend that every soul on this earth has all the “ARC” (Love, Yin, etc) they could ever need within them and enough to spare for all around. Even Miscavige. It’s in there. But why is it buried so?

      How can so many study the “mechanics” of communication as laid out by the “first man to lay out the only truly workable technology for improving one’s lot in life” and yet be incapable of communicating to a vast section of the human race (Journalists, psychologists, ex-scn’s not “with the program” and those who HCO has deemed worthy of a “Non-Enturb order” or “SP Declare”, etc, etc) and with those they are “allowed” to connect with they “communicate” with no connection at all?

      There is a reason why Hubbard left such a an ironic and, some would say, hypocritical legacy.

      And like he so often said “When in doubt, go back to source” (well… Paraphrased of course)… But that is exactly what I did. I understand why Hubbard did all he did.

      For me he was not a madman or a genius. Not “just a man” or a god. What he “was” is irrelevant. What he “did” is everything. And in his actions are the clues to his motives and in turn the clues to where those motives comes from.

      But I digress.

      Yes… Use “ARC”… It is infinitely more powerful than “command intention”… But I would not fool yourself that it is such a simple choice for all. No one “wants” to be an asshole. No wants to be hated or disrespected. But their are many who are. And many still who put Hubbard in that same camp dispite his codification of “ARC”.

      You have to ask yourself why.

      • Chris, of course I dont really have the “for sure” answer to your “how” question above. My own opinion is that the “case” part for most folks goes deeper than whatever understanding they have. That is to say, their dramatizations win out. Frankly, I think that’s what happened to Ron. And I think that is what has happened to many in the CoS. Ron dramatized the whole “messiah” thing – being Buddha, the Commodore, “Source”, anything that conflicts with his ideas is “false data”, etc etc etc And others in the CoS have dramatized past religious insanities, whether that be Miscavige or Heber. Maybe that was inevitable. In any case, going forward, I think the best policy is to as much as possible, be aware of being aware, and also as much as possible, to direct one’s understanding and one’s actions toward folks coming UP tone and doing well, rather than the opposite effect (such as regging someone for 10 intensives of sec checks, which they get as they are in fear of losoing their family, friends and job).

  17. Science and Sanity and General Semantics = next on my list of must-reads.

    I come to this blog to feed my mind. Thank you, Marty, thank you, all.:)

    • martyrathbun09

      To be clear, I am not recommending Science and Sanity – it is a monstrous, tedious piece of work.

      • A couple of very good books that boil General Semantics down into more digestible form:

        “The Tyranny of Words” by Stuart Chase (1938)

        “Drive Yourself Sane” by Susan Presley Kadish and Bruce Kadish (2010)

  18. And thank you, Phil Spickler!!

  19. This actually lend credence to Dianetics and Scientology. A true science is one that evolves. One person builds and expands upon the work of others.

  20. Marty,
    Haven’t had a chance yet to watch Phil Spickler’s videos, but I am intrigued and fascinated with the data you present. I certainly remember references to Korzybski. From your summary of his tome, I must agree that Korzybski’s theses were foundational for LRH’s own hypotheses on Dianetics and Scientology. No problem with that, though, and it doesn’t lessen my respect and appreciation and gratitude for Ron. Keeps things real, actually.

    Korzybski’s work sounds interesting and even important. Honestly, though, it would be impossible for me to tackle right now, so I appreciate your sharing this not so small bit of insight.
    Leonore

  21. One more morsel of thought… if there had been no Phil Spickler – Scientologist, mission holder, opinion leader, straddler of two worlds – there would likely have been no Mimi Spickler, Scientologist, and thus no Tom Cruise, Scientologist, n’est-ce pas?

  22. Credit where credit’s due :D
    Phil’s videos on HELP are a must must see too.
    Wonderful acknowledgement of a great man.

  23. For all to examine – the Korzybski and Hubbard primary research document (excerpts):

    SCIENTOLOGY, defined, t. 53, p. 37 ; is new, t. 60, p. 38 ; of Language and
    of the Universe, t. 69-81, pp. 44-51 ; t. 130, p. 96 (Table) ; OSKI, 1. 157,
    p. 126 ; Universological, a third Abstract Science, t. 168, p. 141 ; Uni-
    versological, asserts the supremacy of Spirit over Matter, of The Ab-
    stract over The Concrete, etc., 1. 175, p. 146 ; final triumph of, what will
    be, t. 198, p. 165 ; t. 210, p. 173 ; named, Tables, Nos. 9, 10, 11, t. 211-
    213, p. 174.

    SCIENTOLOGY, the Science of the Scientismus, or of that Secondary De-
    partment of Being, or Stage of Evolution, in which SCIENTISM, the
    Spirit or Principle of Science (or of that which is analogous with Science)
    preponderates strict, legal, and law-abiding ; FORMAL, regular; character-
    ized by straight ness, accuracy, and adjustment ; as of Straight Lines,
    Parallelisms, Rectangular ities, Squares, Cubes, etc. (See Index.)

    SCIENTISMUS, the Domain or Realm of Being, Evolution, or Progress, in
    which Scientism, the Spirit or Principle of Science, or of that which is Cog-
    nate or Analogical with Science, predominates or prevails.

    SCIENTISM, the Spirit or Principle of Science regular, exact, precise,
    etc.

    58. SCIENTOLOGY, is, on the contrary, that Branch
    or Aspect of Univer’sology in which the Universe is
    considered and treated as consecutively and logically
    evolved from the Three Abstract Universal Principles
    above specified (2, 45), related to the Three Primary
    Numbers. It is, in other words, the Logical and
    Mathematical Evolution of Being universally, from
    the Primordial Categories or Basis-Thoughts of
    Being. Scientology is therefore Universology devel-
    oped in the spirit of the Exact Sciences, and is wholly
    new in kind. It is the Core or Centre and the most
    distinctive Department of Universology, that in which
    the discovery of this New Universal Science mainly
    consists ; but it is proportionally less popular, in
    character, and more remote from old and existing
    scientific ideas.

    59. ARTOLOGY is that Branch or Aspect of the
    Science of the Universe in which the somewhat
    popular truths of Naturology and the new and more
    metaphysical truths of Scientology are, as it were,
    translated or modulated into each other, or, in other
    words, reconciled and married in the Elaborated and
    Completed Grand Cosmos or Total Universe of
    Being. There is, therefore, in this Department, Com-
    promise, Concession, or, in a word, AUTISTIC MODIFI-
    CATION. (B. O. t. 515.) Art is not so much the Art-
    products, or Objects of Art in themselves, although
    they are representative, but these Art-products in
    the act of being produced ; whence it is Evolution or
    Movement, or, in other words, Creation in Progress
    or Procedure what the Philosophers have technically
    denominated ” The Becoming.”

    60. Scientology is new, and remote from the popu-
    lar apprehension, alike of the learned and unlearned
    world. Artology, depending, as it does, for one of
    its factors, upon Scientology, is, Consequently, also
    new. Nat-urology, atone, answers to the whole scope
    of the Sciences as they have hitherto been cultivated and
    developed, and furnishes, therefore, the NATURAL Sams
    of the New Science. This, while it is, in a sense,
    popular, and closely related to the Natural S’ia/ce* as
    they are already studied and understood in the
    world, still, is not, in its Universological sense, mervhj
    the Aggregate of those Sciences, as they noiv stand in
    t]& minds of the Learned. It is, on the contrary, the
    whole body of those Sciences as re-cast and re-consti-
    tuted, Universologically, and by a Reflect of Exactifi-
    cation cast from Scientology, (the Sun and Centre of
    Universology), upon this Primitive and naturally In-
    exact Domain. The method, even here, is Analogical)
    and the result is to unify these primitive and fragment-
    ary Sciences by bringing them under the operation of
    that Identity of Law which is demonstrated and ex-
    pressly elaborated in the Scientological Branch of
    Universology.

    69. The Scientology of Language begins, along
    with the Logical Order of the Encyclopedic or Observa-
    tional Method, IN THE ALPHABET, or strictly speaking,
    lack of the Alphabet, as will be shown presently, (79.)
    But in respect to the Alphabet, it begins in that More
    Rigorous Analysis, in that closer” discrimination and
    classification of the Elementary Sounds of Speech
    which is known as ” Phonetic Analysis.” It passes
    over also from the consideration of the Elements of
    the Single, or Individual Language to the comparison
    of the Elements of different Languages ; and hence,
    from the Monospherology to the Comparology of the
    subject (B. O. t. 403), and hence again, to the founding
    of One Universal and strictly Scientific Alphabet for the
    representation of all Languages.

    76. Linguo- Scientology or the Scientology of Lan-
    guage is the new and totally distinct department of
    the Science of Language, as above sketched, which
    arises out of the discovery of the Inherent Meanings
    of Sounds, and of the Scientific Law of their combi-
    nations, to constitute, basically, the Unitary and Per-
    fect Language of Mankind. Scientology, at large,
    holds the corresponding relation to the Total Uni-
    verse, and is the Back-lying and Regulative Abstract
    Science or Exactology of the Universe.

    Oski, (o-skee), Ideo-Morphology ; Science of Ideas
    as Types of things ; of the Platonic “Ideas;” of
    Type-Forms, in Science Richard Owen ; SCIENTO-PHILOSOPHY,
    Indeterminate SCIENTOLOGY, based
    on the Abstract Typical Representation of Principles
    and Laws ; Pure Scientific Theory.

    175. The Solution is that there are two kinds of
    Truth; one addressed to the Senses, and one to the
    Pure Reason. To discuss radically the claims, rank
    and offices of each of these hemispheres of truth
    would take us too much aside from the present pur-
    pose. It must suffice to indicate the issue, as the
    real issue in the conflict of all past thinking ; and as,
    again, especially, the rising issue of the hour. The so-
    called “”Positive Science” now triumphantly dominant
    in the Scientific World, stands, representatively, for
    the Supremacy of the Senses, of Observational Knowl-
    edge, of Materialistic Realities and Tendencies, or,
    in a word, of Nature over Science. Universological
    Scientology will re-assert and vindicate, on the con-
    trary, the Ruling Function and Legitimate Supremacy
    of the Abstract and Absolute Reason ; of Reflective
    and Analytical Truth ; of Spiritualistic Realities and
    Tendencies ; or, in a word, of Science proper ; of the
    Higher Positivism, over Nature or the crudity of the
    Primitive Appearances. The Theologica-Metaphysical
    First Essay of Thinking has yielded or is yielding, it
    is true, to Observational Positivism ; butUniversology,
    reverting from this surrender ; on higher grounds ;
    while standing on and affirming in-full that Observational
    Basis, (but merely as basis), reasserts the Superior
    Dominion of the PURE REASON ; the Metaphysics of
    Science itself.

    198. The ideas named by the preceding list of words
    are such that each one might bo delineated diagram-
    matically. It is at these Elementary Fountain-heads
    of Thought itself, that Language and the Domain of
    Form are demonstrated, by Universology, to be in-
    herently related, and, as it were, made identical. It
    will be the supreme triumph of Scientology, the Ex-
    act Branch of this new Universal Science, to exhibit
    in Diagram, and by illustrative object-teaching, all the
    Root-thoughts of which the Human Mind is capable,
    and of which the Root-words of the newly-discovered
    but inherently NATURAL Universal Language (Alwato)
    are merely the intrinsically appropriate vocal expres-
    sions or Namings. (69, 73.)

    2. SKISKI, SCIENTOLOGY.
    2. Alrski ; A Priori Order ; from the Universal
    to the Particular, or from Whole to Parts ;
    i. AKLSKI; A Posteriori Order; from Particulars
    to Universals, from Parts to Wholes, from
    Causes to Effects ;

    In the beginning was the WORD, and the Word was with God, and the Word
    was GOD. John 1 : 1. (Text 19, p. 17.)

    __________

    The primary synopsis of universology and Alwato :
    the new scientific universal language (1871)
    Andrews, Stephen Pearl, 1812-1886

    • I have no idea how to navigate this post.
      Define your stuff, your post is full of copies or excerpts but makes no attempt to clearly show sources.
      Korzybski and Hubbard primary research document < WTF is that???

      What book are you referring to, and show a link.

      What does (t.60 pg.38) mean??? TOME??? TEXT???

      Holy cow, you could have just written the whole thing in greek or algebraic symbols for all it communicates.

      See, here is the book:
      The primary synopsis of universology and Alwato :
      the new scientific universal language (1871)
      Andrews, Stephen Pearl, 1812-1886

      http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/71592#page/13/mode/1up

      It also contains OCR available.

      Thats called dev-t, just throwing data people have to word clear, hunt down, and generally waste time on understanding.

  24. Great tape, Marty!
    I think what Phil refers to, when he says that Ron “inverted” or came off integral thinking, is, when he built the bridge across that chasm we’re crossing.
    Now you have people doing, not thinking, and if one way of doing has been tested and found to work, Ron figured, that others recommending other ways to walk across that chasm, was a bad idea.
    That’s the problem he tried to solve with all the policy. Obviously we have not been able to apply it sanely and with understanding. Hopefully one day we will.

  25. Korzybski influenced a LOT of peoples work. Whenever I read a comment containing the phrase “A=A”, its hard not the think of the man himself.

    It interesting, when you think of a neurons fusing and knitting together, serving to streamline the brains functions, it becomes impossible to deny the effect language has on the brain, down to its very construction. The use of language to control and manipulate is well known, but when you go deeper, you see that we are almost primed to interpret it in this way.

    Staying aware of how language can be used is, I like to think, part of being properly ‘conscious’. If you pay incredibly close attention to the words being used in any situation, they tell you an awful lot about the person using them, and their own ‘internal map’, as Korzybski liked to say.

  26. I suspect that, considering where we are i.e., in an illusory universe and all connected in the mind or through our minds, it is not possible to not integrate or, to use a more contemporary term…remix. Everyone is continually and constantly remixing. Everything is a remix and L. Ron Hubbard, in whatever field he chose to work in, was, IMO, a remix genius!

    Kirby Ferguson in this short Ted Talk makes the case that everything is a remix
    and in his four part series, Everything is a Remix, (that actually begins on part 2) on YT he expands on the idea.

  27. Pope Francis (in his first few days as Pope) has warned cardinals of the ‘spiritual sickness of a self-referential Church”. Amazing ! I think this is ‘integration-speak’ put another way. The Pope has apparently also extended the hand of friendship to the Chief Rabbi of Rome. He also says he took the name Francis, because St Francis loved peace. In fact, one of St Francis’ greatest achievements was to broker peace between Muslims and Catholics, centuries ago. The world is being woken up to spirituality (and its many dimensions) – thanks to the likes of Marty and the new Pope. In many ways different. In many ways the same.

  28. Roger From Switzerland Thought

    I suggest we create an University, Marty will be the first Director of it as he’s doing incredidle research on the works of LRH and puts it into the right context. Such an University would have the purpose of what Marty is doing here. It would propablx result in many new applications of the tech in all area s of man and would be able to communicate about Scientology in a way that people will understand it and become common Knowledge ! :) :) :) :) :) :)

  29. The interviews with Phil are great wisdom.

    “Heads grow on necks and hair on heads will grow.
    How many heads have ears, I wish to know”
    Buddha Gotama

    GMW

  30. I had heard good things about these Phil Spickler videos but had not gotten around to watching any of them until now.

    Thanks to Tatiana and Phil for doing this and thanks to Marty for his introduction and posting one of Phil’s video’s here. Mission accomplished! My interest is piqued! I’m going to watch all of the rest of them as one of my top priorities now.

    I think that Marty is right on in this approach to truly learning and using Scientology. After all, how does one most effectively learn and use a subject? He studies and learns it in the correct sequence, of course. That sequence is: 1) Origin, Background and History. 2) Underlying Theory. 3) Practical Application, and 4) Practice.

    Of course one can and should Practice a subject as he is learning it, however I feel that in order to truly master a subject one must also gain a profound conceptual understanding of that subject, so much so that at some point one may come to understand that subject even more profoundly than the one who “wrote the book” on that subject – for the one who wrote the book on the subject inevitably based some of his work on the work of others who preceded him heretofore.

    Such an understanding would then enable one to move forward with the subject and safeguard its axioms as long as they remain conceptually and objectively valid.

    One of the keys to becoming a Scientologist, or “one who knows how to know” is the ability to think in concepts – regarding any subject. A most valuable ability indeed.

  31. Over the Rainbow

    Another great article which validates the tech. The more LRH’s sources are recognized and given their proper weighted importance, the more credibility the tech has and also protects it, in my opinion. LRH’s work in shaping this material into a “tech”, displays his subjective brilliance. You share a refreshing and exterior viewpoint, as opposed to the mental cloister which was life inside the church. This is excellent long range PR. You establish and reinforce the Bona Fides. This was and is the missing or downplayed foundation in the church and LRH’s story. Your absolutely doing and say the right things. Nice job.

  32. Marty,
    Great post, I too find Phil Spickler a wonderful a genuine being.

    Here are my thoughts about integration and religion:

    About 1600 hundred years ago a holocaust of the mind took place in the West.

    When the Christians finally took control of the Roman Empire, the accumulated wisdom of thousands of years of innumerable sources of Religion, Philosophy, Mysticism and freedom of thought abruptly ended.

    What was originally a syncretic effort by many Jewish Gnostics to integrate the isolated Hebrews into the general Hellenistic culture was hijacked by the most literalist, violent, power hungry fanatics that the Roman world ever encountered.

    These psychopaths were not alone, but were assisted by the many thousands of the worst of the roman population, uneducated, dumb, unable to penetrate the Mystery, they clung to the fanatic‘s new literal interpretation of the ancient Mysteries and a holocaust of reason ensued.

    For the Romans freedom of thought, belief and religion was not a protected right, enforced by law like we have now, but it was something natural to every human being. No laws were required to protect that which was universally manifest.

    The abundance of ancient sources of knowledge, mystical traditions and philosophical systems are almost too overwhelming to behold, but precisely that was the target the Christians sought to obliterate.

    And the violence, with which this newly syncretized “single source” was enforced, was directly proportional to the abundance and ubiquity of ancient spiritual sources.

    The obsession to artificially create one single source of knowledge, one Church, one religion, mandated the total wipe out of all extant sources, for if any person could point out to the obvious, it would bring down the entire house of cards.

    All comm lines to knowledge were cut, first within the Empire: All sources, books, colleges, libraries, and opinion leaders were wiped out.

    Then the lines to the outside world were severed, so the East was permanently lost to the West.

    Then every person line to general knowledge was cut, as universal education ended.

    Eventually only the high priests could read and write, the Bible was the sole source of all knowledge and the general population was permanently dumb down, no one was left with enough understanding to effectively oppose that evil cult.

    Thus a total monopoly on the spirit, the mind and knowledge was achieved and the Dark Ages reigned.

    Scientologists need to be aware of the religious history of this planet, as unlikely as the above scenario may look to them now, they would do well to remember that many of us, were born, died and were reborn again in that repulsive construct.

    Single source is a myth. A careful study of the PDC and The Factors Lectures will dispel that illusion.

    • martyrathbun09

      Brilliant, a very very brief history of everything.

    • Conan,
      Finished reading last week “The Gospel of Judas” published in 2006
      by National Geographic. This Gospel shows a different Jesus,
      one who laughs. It also shows quite clearly what you say above.
      In the Gospel of Judas. Judas is a ‘good guy’, the one who
      truly ‘knows’. At least some fragments of the early tradition
      survived.
      George M. White

      • Maybe he was a good guy,

        there are at least seven of them in the scriptures:
        1. Judas Maccabaeus.
        2. Judas Iscariot.
        3. Judas, brother of our Lord who wrote the Book of Jude.
        4. Judas (Son or Brother) of James.
        5. Judas Leader of a revolt against Rome.
        6. Judas surnamed Barsabass, a leading member of the church.
        7. Judas a man of Damascus with whom Paul lodged after his conversion.

        The one who betrayed Jesus was Judas Iscariot.

        • SKM,
          Thanks for the clarification.
          In the National Geographic book, Judas Iscariot is featured.
          In this scripture, Judas Iscariot betrays Jesus. It is
          viewed, however, as simply necessary to release Jesus.
          The text ends without a Resurrection. Judas Iscariot is
          portrayed as a Gnostic. I found the book very interesting.
          GMW

      • George,
        Nice. I think there are at least 30 known (by name) Gospels.
        The Gnostics were a veritable production machine of the Jesus Myths.

    • Thanks for posting this.

      I have a slightly different concept on the brief history you’ve posted but I can whole heartedly agree on much of what you said.

      Two things in particular;

      1. I too believe a single source is a myth. In fact I would go so far as to say there as many paths to truth as there are travellers.

      2. You are dead right, in my view, that the east was lost to the west. A number of poster’s have alluded to the “fact” that Hubbard was the first to map out a workable route. Whilst I cannot type with 100% certainty that he wasn’t I do know this. I have met way too many people that are mountains ahead of the “scientologists” that sought to “teach” me to know that he is most definitely NOT the only one. And in my journey to find out what got them where they are I invariable found myself looking at eastern wisdom from many a millennia ago. And few if any had but heard of Hubbard or scientology.

      Anyway… Thanks for the post. Enlightening and interesting.

  33. ” It is critical for growth and transcendence to understand that the technologies of Dianetics and Scientology were evolved out 10,000 years of evolution in thought that preceded them”

    A little flaw that obscures somehow Hubbard’s work for someone who’d like to analyse Scientology and the Tech is the fact there is no specific annotations in his written work acknowledging his sources as he was going along. Here and there there is a concept, one reads it and providing one has studied the material Hubbard got his idea from, one can say “aha, that’s from _____ , from that book” . Otherwise it seems like coming out of the blue, Hubbard made ideas he got from others really his own pushing that part of the study tech somehow to the extreme.

    All that is good – taking concepts from others and aligning those along one’s own stable data, discarding what doesn’t work enables progress and new forms, new styles, new disciplines. In that aspect Scientology as a subject is completely new. Mixing and borrowing – Mozart took from italian school and mixed it with the german one, Jazz is like a sponge, borrowing from african rythms and classical harmony etc. However, when improvising it’s often good to add here and there motifs phrases clichés from traditional styles to show clearly the roots. Otherwise one might lose the audience. Similarly it’s more academic to show one’s sources clearly, with a full bibliography referencong all books and works one got ideas from.

    Thus a small request – does someone have the precise list pf all books that were in Hubbard’s perspnal library? It would be very useful for some studies I make, I know this list does exist and I’d really love to see it appear somewhere ;-)

  34. All respect to the founding Scientologist, without them here there is less to say.

    All love/A

  35. Marty Rathbun I am so fucing proud of you,

  36. I love Marthy Ratbun, you are family now Marty, your wife too.

  37. Marty I am stunned about how you have grown and that you have tolerated my prescence on your board.

    I might get a girlfiend

  38. Back in the late 60s and 70s, Phil Spickler’s Palo Alto Mission was making significant inroads into society in the SF Bay Area. 49er quarterback John Brodie was voted the NFL’s MVP a year after being audited by Phil when he could no longer lift his are to throw a football after a car accident. From that numerous 49ers were involved to one degree or another in Scientology: Gene Washington, Stan Hindman, Cedric Hardman and some others. Phil had people from the Stanford Research Institute such as Hal Puthoff and Russell Targ on his lines. Psychiatrists such as Sarge Gerbode were part of the mission. Phil’s daughter Mimi later married Tom Cruise and got him going. The Palo Alto Mission was a real going concern.
    A couple years ago when I last checked it was operating out of an industrial garage type building next to a Cross Fit type of center. It would be interesting to see a video of Phil discussing the impact that his mission was creating back in the day.

    • martyrathbun09

      Phil is the Forest Gump of Scientology.

    • Dan, I remember a time when John Brodie came to a Friday night event to talk about his Scientology experiences. Ely Primorse arranged this. I was sitting next to Sarge Gerbode. As a long time 9r’s fan I was excited to see him. One thing I remember was he was really down to earth and said that he had and “issue” with OT3 but that got “totally handled when I completed OT5”
      The tie-in to the 9r’s: About a year or more later I got a call on a Saturday morning asking If I could come if to coach some TR’s on a “VIP”and it was urgent. Apparently I had a rep as a great coach and they had this person who, supposedly , finished TR0 the night before but need a stable win on bullbait and TR1-2 if possible. I came in about 9am and this fella was waiting. Black fella with dressed in a nice blue suit. They introduced me and said his name was Eddy. I sat down and I asked him how things were going. This guy was dressed in a nice blue suit. Very athletic and I noticed that he had a couple of Dobermin Pincers for arms. I mean the dude was buffed. Anyway I introduced myself and immediately noted that his TR0 was not in at all. I excused myself and went and talked with the Sup. I said he has not completed 0 and we needed to work that first. The Sup said, “well, he has a meeting this afternoon with his agent and the team attorneys and he needed to be prepped. Ok I said but I need to get his 0 n first and leave us alone. I went back and had Eddy review the TRO bulletin. I said let’s do a little more. We went for about an hour and several flunks and I felt he was much more comfortable and a bit of 2-way com we started on Bullbait. That was going ok but he was still a bit “solid”. I pushed some buttons and that was helping him with the purpose of TRO but he was still not being there comfortably. Then, all of a sudden I realized who he was. Eddy was a defensive back for the Niners and a couple of games back he got burned big time for two, or three touch downs against the Cowboys! Holy shit! I thought to myself. However, I was still being a coach here. So I found a button to get him off this solid, “confronting” me. But, If I pushed this “button” he could easily awaken those “Dobie’s” and reach across our comfortable 3 feet and launch my ass straight up and vertical thru the air conditioning vent above us. I went for it though. I told him I remembered the game and how he fucked up. At first he just looked down. I flunked him. Then he smiled. Flunk!. Then he line charged for about 5 minutes. He shook my hand, his agent came over to fetch him and they left the mission.

      • Great story, Ducksoup, and well written!

        • Thank you, Bob. Interesting that I read in the paper a couple of weeks after that Eddy Lewis was traded to the Detroit Lions. I kinda felt “my bad” cause I didn’t have the time to work with him and get him more into present time. Of course I couldn’t help him directly on covering WR’s. Really though it was fun back in the seventies. You studied and understood the tech and applied it to success. It’s been several years since I participated with the movement because I just saw a “watered down” version of Hubbards tech and after several queries I reckond it was some response to an eval and wound up being more about PR control than just “Read it-drill it and apply it to the pc/students beneifits.

  39. Wow! Great post. Another point is cognitive dissonance theory. This was first published in 1951 and later put in book form in 1956. IMHO the ARC triangle and cognitive dissonance theory are of the same cloth.

    ARC is “how to improve” while Cognitive Dissonance is about “What’s upsetting” a person.

    ARC Triangle Cognitive Dissonance Theory
    Communication = Thought
    Affinity = Emotion
    Reality = Behavior

    Ron has readily admitted that he’s “codified these things into a workable solution.” I think references to divining or ” immaculately conceiving” can be mistakenly taken as literally stating Ron implied that….and he certainly did in many cases, but he also made clear that his ideas were not all original.

    In marketing, we call this repurposing or repackaging something to make it more acceptable to the general public. This has been done throughout time. A scholarly sage or otherwise very intelligent person will make a statement of truth, and the it’s presented in a many different ways so the masses can understand it.

    At any rate, I have watched Phil’s videos in the past and they’re definitely worth tuning in.

    Brett

    • Indeed.

      Plagiarism as a word has had a very hard time of it ever since the “industrial revolution”.

      Is “wordest” a word I wonder…😄

  40. Googling Phil on You Tube should be required for all Independents. He is the clearest voice that knows the good bad and the ugly. This man knows the truth of Scientology more than anyone I have ever heard.

    It seems to me that the magic brilliance that was auditing and the amazing results got to his ego and he felt he had to protect this help at all cost.

    The cost was too much and he became that which he was trying to free people from.
    There is a certain sadness to it all as obviously Ron loved helping people.

    It is now up to the Independents to carry the banner of research and discovery. To help make happy free people by using the right tech with love and understanding.

    What I have experienced is that even in the Independents, some people still have the implant of attack attack, control control, only way better than.

    If the good of Scientology is to be accepted in society in general it has always been my view that Ron’s legacy MUST be directly confronted and not white washed.

    The dichotomy is: Ron saved lives and destroyed them. Those elements that are in writing that caused this horror to occur must be culled from the herd and placed in a historical context of when Ron went off the rails. And put it in the History of Scientology Museum.

    And if you can’t bring yourself to be critical of Ron, run the process: have a critical thought of Ron, Thank you. Have a critical thought of Ron thank you.

    It may help him, and it will certainly help the Independents to break the “insidious crime” of critical thinking. Then maybe Scientology can be accepted by the public as a good thing.

    The secret to Scientology’s success is well done hrs and a truthful history of the Old Man. His brutality and all.

    He’s not done here. He’ll be back. His Karma will demand it.

  41. I watched some of Phil’s videos last year and really enjoyed them. When I lived in LA in the 70’s he was doing great things. He is credible and real to me. I will definitely be sure to view the rest of the videos now.

  42. My non sequitar self. . non sequitur – a reply that has no relevance to what preceded it.

    Getting real real.

    • Um… Not THAT non-sequitur my friend.

      Besides I love non-sequitur… Some of the most beautiful truths can be found in those “non-sequitur” moments.

      Case in point. I finally got the concept of, and importance of, “balance” from the most unlikely of places.

      I’d explain but then I would truly be de-railing this post’s purpose.

      In any event thank you for sharing…. One thing though… It can also mend it… I’m referring to the chorus…😊

    • Thanks Oracle,

      One of my favorite old time songs! It’s being bookmarked right now…

  43. Getting back to John Brodie for a minute, I just read an excerpt from Brodie’s autobiography on Phil’s website. It is one of the absolute best success stories I have ever read. Phil did some amazing auditing on him. Amazing. Here is the link: http://community.freezone-tech.info/phil-spickler/from-the-book-open-field/
    Well worth reading. Talk about auditing the pc in front of you. Years later Ray Mithoff and John Eastment, the two most highly regarded tech terminals in all of Scientology, we sent to handle the great Joe Montana, who had a bad back problem. These two dicked around doing C/S-1s and other nonsense assists and finally Joe had to go to training camp and that was the end of that.
    Phil just took Brodie in session and started handling the pc in front of him.
    Who was more “standard”?
    Unquestionably, LRH would have said Phil was.
    On the set while filming the Pro TRs film, LRH was talking with Waldo one time and posed a hypothetical situation. He asked Waldo, “What if your pc had a blinding cognition about what had been ruining his business and he threw down the cans and raced out of the auditing room to go handle the situation. Would you stop him and take him to the Examiner or let him go?”
    Waldo answered that he would take him to the Examiner because that was the standard thing to do.
    “Flunk,” said LRH.

  44. Wendy Munro writes that
    “Pope Francis has warned cardinals of the ‘spiritual sickness of a self-referential Church Amazing ! ..This is ‘integration-speak’ put another way. The Pope has also extended the hand of friendship to the Chief Rabbi of Rome. He also says he took the name Francis, because St Francis loved peace. In fact, one of St Francis’ greatest achievements was to broker peace between Muslims and Catholics, centuries ago.”

    I was fortunate to live and work for one year in Sevilla, in the South of Spain, once a hub in the former Al-Andalus a medieval Muslim state in parts of what are today Spain, Portugal, Gibraltar, Andorra, and France.

    There was there a true, little-known golden age there once, one of the few known in the history of humanity. Muslims, Christians, and Jews lived in peace. Even though the government was Muslim, Jews and Christians were granted special status of “protected persons” And were allowed to thrive. This era is called the Cordoba Caliphate and is seen as the golden age of al-Andalus.

    Among European cities, Córdoba under the Caliphate overtook Constantinople as the largest and most prosperous city in Europe. Within the Islamic world, Córdoba became one of the leading cultural centres. The work of its most important philosophers and scientists (notably Abulcasis and Averroes) had a major influence on the intellectual life of medieval Europe.

    Muslims and non-Muslims often came from abroad to study in the famous libraries and universities of al-Andalus after the reconquest of Toledo in 1085. The most noted of these was Michael Scot (c. 1175 to c. 1235), who took the works of Ibn Rushd (“Averroes”) and Ibn Sina (“Avicenna”) to Italy. Poetry (Ibn Arabi) and music flourished. As Jewish thought in Babylonia declined, the tolerance of al-Andalus made it the new centre of Jewish intellectual endeavours. Poets and commentators like Judah Halevi (1086–1145) and Dunash ben Labrat (920–990) contributed to the cultural life of al-Andalus, but the area was even more important to the development of Jewish philosophy. A stream of Jewish philosophers, cross-fertilizing with Muslim philosophers culminated with the widely celebrated Jewish thinker of the Middle Ages, Maimonides. The 10th-century library of Al-Ḥakam II was one of the largest libraries in the world, housing at least 400,000 volumes. Throughout the period of al-Andalus civilization, Jews and Arabs lived in harmony: Jewish stonemasons have left their marks incised into many columns of the great Mosque at Córdoba. It was not until the fall of al-Andalus in 1492 that the incoming Christians banished the Jews from Spain.All this had a significant impact on the formation of the European Renaissance.

    On the economic side, prosperity reigned: crops produced using irrigation, along with food imported from the Middle East, provided Andalusī cities with an agricultural economic sector that was the most advanced in Europe by far.

    The dark side of human nature sadly came back and the Córdoba Caliphate collapsed during a ruinous civil war. The rest is history. Look at the sad state of conflict between the worlds of Muslims, Christians and Jews, compared to what happened then when they were united…

    History shows that whenever religions come together, intellectual and artistic renaissance surge, and prosperity manifests. Let’s learn from this!

    • martyrathbun09

      Indeed.

    • Averroes was rejected by muslim scholars because of his reasoning. Jews and Christians had to pay a poll tax for not being Muslim. No church or synagogue could be built taller than a Mosque. Google the word ‘jizya’ or ‘Dhimm’i.

      It puts a little cloud over the golden part of that age.

      And when the tax was paid, you had to walk in to pay it with your head down. Extortion and golden age doesn’t work for me.

      And google if the tax wasn’t paid, what the alternatives were.

      • An important note, Brian.

        Paul’s post above is skewed and inaccurate because it contains much omitted information. Read the article “Martyrs of Cordoba” with its scholarly citations on Wikipedia, and note the horrific consequences of not capitulating under the weight of the conquering Muslims and complying with sharia law. Christians were forced to convert to Islam through legal discrimmination and taxation.

        In brief, The Martyrs of Córdoba were forty-eight Christian martyrs living in the 9th century Muslim-ruled Al-Andalus who were beheaded for religious protest. There was no tolerance.

        I would love it if religions would come together, but let’s get real about this history. The Golden age was only golden for the caliphate rulers who lived on the taxes and servitude of others.
        Leonore

        • Spain was once the powerhouse of Europe because many of the royal houses sent their kids to the University of Salamanca to complete their education, giving Spain a unique position of influence. Most of the Jewish professors though fled during the Inquisition, and the great Salamanca school was no more.

          Spain went into a decline shortly after from which it has never recovered. I’m sure there is a lesson in there somewhere.

        • Thank yo Leonore,

          The Jizya was a tax on all non muslims. Here is what a Muslim theologian says of the jizya. Make up your own mind if this sounds like bunnies and flowers. For some reason some portions of history leave out this side of the “golden age of Andalusia.” I understand this theologian is toward the end of Islamic controlled Spain, but a study of both sides reveals both sides. Hey, funny how that happens:-)

          Al-Maghili, a fifteenth century Muslim theologian, explains:

          On the day of payment {of the jizya} they {the dhimmi} shall be assembled in a public place like the suq {place of commerce}. They should be standing there waiting in the lowest and dirtiest place. The acting officials representing the Law shall be placed above them and shall adopt a threatening attitude so that it seems to them, as well as to others, that our object is to degrade them by pretending to take their possessions. They will realize that we are doing them a favor in accepting from them the jizya and letting them go free. (Al-Maghili, quoted in Bat Ye’or, The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam, 361.)

    • Thank you very much for this.
      Religion can be such a beautiful thing.

    • Brilliant. Thank you for taking the time to post that.

      A close family friend is a historian and she has all but despaired at the lessons not learnt from this tiny planet’s oh so recent (in evolutionary terms) history.

      If we dropped all the emphasis on “business studies” that our educational authorities seem obsessed with and replaced it with history I truly believe the world would right itself within a single generation.

      Anyways… Thanks again for posting.

  45. I find it interesting that Phil mentioned the mindset of an “early” or in his words “initial” Ron and that of a “later” or “inverted” Ron and that there was an apparent difference in how LRH approached the understanding and acceptance of his technology, his written works, in regards to Dianetic and Scientology from a once lighter to a now (or the latter portion of Ron’s life) more heavy handed approach. Any comments on this?

  46. Overall: There seem to be a ne plus ultra conception of “THE ONLY ONE” rampant.

    Imagine the Dao starting out with, not “The name that can be given is not my eternal name…” but instead “There is only one source…”

    Take some breaths before rebuttal.

  47. gretchen dewire

    Its funny, the day befor you mentioned Phil, I just happened to be listening to one of his videos. He makes me smile just thinking about him.He is so relaxed and funny, youd just love to sit down and have a great conversation with him. He must be a wonderful auditor.

  48. One of those who see

    I have been reading here and listening to some of Phil’s videos too. Struggling with some old fixed ideas that are a little hard to let go of too. But I am winning.
    Here is what I think. I love that you posted Phil’s videos. Well done to Phil and Tatiana! Free thought and communication is the way in my opinion. How wonderful for Truth seekers, people looking to move up a little higher to be in comm. Early on, in my own journey outside the church, I listened to David Mayo’s talks and just loved them! There are those who ARCx with him because he left his AAC and took $$ from the Church. There are those who are not ARCX with him. Regardless, the man did wonderful things for the cause of freedom. I suggest his talks be listened too as well as Phil’s. There are thousands of US – meaning people once in the church. Probably more than are active in the Church now. ARC is the answer. The only problem I have with those who want to practice KSW – is when they want to do it with a hatchet! SRAs, Cut comm lines, disconnection etc… If you feel your way is the correct one, fine. Continue to communicate. Have enough respect for people to appeal to their reason.
    Integral to me means Scientology in comm with all the knowledge available. LRH was not into Ivory Towers.
    I think the wonderful, workable, magical parts of Scientology shine through. I also think LRH took some wrong turns in order to try and solve problems. OK. It’s only 63 years since Dianetics. So well done to all here for waking up so quickly and turning this around.
    I am also retaining my ARC for those good people still in the Church. And true Evil should be stopped any where it is found.

  49. gretchen dewire

    I did not get very far on the bridge, but I loved LRH. There was always such a difference in what I percieved he was saying and what I encountered at the orgs and even at flag. I always thouht it was me, some failing inwhat I observed. I am so grateful for you Marty and friends and Phil Spickler for showing me that I was not crazy. Keep it up

  50. The one video of Phil I saw randomely when I first started to research what was going on with the Church helped me get out of the initial confusion and therefore put some order in what exactly I was looking at and how to go about it.It was also emotional because his grief over what the Church had become matched my own and that felt good at a time when nobody else around seemed to feel anything in particular!or so it seemed..

  51. It sure feels like I’m learning something here. But no….on closer inspection, it’s not learning, it’s remembering. I’m remembering so much! Thank you one and all.

  52. A little something I remembered….from R&D Vol 7 (what evolution I don’t know), 13 Aug 51, The Purpose of Human Evaluation:

    “My wife would tear her hair out by the handfuls when she got bills for books – a bill for $150 for ‘A Discourse on the Mystical and Spiritual Principles of the Magi, rare’ – and she would say, ‘Gosh sakes!’

    ” ‘Well,’ I would say brightly, ‘I wrote a novelette last week and that brought in a hundred and forty dollars.’ There was a lot of money going out along this line, accumulating this material; I kept on studying and trying to figure it out.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s