Category Archives: Uncategorized

Scientology Indoctrination Abomination

There is a specific sector of scientology ‘technology’ that clearly betrays the subject’s hypnotic, mind controlling nature.

That is L. Ron Hubbard’s ‘False Data Stripping’ technology. In short, Hubbard dictates that one identify the source of any data that is getting in the road of a person adopting, with 100% certainty and exclusivity, any datum from scientology’s indoctrination.  Hubbard has the practitioner search for the data that conflicts with a datum Hubbard is attempting to get across.  The objective is to eradicate the earlier datum utterly so that only Hubbard’s datum remains unopposed.

First the practitioner and the recipient are indoctrinated to accept that holding conflicting data of any sort is a sort of aberration or mental dysfunction.  There is no concept of plurality or synthesis when it comes to understanding in scientology.  Please read this from the Hubbard indoctrination very carefully and try to think with the consequences of accepting it as Gospel.



There is a philosophic background as to why getting off false data on a subject works and why trying to teach a correct datum over a false datum on the subject does not work.  It is based on the Socratic thesis-antithesis-synthesis philosophical equation.

Socrates:     470 B.C. – 399 B.C.  A great Greek philosopher.

A thesis is a statement or assertion.

Antithesis:  opposing statement or assertion.

The Socratic equation is mainly used in debate where one debater asserts one thing and the other debater asserts the opposite.  It was the contention of Socrates and others that when two forces came into collision a new idea was born.  This was the use of the equation in logic and debate.  However, had they looked further, they would have seen that other effects were brought into play. It has very disastrous effects when it appears in the field of training.

Where the person has acquired a false thesis (or datum), the true datum you are trying to teach him becomes an antithesis.  The true datum comes back to smack up against the false datum he is hanging on to, as it is counter to it.

In other words, these two things collide, and neither one will then make sense to him.  At this point he can try to make sense out of the collision and form what is called a synthesis, or his wits simply don’t function.  (Synthesis:  a unified whole in which opposites, thesis and antithesis, are reconciled.)

So you wind up with the person either:

  1. attempting to use a false, unworkable synthesis he has formed, or
  2. his thinkingness locks up on the subject.

In either case you get an impossible-to-train, impossible-to-hat [train for one’s scientology job] scene.”


In other words, it is Ron’s way (to the exclusion of all other ways, including even your synthesis of his way with something related you may have learned earlier) or the highway.

Why could not ‘a’ above have been ‘attempting to use a remarkably new, fresh and workable synthesis he has formed?’

Because, in scientology there is only one way, and that is the way Ron Hubbard tells you it is.  Now, I can already hear the apologists claiming ‘well, damn that applies to critical stuff that could happen in an auditing (counseling) session.’   I have news.  This bulletin, and ‘technology’, was not developed because of any scientology counseling problems being encountered.  The bulletin begins by telling you that it applies to just about everything but scientology counseling:

“When a person is not functioning well on his post, on his job or in life, at the bottom of his difficulties…”

This bulletin in fact was issued one month before Hubbard’s wife Mary Sue and eight other top ranking scientologists went on trial for crimes committed in running the largest domestic espionage ring in the history of the United States of America. (Fittingly, scientology’s chief justification for the operation was to ‘correct false data in government files.’)  It was headline news across the world.  What ‘false data’ do you suppose all outposts of the scientology network were fixated on ‘stripping’ about that time?

Many outsiders have wondered how could such apparently intelligent, cheery – if sometimes overly focused – people as scientologists adopt such Hubbard sociopathy as forced labor re-education concentration camps and dictates to treat critics as ‘fair game’ for personal ruination.  I’ll tell you how I did.  I was heavily false data stripped.  I recall specifically some of those nasty ‘false datums’ that were stripped from my mind through ‘false data stripping technology’ to make me amenable to doing it Ron’s way:

Datum: ‘The best a man can do is to do the best he can do.’    Wrong.  The true scientology data is that if someone fails it is more likely that they are secretly engaged in criminal activity and have billions year old hidden evil intentions towards Ron and scientology, and that any failure should be interrogated intensively to uncover such.

Datum: ‘The most effective form of leadership is to lead by example.’  Wrong. The true scientology data is that it is far more effective, and necessary, to ‘muster bayonets’ as most people are ‘degraded beings’ and it is fruitful sometimes to ‘make Captain Bligh look like a Sunday school teacher.’

Datum: ‘When under attack it is best to take the high road.’  Wrong.  When under attack ‘ALWAYS ATTACK…The defense of ANYTHING is UNTENABLE…cause [the attacker’s] professional demise, or if possible, of course, ruin him utterly.’

These are actual examples.   They really shouldn’t be needed though to get the point across.  It is quite evident from the theory section above where all this might lead.

So thorough is Hubbard’s ‘tech’ for ferreting out and disappearing ‘false data’ that conflicts with his data, ironically, that those steps applied to one’s scientology experience could actually de-hypnotize someone from years of mind control programming.   That is provided that on the last step ‘Have the person study or restudy the true data on the subject you have been handling’ one did not impose on the person what it was he had to study.  In other words, free him from the implant and give him the freedom to start out at square zero to discover for himself the plurality of ideas (thesis, antithesis, synthesis, or otherwise) available in a free society.

Deconstructing Scientology

This is an excerpt from an upcoming book with the working title ‘Deconstructing Scientology.’  It is directed toward those who are considering the possibility of dipping a toe into dianetics or scientology study or participation.  My failures over the past three years in attempting to help former members graduate from the subject informed a whole new line of research into some of the darker arts that L. Ron Hubbard mastered to make people so apparently incapable/unwilling to learn.  


The most diabolically effective form of hypnotism would probably thoroughly convince the subject that it was impossible to hypnotize him.  It seems that only in that case could the idea be implanted that no awakening and de-hypnotism would ever be desirable or even possible. It would inculcate the opposite of the old adage applicable to any reform, or even education, activity that the first step to recovery or learning is the recognition that there is something to recover from or to learn.  If you were thoroughly convinced that you were more awake than virtually all of humanity, there is no chance that anyone could convince you to possibly take a look at waking up.

Imagine this scenario for a moment.  You take up a course of therapy and study that convinces you that if you dedicatedly address a particular category of subconscious incidents (those anchored in unconsciousness and pain) you will have erased your subconscious mind and all of its automatic associative responses.  The practice promises to render you virtually immune to sub conscious suggestion because you are permanently erasing that mind system or mechanism – in this case related as a tangible, factual entity – that makes you susceptible to such.  The practice of concentrated attention toward past experiences produces some feeling of catharsis, just as countless forms of psychotherapy, meditative and contemplative practice inevitably do.  Thus heartened, you assiduously follow instructions and devote a substantial amount of time and treasure to the endeavor.  The required sacrifice alone conditions you to fight to justify the experience so as to account for the years and resources devoted to it.

Each session of therapy leaves you that much more certain that you are that much less prone to sub conscious persuasions.  While following this course, you also take in a tremendous volume of opinions, prejudices, life-directing philosophy and mythologies from the source of the methodology that is making ‘erasure’ of your sub-conscious a reality.  You are fed a comprehensive, romantic and imaginative new universe view.  It is reinforced every time you encounter evidence against its plausibility. That is because your new universe view characterizes any information conflicting with your new universe view as evidence of the validity of the new universe view under attack by ‘flat-earther’ holders of traditional universe views.

You implicitly trust virtually all of your indoctrination because you find the therapy cathartic on some level and you are so grateful for being given the opportunity to forever be free of hidden persuasions directing your life.  Your experience is being validated and reinforced by sophisticated, organized positive encouragement all along the way.  That – combined with ample mythology adoption – elevates your cathartic experiences to levels of exhilaration.  You are led to believe that these feelings of exhilaration are super human states making you sort of an elite, special being.  You are literally told you are among the upper tenth of the upper ten percent of humanity, simply because of your participation.

The indoctrination becomes part of you because, consistent with the principles of conversational (or covert) hypnosis, you are given to believe you are assimilating it of your own volition.  You are repeatedly told that nothing you are being told is true unless you yourself accept it, so that analytically you are certain data cannot be being imposed upon you, but instead you are self-determinatedly evaluating its truth or falsity and use.

All the while all the data input is being poured into a sub-conscious that could not be opened wider for unfiltered receipt of information and suggestion.  That is because you are convinced that you have no sub-conscious, auto-associative mind.  As noted already you are given to believe you have ‘erased’ that hidden persuader.  Of course in reality you have as strong a sub-conscious as anyone else.  It is probably even far more hair-trigger given all the counseling you engaged in to take the edge off your incidents anchored in pain and unconsciousness. That you have a sub-conscious, auto-associative faculty is patent.  Otherwise, you would not be able to draw a breath.  You would not be able to direct a spoonful of corn flakes into your mouth in the morning.  You would last about five minutes on a busy city street before you walked in front of a bus or speeding car.  You would not be able to perform any of the myriad intuitive tasks human beings routinely carry out daily.

Just as you have come to believe that you are making trillions of analytical, conscious calculations every day in order to function, you consider all that you have been taught during your mental therapy devotion is analytically evaluated and understood wisdom.  Yet, by objective observation of people not wed to the same therapy your behavior is in many ways far more reactive than before you engaged in the therapy.  If such observations are shared with you, you will reactively, automatically associate such with sociopathic characteristics of the type who oppose the magic of erasure of the sub conscious, associative mind system.  That is part of your indoctrination.  Just as certain as you become that you are a member of the top one percent of humankind, you truly believe that such negative people are part of the sociopathic bottom 2 ½ percent of humanity. You will move away from such people and replace those bonds with people who have received and abide by your therapy and its indoctrinations.   Again, indications of the possibility of your having entered an elaborate trap are converted into reinforcements for the walls of that trap.

By now, you might recognize that what is being described here could be characterized as an extreme, exaggerated case of the mechanisms of fanaticism.   You might have noted some more subtle forms of the mechanics outlined so far as being present in the far-out fringes of political or religious isms.  Such indications are not difficult to recognize when there is some distance between you and the object of your observation.  By entering those mechanics into such a super personal, ultra subjective activity as psychotherapy that works with the deep recesses of your psyche, those mechanics are far more difficult, if not impossible, to detect.

Scientology Golden Ages

This essay does not stand alone.  It will not make much sense absent first reading the essay ‘Standard Scientology.’

There is a rationale behind David Miscavige coming out with ‘Golden-Age’ campaigns.

Consistent with the essay ‘Standard Scientology’ (and chapter 25 of Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior) there is every necessity to continually revise, re-revise, compile, re-compile and re-issue the words of L. Ron Hubbard.  And thus there is some logic behind the Golden Age of Tech, the Golden Age of Knowledge and the Golden Age of Tech II – the three major Miscavige directed re-compilations of Hubbard.  Whether you agree with the way the church of scientology went about it is an entirely different matter.  But, moaning about the fact of the re-compilation is about as sensible and effective as complaining about the weather.

The original Golden Age of Tech was done in response to virtually all of the established technical hierarchy of scientology (Class XIIs, mainly trained under Ron’s regime) being about as capable of applying scientology fundamentals as the leading electro-convulsive shock therapy psychiatrists were.  I know, I was there, having been the only one in scientology who I am aware of to train uninfluenced by the scientology technical hierarchy.  Nearly all of the Class XIIs at Flag could not read an e-meter, could not deliver a crisp command, and did not apply a single tool effectively for salvaging a session gone south (which occurred frequently).  Quite a few of them could not make it through an entire session without dozing at some point.  When put on a correction program directed by me personally, by personal observation the majority of the Class XIIs were by modern societal standards nut cases.  About 90 percent of them were incapable of correction.   One reason for that was that they were convinced that the only valid correction was to ‘blow’ the body thetan who suggested that they screw up in the first place.  “It was misownership; not my overt” was the common refrain; and once the body thetan was addressed, they exclaimed gleefully “it’s all handled now!”  Not only had they bought Hubbard’s space opera constructs literally, that universe view was running their lives helter skelter.  I have written earlier that had the XII’s remained in boot camp with me to learn communication training routines the hard way and how to naturally and accurately handle a meter I believed that 90% of the problem would have been solved. But, alas Miscavige’s and the Class XII heirarchy’s killing of Lisa McPherson ended that program.

Having had six years of experience watching what passes for ‘independent scientology’ outside the walls of the church, having deconstructed the subject through intensive study and practice, I have come to the conclusion that there was something even more fundamental than Training Routines and metering that needed to be addressed.   It is covered in the post ‘Standard Scientology.’   Virtually every Class XII in the church at the time – those at Flag, those on the ship and those at the International base, including Senior C/S International Ray Mithof – were empowered to squirrel to their hearts’ content by none other than L. Ron Hubbard.  They, much like some of the die-hard scientologists who continue to frequent this blog or have disconnected from (while claiming Miscavige is a squirrel for allegedly reinstating the disconnect policy) and declared war against me, could and did regularly come up with an LRH reference to justify just about every technical crime imaginable.  And they routinely committed them.  You doubt that statement?  Then how could L. Ron Hubbard’s Class XII technical hierarchy from his ‘Mecca of Technical Perfection’ effectively kidnap a non compos mentis woman out of the hospital, imprison her for seventeen days, and ultimately kill her?  Lisa McPherson is only one of many products of the scientology ‘Mecca of Technical Perfection’ that went mad under scientology processing there.  And she was not the only one to die in the process.  That is impossible in an environment that has not committed every other crime and misdemeanor routinely for quite some time.  Certainly, I have made a strong case for pinning primary responsibility to Miscavige for McPherson’s fate. Just as certainly, by statistics the frequency of suicides and psychotic breaks among Flag public drastically declined after Golden Age of Tech implementation.  Some might argue that that is due in large part to heightening of restrictions against people prone to psychotic breaks being allowed on church premises.  Well, that is as it ought to be.  Scientology is eminently unqualified to practice in the field of mental health that its founder sought to take over.

In either event, Miscavige attempted to solve the problem by bypassing the Class XIIs lack of responsibility and understanding by making everything rote for them.  He was precluded by Hubbard policy from doing the type of radical, fundamental compilation the subject requires. That is, compilation of what ‘to do’, instead of what ‘not to do’, and communication of it in plain English.  He tried all manner of tweaking in order to overcome the inherent confusion of millions of words of dianetics and scientology trial and error, none of which could ever be accurately labeled as ‘background’, ‘historic’, or ‘no longer used’ because of firm policy prohibiting that.  And so he attempted to covertly do so through the via of hundreds of packs of drills – heralded as the Golden Age of Tech.  That effort provided endless fodder for organization-spurned scientologists.  A wave of disaffected scientologists arose, seizing on the fact of organizational revision to justify their continuing loyalty to their own interpretations of Hubbard’s incomprehensible – conflicting evolutions and devolutions must all be accepted as Gospel – body of work.  Certainly, I exacerbated that prairie fire with my continuing loyalty to Ron Hubbard.

Miscavige became increasingly frustrated as his new Age resulted in continuation of declining delivery and income statistics.  At some point he apparently threw up his hands in disgust and decided ‘to hell with it, you all listen to everything Ron said and sort it out for yourselves.’  Hence, ‘Golden Age of Knowledge.’ Given scientology’s unalterable policies forbidding any sort of rational compilation, it was not a wholly irrational measure.  It took something like that for me – done on my own – to fully appreciate what is effective and what is not and what is destructive in the legacy Hubbard left behind.  But, I am not bound – as all those considering themselves scientologists are – to submit to allegedly more informed, or more ‘with Ron’ or more ‘ethical’ or more ordained scientologists’ arrogant enforcement of Hubbard’s other writings outlawing such understanding and subsequent application.  It should be noted that that arbitrary, arrogant policing priesthood too was created by Hubbard and invested with paramilitary powers.

I have yet to review the second major phase of re-compilation heralded as Golden Age of Tech II.   It is possible some of the thorough re-compilation I have noted here that is required was assayed with that. Given the continuing absurd lust for lucre apparent in scientology promotions and the terroristic and counter-productive ways in which the organization continues to spend the take, it does not seem very likely to me that the job was approached with a motivation approximating that required to do an effective job.  Moreover, as my next book will explain in some detail, the better the job in enforcing ‘standard’ is ultimately a better job at enforcing mental imprisonment.  In that regard, habitually lamenting the alleged colossal balls up of Golden Age Of Tech II is a disservice, keeping potentially recovering scientologists caught in the paralyzing cognitive dissonance that something can be done to salvage something that if done more ‘standardly’ will only serve to entrap more people.

Even if Golden Age of Tech II were effective, however, it is likely doomed in the longer track of scientology.  That is because if it was effectively done, some bands of true believer scientologists in the future will no doubt ‘discover’ the grotesque violation of fundamental scientology tenets prohibiting such bold compilations.  In fact, some have already figured out how to make a living by condemning it sight unseen; a practice that capitalizes on keeping potentially recovering scientologists locked into a cognitively dissonant state of false hope.  All of this continuous, finger-pointing nonsense is one of the many inevitable pitfalls of converting a purported ‘modern science of mental health’ psychotherapy into a religion.   It is ordained by a system whose most advanced levels teach that ‘standard technology’ can only be realized by ‘commanding’ acolytes and not by appealing to ‘reason.’   It too is inevitable given the facts spelled out in Standard Scientology.

My sincere advice to any people still caught in this vicious circle is to move on.


Excerpt from upcoming book Clear and Beyond:

The fundamental two-way communication process that all scientology methodology derives its workability from existed before L. Ron Hubbard ever wrote a word on the subject of the mind.  All of its components were developed, far beyond the degree of sophistication that scientology ever treated them, while Hubbard was still engaged in black magik rituals in Pasadena.  They were perhaps best explained and demonstrated in Rogerian client-centered therapy.  It would behoove scientologists to study of it.  The best place to start would be On Becoming a Person by Carl R. Rogers (Houghton Mifflin, 1961).

What made Hubbard popular initially with publication of Dianetics was his simplifying and codifying critical principles of client-centered therapy thus potentially opening the process of self-actualization to far more people.   Hubbard himself has acknowledged that Dianetics’ fad-like initial appeal rested largely on the promise of taking therapy out of the hands of professionals and putting it into the living rooms of lay people.  Much of that particular appeal was lost as dianetics and its progeny scientology became more mass-production oriented, expensive, exclusive, and cult-like.  Not surprisingly, those negative developments can be traced to dianetics’ and scientology’s attempts to short-cut vital client-centered therapy principles in the first place.

The more failure in producing a confident, independent-minded, self-determined client, the more Hubbard introduced personality control mechanisms.  That is probably the most cardinal of sins imaginable in actual client-centered philosophy.  With pressure to deliver on dianetics’ original promises of immediate and permanent results, the training of practitioners became an assembly-line like activity.  On the one hand that helped to thoroughly crash train some workable skills, while on the other hand it omitted a more contemplative, intellectual appreciation for the agencies at work that actually create a desired effect and the responsibilities that go with such practice.

For example, for all the effectiveness of the training regimens instituted to teach the skills of counselor communication in scientology, perhaps the most important client-centered counseling ability was not only omitted but the opposite was trained in.  That is congruence.  Congruence is the term Rogers uses to describe the counselor’s natural ability to fully and comfortably be himself without imposing himself upon the client.  Congruence is being oneself as a person and not attempting to conceal it by creation of a façade, even a null one as trained in by scientology.  By establishing congruence the client has the security of the sense of knowing exactly where the counselor stands at any given moment.  Without congruence he does not.  That is critical in establishing the conditions necessary for self-actualization.

In contrast, scientology drills congruence out of a counselor to the point he can become a blank personality or a synthetic one.  Scientologists are even shown films depicting how they should ‘act’ (the ‘beingness’ they are expected to assume) as an auditor.   That is in keeping with its teaching that the way to achieve something is as simple as be, do, have.  That is, figure out the personality traits of someone who has what you want, then act them out as you do as he or she does, and before you know it you will have the fruits you sought.  Sincerity and genuineness (read congruence) are not included in the equation.   Certainly there have been mavericks within scientology who have had the courage or sense to be themselves as counselors.  And their results reflected that.  But, every single one of them was eventually caught up with and either expelled from the ranks or converted into a play-acting automaton by scientology’s policing arms.  This presages later chapters where we analyze in more depth the manifold ways in which scientology creates conforming, compliant minds.

Reality Check

Folks who have been following the journey I have been sharing on this blog and in my books over the past five years might want to know something about a subject that I have not mentioned in quite some time.  I probably will not mention it again.  But, I interrupt the flow of the discourse here for this brief message in the interest of giving a balance to the picture of the direction that I have been sharing.  When events of 2015 are in full roar I don’t want people to get the idea that all I have written over the past two years was some sort of diversionary ruse.

I have practiced what I have been sharing.  If one seeks equanimity and expansion of awareness, I continue to recommend it.  But, you might want to know that I have also drawn from other traditions on longer term work.  Those disciplines understand that in order to increase the ability to confront sufficient to truly face the unknown, one must exercise proficiency in overcoming major sources of oppression.  It has to do with ascendency of power over force and the art and science of critical point analysis application.

Work along that line must necessarily not be broadcast for the foreseeable future.  Thus, none of what I refer to here has been disclosed anywhere, not even to my closest friends.  It has nothing to do with any current legal proceedings and is unrelated (as am I) to the scientology infotainment lampooning industry (whose main useful purpose is attention distraction).  If you hear rumors or ‘inside skinny’ about what this parallel work entails, you are hearing lies or the imagination of someone still caught in the scientology hallucinatory cause syndrome.

In the interim, I inform you that nothing about any of this is inconsistent with what I have written over the past two years.  Just as certainly, many spectators will be sure that is not the case when they witness that 2015 and 2016 make 2009 and 2010 look like child’s play.

Standard Scientology

Those who obsess on the motivator (object of victimhood attachment) about how David Miscavige is scientology’s problem because he keeps revising scientology are like dogs barking up the wrong tree.  There is a plain fact they are not coming to grips with.  Scientology will forever be altered, revised, re-revised, repackaged, re-organized, and re-compiled.  People on the outside have been at it as hard as scientology organization folk are on the inside.  It is inevitable.  That is not because misunderstood words, the reactive mind or body thetans will forever keep people confused and incapable of applying one-hundred percent scientology standard technology.   Nor will it be because of the unstated (except in confidential upper level secrets), but actually held, scientology belief that humankind can’t get it because humankind is inherently incapable of understanding.  Instead, scientology will continuously be revised because there is no such thing as standard scientology technology.  Like the substance of scientology itself, what constitutes the standard is wholly a subjective matter.

That fact is obvious if one can unlock himself from identifying with L. Ron Hubbard and his work and read the latter dispassionately.  That of course is impossible for those who vow from the outset of their studies – and stick with it all the way through – to the notion that Hubbard is infallible and examination of any comparative data is potentially lethal.  When one who can objectively study scientology does so – particularly when he has tested its methods through extensive practice – something becomes patently clear. That is by conservative estimate more than ninety (90) percent of everything Hubbard wrote and uttered on scientology and dianetics was about how wrong all those who attempted to apply it were.  It is mostly a running stream of consciousness  (albeit held together by a hard core, two-valued logic and persuasively conveyed by a convincing speaker and writer) record of assigning reasons why the promises in the book Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health were never realized and how they might yet be.   Highlighting that statement is Dianetics’ promise of full memory restoration in 1950 and Hubbard’s last ‘breakthrough’ (OT VIII) – as his 1986 dying declaration – promising to address the reason folk are apparently inherently amnesiacs.

Exacerbating the confusion is that many of the methods Ron educates his followers on as the mechanics intentionally used to control and damage the mind are simultaneously employed by him to do precisely that to his followers.  It is diabolical in that the follower having been educated by Ron on those mental entrapment techniques would then never guess they would be used on the follower.  You wind up with the curious phenomenon of apparently sincere people devoting their lives to vehemently defending their own entrapment.

There is another reason why the obvious is nearly impossible for a scientologist to see.  If there is one skill Hubbard had that perhaps outstripped all others it was his ability to always convincingly sound right while making others wrong.  That skill was exercised as consistently and as uncannily as a falling cat’s ability to land on its feet.  From before the publication of Dianetics, Ron Hubbard proved as immovable as a mountain on being criticized, corrected, or accepting even the most rational of input and advice. Just as consistently, he rained hell on anyone with the temerity to suggest holding his theories up to objective standards.   When he said or wrote something it was communicated convincingly and in an authoritative fashion.  For the next thirty-six years he evolved his subjects by trial and error.  But, the running track of that development was memorialized in a unique voice.  While the track altered and changed everything over and over because of unworkability found with that which was at first communicated as unalterable, absolute fact, the voice of those continuous alterations could admit of no error.  The matter is exacerbated by the fact that it is a ‘research and development’ record based exclusively on subjective standards.   With no objective scrutiny allowed and no accurate, honest assignation of error possible, all manner of erroneous yet authoritative data are driven home just as forcefully as correct ones.

The continuous backfilling that constitutes the bulk of scientology writing and lecturing is apparent in scientology training packs.  The student is not instructed simply on what he should do and why.  Instead, he reads bulletin after bulletin and listens to lecture after lecture of Hubbard talking about how people have misapplied or might misapply what he discovered.   The materials are a patchwork of Hubbard writings and lectures cherry-picked from different periods of time.  They make for a mix chock-full of contradictions.  Without having one’s intellectual honesty compromised by agreeing from the outset that Hubbard is infallible and all of his words are literal Gospel (that which is required in scientology training – along with the requirement to attribute every success to Ron and every failure to pesky humans and their inherent fallibility), all of this would be as obvious as the nose on your face.

Since all scientology courses begin with a warning that if anyone states that anything Hubbard wrote is ‘historical’, ‘background’, or ‘no longer used’ he will be promptly convicted of the crime TREASON, how does one cope with the miasma of contradictions?   Scientology instructors employ a ‘technology’ that has the student convince himself there are no contradictions.  It is so effective that scientology students do not graduate a course until they attest with certitude that everything makes consistent, perfect sense.  The firmness of that idea of certainty is verified by one component of a modern lie detector (the stress testing electropsychometer).  Highlighting this culture of hypocrisy, the cognitive dissonance creating course rooms – which eliminate any questioning, thinking or doubts – are called ‘Academies’ taken from the ancient Greek sites where liberal, critical philosophical thinking was once nurtured.

The net result of all this is that scientology is destined to always incite debate and internecine strife – no matter how enlightened and wise its leadership may be.  There can never be universal consensus on what constitutes ‘standard technology’ given the voice (noted above) scientology is written in and given its inalterable injunctions that that voice may not ever be questioned, interpreted, or clarified.   In a strict organizational setting, the debate goes on inside each individual’s head (until settled by an instilled, arrogant brand of cognitive dissonance) while attempting to keep up, lock-step of course, with management’s latest pronunciamentos on what constitutes ‘standard.’   In an independent setting it is a self-righteous war of words in which nobody can establish a clearly reasoned high ground.  To gain any traction in the debate requires one to progressively retreat further toward adopting Ron’s certain, swaggering and authoritative personality.

That is why bands of scientologists, whether in or out of the official organizations, will always rally around certain, swaggering, authoritative types of personalities – and promptly disperse when that catalyst is removed.   Sadly, but just as certainly, about the closest thing scientologists are going to find to that original L. Ron Hubbard package is David Miscavige.

About the only common denominator all brands of scientology share as something resembling a standard in practice is this: does the guy stay on board and continue paying?  If you have been led to believe that any viable brand of scientology is applying some more enlightened standard you have simply been led to believe yet another lie.  Why do you think that the only allegedly ‘expanding’ independent scientology outfits feature the addition of 47 advanced levels of auditing?  It is like Miscavige inventing the existence of OT Levels IX through XV and beyond, only seven times over.   What you get is power of choice in picking the duration of your addiction.

Those who make a living by trying to convince folks otherwise are profiting by playing on misplaced hopes.  It is a different harmonic of the same game that was played on people within.

There is a silver lining in all this.  In addition to whatever any individual may feel he might have picked up of use along the way in scientology,  there are a couple of assets that probably all scientologists can recognize they possess.  First, they can realize that they were well meaning and trusting to begin with; scientology doesn’t take very well on people without those virtues. Second, they can recognize that they have had the opportunity to hone the latter virtue (trust) by surviving the most intense graduate school of psychological hard knocks.

Back To The Middle

I take to heart the comments to my last post accusing me of casting too wide a net on the issue of whether one should trust a person wearing the scientology banner.  To the extent I offended some folks, I apologize.  So as to avoid such offense in the future I also provide here fair warning.  If the last post offended you, the next several probably will too.  If you want positive reinforcement for your faith, you will not find it here; but for possibly in the comments section where scientologists are free to provide their views with everyone else.  There is an evolution afoot that perhaps ought be shared with readers here.

Of late I have been asked by a number of journalists, documentarians and religious experts to explain any legitimate aspects of scientology.  Since the church responded to the revelations of the Truth Rundown series – and its progeny – by bunkering down and going incommunicado with such folks, I have sort of inherited some of their public affairs function by default. In the course of that odd twist of fate one repeated question became increasingly difficult for me to answer: whether I recommend scientology to the public at large.

My answer has evolved with my own experience and thoughts.  Ultimately, my answer is that I would not recommend to anyone that they get involved in scientology.  That is because having thoroughly deconstructed the subject I came to realize that its control and exploitation elements are so thoroughly embedded within the teachings of Hubbard as to make the journey more likely to be on-the-whole negative than positive.

Of course there are some stellar results that have been achieved by application of scientology.   But, those are contingent not only upon the person they are applied to but to a great extent by the instructors’ or counselors’ ability to inspire confidence.  In this context ‘confidence’ can be read almost synonymously with ‘faith.’   If – as in some spiritual and psychotherapeutic practices – that confidence or faith is acknowledged and imbued and nurtured for what it is within the client or supplicant, it more predictably leads toward salutary results.  But, scientology – adhered to as the ism it is – by design leads one in the opposite direction.

The raw statistics of scientology support my conclusion about whether it is worth the price one inevitably must pay for it (not just monetarily). David Miscavige (influenced, of course, by Hubbard advices on the subject) used to repeat ad nauseam to his public relations people whenever the media brought up a scientology abuse that they were to say words to the effect, ‘for every one who complains, I can bring you one thousand scientologists who swear by it.’  Having dispassionately ball-parked the numbers through thirty-five years of involvement with the subject,  I would say the truth is more on the order of for every one considering she was damaged from her experience  with scientology, scientology could probably match it with a die-hard true believer extolling its virtues.  Certainly, greater than 90% of people who have taken several courses or intensives (12 ½ hours each) of auditing in scientology have disconnected from scientology as an organization and membership body completely.   What percentage of them thought the good outweighed the bad or vice versa is anybody’s guess.  Given the extraordinary efforts scientology engages in to keep members aboard, and the draconian punishments it metes out upon any member or former member raising doubts or reservations, my guess is that the latter far outnumber the former.  Less than one thousand former members give much attention to on-line forums, blogs and other networks involving scientology at any given time.

By the numbers, it is apparent that scientologists are led to believe they and their subject are a lot more important than they in fact are to the world at large.

When I weigh that objective look against what scientology produces, both inside the official organizations and without, and with what I know about the depth of the embedded control and exploitation implantation within scientology, on balance I cannot with good conscious recommend it as a high percentage bet for anybody.

I have devoted the better part of six years to attempting to help the subject survive by elimination of its negative elements.  I concede that the experiment was a failure.  As much as independent scientologists accuse the organization (RTC , CSI, et al) of operating on judgmentalism, arrogance, utiltarianism over conscience, form over substance, and Hubbard-revisionism dressed up as Hubbard-literalism I have found all those shortcomings just as prevalent in the independent field as in the organizations. I hold no rancor for such folks – inside or out – to the extent they stay out of the grills of people who ask them to.  A dispassionate study traces those self-defeating qualities as stemming from Hubbard and his scientology works themselves.

I have found efforts over the past year and one half to help people graduate from the subject to not be very popular nor worth the effort that goes into doing so.  While some of what I have already worked on along that line may appear from time to time on this blog, the focus will veer more toward speaking to the general public – as opposed to the formers, the antis, and indies.  The blog continues to serve as a chronicle of my own journey guided by my conscience – for whatever that is worth – and you can expect it to tend toward speaking to the increasing percentage of audience who are unfamiliar with the subject.  It may well even tend toward unrelated subjects.  There are plenty other forums where positive reinforcement of existing anti, pro, indie, and ex scientology views can be had.  I hope for all of you that at some point in the not too distant future you will find your own comfortable, fulfilling middle path.

If you like that, you will probably love this: