The Psychopath Test

References:

Judgment

Sitting In Judgment

I am adding The Psychopath Test by Jon Ronson to my recommended reading list.   This short excerpt from What Is Wrong With Scientology explains why:

Ironically, perhaps the best way to understand the most fundamental flaw in the Scientology system of dealing with the influence of sociopaths is to read a book that touches on corporate Scientology’s vehement, costly protests against the alleged failure of the field of psychiatry to do the same.  In The Psychopath Test, Ronson chronicles a member of corporate Scientology’s Citizens Commission on Human Rights (a group established to “clean up the field of mental healing”) and his quest to free an allegedly falsely labeled psychopath from a United Kingdom mental institution.

Ronson becomes fascinated with the apparent terrible injustice of “Tony’s” (pseudonym) incarceration.  As Ronson researches the matter in greater depth, he comes to find the Bob Hare psychopath test, or checklist, rather rational and workable.  The more time Ronson spends with Tony, the more he begins to doubt the fellow’s sanity against the psychopath test.  Out of curiosity, Ronson puts the test to use on a businessman who is unrelated to the matter of Tony.  When he completes the analysis, Ronson shares his condemning findings with a fellow journalist.  His colleague points out that Ronson only spent a couple hours with the target, and perhaps his journalistic “skill” of catching a target out on lurid admissions, and his preconceived notions of guilt, played a part in his finding.  Ronson, in his honest and entertaining style, rides the rollercoaster of enthusiastic certainty to self-deprecating doubt in his own and others’ use of the psychopath test.

Ultimately, Ronson causes the reader to consider that while there is a tremendous, accurate compilation of information that helps us detect sociopathy, can any one of us be trusted with the power to judge and sentence anyone else against that information?  Are any of us worthy of the God-like power to condemn another to a life of quarantine and isolation?  Do we, in wielding such a powerful tool of knowledge, tend to take on the characteristics of the sociopath when we sit in judgment?

Ronson seems to wind up in much the same place L. Ron Hubbard did when he published this statement: “I have come to find that man cannot be trusted with justice.”  While Hubbard persevered and constructed an elaborate system of justice intended to overcome that fatal flaw of humankind, for whatever reason, his lack of trust was proved justified by his own creation.

Ultimately, though, L. Ron Hubbard said that the only guarantee that one would not wind up on the receiving end of a sociopath’s club was to understand how to identify one in the first place.  And that conclusion was echoed by Martha Stout.  The founder of Scientology and his long-time nemeses in the field of mental health ended up agreeing on one unifying principle: When it comes to the havoc others can wreak upon one’s life, the best protection is the truth – know it, and it shall set you free.

And so my recommended remedy in dealing with the very real problem of sociopathy, or the suppressive person, is as follows:

  • Learn for oneself how to evaluate the worthiness and value of one’s fellows.
  • Never forfeit your judgment to some authority, no matter how apparently wise and judicious, when it comes to judging the merits of others.
  • Strive to be worthy of the trust of those you care about.

 

139 responses to “The Psychopath Test

  1. Those last three bullet points are eminently quotable!

  2. Marty, your advice here is so simple and obviously the way things should be.

    If you abdicate your need to observe and assess the nature of others by letting an authority do it for you then you are eventually subject to manipulation by SPs that represent that authority. This happens repeatedly in history.

    • Can you find the wrongs ? I grabbed it from a Church site. But maybe it’s all good

      PERSONAL INTEGRITY
      BY L. RON HUBBARD

      What is true for you is what you have observed yourself. And when you lose that, you have lost everything.

      What is personal integrity? Personal integrity is knowing what you know. What you know is what you know and to have the courage to know and say what you have observed. And that is integrity and there is no other integrity.

      Of course, we can talk about honor, truth, nobility—all these things as esoteric terms. But I think they would all be covered very well if what we really observed was what we observed, that we took care to observe what we were observing, that we always observed to observe. And not necessarily maintaining a skeptical attitude, a critical attitude or an open mind—not necessarily maintaining these things at all—but certainly maintaining sufficient personal integrity and sufficient personal belief and confidence in self and courage that we can observe what we observe and say what we have observed.

      Nothing in Scientology is true for you unless you have observed it and it is true according to your observation.

      That is all.

      L. Ron Hubbard

      • Cat Daddy, I have a lot of personal integrity, I feel, I know, I am not boasting of this fact, I do. I was just recently watching some interviews done by the Shoah Foundation in Los Angeles, and several people were telling their stories of how they survived in Germany during the reign of Hitler even though they were Jewish. I couldn’t help bu recognize that many of these people’s emotional tone levels and experiences are very similar to many of the people that speak, sometimes on this blog and elsewhere of their activities after leaving the Sea Org and other parts of the RCS heirarchy. I am amazed. I think “God, worse than what took place could have happened to me!”. One woman in Auschwitz was strangled with her own bra by a Nazi guard in front of the other deportees at 2:00 a.m. because she screamed when the Nazi’s asked her to remove her clothes for delousing. I am glad I survived RCS and I am glad they survived too (the RCS Team I’ll call them). There is a lot of life and a lot of living left for a whole lot of people! Let’s make and keep our integrity tantamount in the game!🙂

      • And I have to laugh at this, because DM “The Father Of Scientology” is still back there in the “old org doing the 9 to 5 thing” experiencing the profound benefits LRH tech has had on him. Well, you know what I say? Good for you Davey! Good luck! Sounds like you really finally got somewhere in life I imagine!🙂 But the real point being that people like DM and including him give things like the word integrity a bad name, like as if it’s dishonest to have any!🙂 It’s beyond psychopathic in nature! To be real!🙂

      • Cat, I also think that essay expresses very fine ideas about how to live a better life. I do have to say though that coming from Ron, those words are empty ones for me because he didn’t live them. In fact, he heavily penalized others who attempted to live them. And he created and promoted a culture where others would not let others live them.

  3. From the moment I first read the PTS/SP tech my mind gravitated to the part about what “I” did or was doing that could be causing the problem. In the same vein I would think that taking time to find the sociopath/psychopath in others, while perhaps serving a good purpose so one does not get tripped up, can also help me find similar in myself and thus open the door to more Responsibility and Cause. There is nothing more pathetic, IMO, than a Victim valence. Which, of course, tells you right away that I too have had the pleasure of engaging in that darned activity.

    Who knows? IF more of us were taking the same time to look at what “we” were doing everytime we got our feathers ruffled we just might clean this planet up after all. It’s also interesting, to me that none of us do a solo number regardless of how we might think at times we are. We are each connected and influence our whole environment, knowingly or not, IMO. If we look at the guy we wish to label psycho and assigned ourselves as the Cause of it instead of hanging the guy out to dry all on his own, I wonder how things would turn out instead of the usual way of merely labeling him and throwing him away, whether that be done by shunning or drugging?

    So, I would take your three points Marty, and write as an addition this:
    ◾Learn for oneself how to evaluate your own worthiness and value so you can more easily find it in others
    ◾Never forfeit your judgment to some authority, no matter how apparently wise and judicious, when it comes to judging the merits of yourself and/or others.
    ◾Strive to be trustworthy and by your actions influence others to do same

    As usual Marty, an interesting subject you introduce that allows us to take a better look. Thank you.

    • Nice edits. Thank you.

    • Very well said.

      My own way of doing exactly what you have stated so elequently is practicing the art of “being wrong” and then growing from there.

      No matter how evil the other’s behaviour there is only one person that I can “control” (be cause over, influence, etc) and that is the guy staring back at me when I pass by a mirror.

      But very well said brother.

      😊

  4. Thank you for indicating the by-passed charge that I have had about the Scientology “justice system”, which I had trouble with for many years while in corporate Scientology. I thought my problem was with “Disconnection”, but the earlier frustration was with the incorrect labeling and the use of Black PR by individuals that created the atmosphere in which others felt it okay to sit in judgement of me. I would always get hit while in the process of helping my fellow man. I allowed this situation to destroy my life, sitting in introspection of the wrong indications. It was only after a long decompression period, that I realized that the labels that were placed upon me were not the right indication; and then free from those incorrect judgements, I was then able to use LRH’s Data Series, to find the correct problems and the correct solutions. I recently had the realization that when one adopts a WRONG WHY, or is introverted about a Wrong Why, one is then impeded in finding the RIGHT WHY, which then can be handled with the correct technology for that situation. This is especially true when it comes to a “label” about oneself. The wrong labeling and judgements from others make it very hard to confront and handle the REAL things that need to be corrected on ones life.

    I realized for myself that man cannot be trusted with justice, and that justice systems are easily perverted when someone with less than good intentions towards you, can enter incorrect data into that system, causing others to come up with wrong answers and wrong labels. LRH tried to enter safeguards into the system with policy letters about finding out the real truth before “labeling”, but my experience was these safeguards of correct investigation were not followed.

    The longer I was away from corporate Scientology and its “ethics and justice system” the better I felt. I now feel there is no personal problem that I cannot solve with the correct technology, whether that technology be Scientology tech or or some other technology. One’s mind has to be free to find the correct problem and the correct solution. A wrong condemnatory label only impedes this process.

    I believe one of LRH’s most amazing discoveries was detailed in his policy letter entitled “YOUR POSTAND LIFE”. An excerpt from this policy letter:
    “IF ONE KNOWS THE TECH OF HOW TO DO SOMETHING AND CAN DO IT, AND USES IT, HE CANNOT BE THE ADVERSE EFFECT OF IT”.

    I believe that the definiton of Scientology as “the science of knowing how to know” is a framework for my life. As I look across the activities in which I am engaged, I can pose problems and use what I have learned in Scientology to find the “correct technology” or solution to those problems. It is truly amazing to me that corporate Scientology would engage in the shutting off of knowledge of the world and the universe, by trying to stop Scientologists from gaining knowledge in all fields of endeavor. I am very grateful to Marty for pointing this out, as I had gotten into a state of reading only Scientology materials, shutting myself off from other areas of knowledge. This had happened little by little, and it was a rude awakening to find out that as someone who used to be interested in all kinds of knowledge and read extensively in other subjects, found myself not reading anything not written by LRH. I now am very happy with the idea of Scientology being a framework for my knowledge of specific technologies that others have developed in various fields. In the beginning of my training and processing, I thought this was why LRH developed the auditing technology: to make us all more able to develop technologies in the specific areas of our endeavors, and thus forward the advance of civilization to higher states.

    Just my two cents on this subject.

  5. Ronson’s book literally stopped me in my tracks.

    At one time I had been very active as a CCHR spokesman in California. Some of the experiences shared provided by Mr. Ronson shocked me.

    A variation of your Bullet #2 – “◾Never forfeit your judgment to some authority, no matter how apparently wise and judicious, when it comes to judging the merits of others.” certainly came to mind.

    I don’t do humble well, but this one simply slapped me in the face and got my full attention. As a result I’m probably traveling a little lighter; less judgment and more active compassion.

    And yes, there’s another thank-you, *chuckle*…

  6. If you have a little time, you could listen to these two talks by Jon Ronson. The first is a summary of the book Marty is discussing.

    The second video covers, in part, the debacle of witch hunting. He explores the disruptive and destructive effects of judgment and the tremendous flaws in human thinking/response towards perceived “dangerous” or “different” behaviors.

    • Thanks, Maria.

      Both clips were well worth the time.

    • maxim46zbitnoff

      Good stuff Maria. Ronson likes to explore things without forcing conclusions. Read the book. Combining this and the quantum physics discussion it appears that what is observed is dependent on the observer and the observer can have many different and seemingly conflicting viewpoints. The self we imagine we are is manifold.

  7. Just the labels of “Psychopath” and “Sociopath” are interesting to me.
    We….as “group egoic think” have decided that this “protect” us somehow…it keeps us separate and out of harms way from these “crazy people”… the whole purpose was to separate people who maybe just didn’t see life the way they “should”…I have known people who have been labeled such in the Church who (once they were seen as who they REALLY are and loved once again) turned out to be the most amazing people I’ve ever known…and Brilliant in their own right.
    Our society has a long way to go to be able to see “crazy people” in a different light. Of course there are those who have just completely separated from mankind and live in a crazy way but most people …once seen differently come around and want to live with their fellow man in harmony and peace. I always felt that the Church had this “throw away” mentality…so quick to throw you under the bus if you didn’t think and act as you “should”…and more than anything else… I think this will the cause of their complete demise.

  8. L. Ron Hubbard put together a list of the attributes of sociopaths/psychopaths, but also warned against using such a list to start “witch hunts”. He also said that when one is evaluating a person as to whether or not they were a sociopath/psychopath, (which he labeled as “suppressive persons”) one must not only look for the person’s outpoints in their behavior, but also their plus-points.

    The use of the term “suppressive person” was used in a “clinical” sense. It defined his mental and spiritual state as much as the havoc that he caused for others.

    Then, within a very few years, Ron departed from this very sane approach and introduced the same term, “suppressive person”, to label anyone who had done any of a significant list of individual acts that Ron considered suppressive to others, or to the attainment of the purposes of Scientology.

    The very “witch-hunts” that Ron had warned against were, at that point, made “policy”. The clinical use of the term “suppressive persons” was overshadowed, and virtually replaced for the most part, by a “political” use of the term.

    Because the same term was used to label both the clinical and political “suppressive”, they were assumed to be the same thing by many Scientologists. What applied to one, was assumed to apply to the other. It was the introduction of an insanity into such individuals, and into Scientology itself.

    The knowledge and use of the information regarding sociopaths and psychotics, is very valuable, and potentially aids in the handling of various social situations that are being impacted by such people, and in fact, the sociopath and psychotic himself. The better understanding one has of this phenomena, the better one will be able to handle it.

    The political use of the term “suppressive person” (SP) was a bad idea on so many levels. It has become part of the Third Dynamic engram of Scientology. Until it is confronted, and seen for what it is, it will continue to affect Scientology and Scientologists adversely.

    Eric

    • Thanks Eric.

      • Eric
        Very well said! This helped me to recall the moment, years back, when i was looking through the Ethics book, specifically on SP Characteristics, and wondered why so many ways to be an SP? I had in my mind that an SP was a datum of magnitude. Stealing candy, scratching a car and leaving the scene, didn’t qualify, even though they were objective acts. The characteristics of an SP started to become subjective. Mr. X does such and such and this act is perceived as suppressive to Mrs. Y, so therefore by default, Mr. X starts getting looked over as a potential SP. And in Corporate SCN, potential is reality, especially if viewed by someone in “authority.” I saw this happen time and again while on staff. People were rapidly slotted into SP, PTS, and Other Practice categories with such ease, you would think the org was populated by savants. Not so. Just people with a little knowledge and an overly high knowledge to ‘instant application’ (usually incorrectly so) ratio.

        Clinically, this data is priceless, like a metal detector is priceless when having to walk through a mine field. But tweak it, so that you start adding variables into what gets detected, why and when and at the very least, you end up losing a foot.

        Great insight Eric, thanks. Great posting Marty, thanks as well.

        • And some helpful insights yourself, OddT.

          Such as this Owner’s Manual type warning, “…tweak it, so that you start adding variables into what gets detected, why and when and at the very least, you end up losing a foot….”

          Thanks,
          Vic

        • Thank you Odd Thomas.

          I personally believe that the term “sociopath” leads to a broader understanding of the actual “pathology” of the being than does the term “Suppressive Person”, simply because the term “suppressive” has so many degrees of interpretation.

          Eric

    • Hi Eric. And what are witch hunts basically but mass hysteria? L. Ron Hubbard was right. He usually offers some wisdom to a scene gone wrong. People believed hundreds of years ago, for lack of anything else to believe that “witch hunts were good”, even the Catholic church stood behind them. What caused the people to believe them? They founder a bigger lie worth telling to believe. I see the world as made up of two kinds of people, people that lie and people that believe lies. But the people that are in the church KNOW they are believing lies. This is not Spain circe 1487. Church members go insane from being in the church. One staff member in New York at the New York Org that was the ED when I was 18, FORBID me from commmunicating with LRH. Take it for granted that makes no sense. L. Ron Hubbard had to write to me at a seperate address to insure I received his letters, because this ED was taking them, (stealing them actually) reading them and then showing them to his wife and the ethics department that would determine based on this stolen communication the best program to make up for me to pay for. Simply based on what I knew or didn’t know about tech. You don’t suppose that anyone else in the church may have been in on this either do you, like for example the OT VII that “never heard of me before until the church just recently mentioned me to him” but his memories of me go all the way back to early 80’s!🙂 Inside that church is daily witch hunts and smart people, like me, will just close their course pack, get up and walk out the door and look for alternatives, that the independent movement has helped give birth too.🙂 I thank the “lord” every day for this chance to know this and what this alleged church is getting away with. A criminal in the church on staff does not a make a friend in society always when that person leaves. SOME people leave the church that are honest and come clean and admit they part of “witch hunts” in their orgs. Some people leave and STAY dishonest. I think that is psychopathic.🙂 Example: Debbie Cook. I love and admire her and enjoy listening to her now as much as I did when she was captain of the FSO!🙂 Just my two cents.🙂

      • Lawrence

        Hi.
        Yes, mass hysteria replacing individual evaluation, not a good formula for increased sanity.

        It amazes me that the ED somehow felt that he had the right to cut your comm to Ron, especially when you consider the SO#1 line.

        We do live in “interesting times”.

        Eric

        • It is the kind of thing that might introvert some people. In a way it is itself a sort of relief to just know this is the truth. All these years later, where did people like the former ED and others really, really wind up?🙂 I think you and I could be good friends!🙂

        • Eric. I have said too much already, but just one last thing. Things like this ED happen in the world because most people will ask when they hear about “Well what in the world would anyone do anything like that for”?. Fortunately I was able to answer that question before some of my peers did. People in the church deliberately mislead and confuse people that the put aside for future plans. I guess those plans of their failed. I am not unhappy about it. I know that people from the Church of Scientology read this blog (or at least try to🙂 ) but have those people ever considered how come they never found these things out themselves?🙂

          • Lawrence

            Yes, we each live in the universe of our own creation. We would do well to strive to make it the best we can.

            Thanks for the chat.

            Eric

            • Lawrence

              About the friend thing… I suspect you could be right.

              Eric

              • Thanks to you as well. This blog is a wonderful place to learn ALL ABOUT the things that go on in the church.🙂 I ESPECIALLY favor Marty for showing people and if they don’t see explaining to people exactly “What is Wrong with the Church of Scientology”. Because, I absolutely LOATHE the Church of Scientology.🙂

  9. In a way I’m thankful for the “bad apples” I encountered in CoS, for without them I would not have seen the “bad barrel.” And I’m thankful for the “bad barrel,” for without it I would not have seen the “bad barrel maker” and made a clean decision to leave. I’m thankful to one “bad apple” in particular — a Scn employer who had trouble paying her staff. When my wife wrote a KR on this, she became the target of a Black PR campaign that lasted several years. The details are worthy complete chapter in Martha Stout’s book.

    • That is the standard procedure. If you report to the church something wrong with another member of the church, YOU become the target. I am not a member of the church, but I did speak to one that still is. And she questioned why I was not a member any more. Rather than tell her, I sent her a link to a web site I had, that explained it all, and her name was on that web site as one of the “bad apples” I met in the church. Wouldn’t you know that she informed me she was sending our whole comm cycle “up lines to RTC”. Where did that get her? Where does that get them? The wronged are still wronged, the right that needs to be done to fix the problem still needs to be done regardless of any way a person can alter the facts to someone. I stopped reporting C of S outness matters to C of S members LONG AGO. Lesson learned, you can’t hire the criminals in the church that might be ripping you off to catch another one in the church that is. Any good detective will tell you the same thing.🙂

  10. Psychologist Kevin Dutton, author of “The Wisdom of Psychopaths: What Saints, Spies, and Serial Killers Can Teach Us About Success,” has created a top 10 list for the most attractive and least attractive professions for psychopaths.
    The Journal of Abnormal Psychology notes that psychopathy is a personality disorder characterized by anti-social behavior, selfishness, egocentricity, callousness, manipulativeness and lack of empathy.
    But in an interview with Smithsonian.com, Dutton said one of the reasons he wrote his book was to debunk two myths about psychopaths: that they’re either all “mad or bad,” and secondly, that psychopathy is an all-or-nothing thing, that you’re either a psychopath or you’re not.
    “When psychologists talk about psychopaths, what we’re referring to are people who have a distinct set of personality characteristics, which include things like ruthlessness, fearlessness, mental toughness, charm, persuasiveness and a lack of conscience and empathy. Imagine that you tick the box for all of those characteristics,” Dutton explained.
    “You also happen to be violent and stupid. It’s not going to be long before you smack a bottle over someone’s head in a bar and get locked up for a long time in prison. But if you tick the box for all of those characteristics, and you happen to be intelligent and not naturally violent, then it’s a different story altogether. Then you’re more likely to make a killing in the market rather than anywhere else.”
    Dutton claims the professions that seem to have the most psychopaths are:
    1. Chief executive officer
    2. Lawyer
    3. Media (Television/Radio)
    4. Salesperson
    5. Surgeon
    6. Journalist
    7. Police officer
    8. Clergy person
    9. Chef
    10. Civil servant
    Dutton also lists the following professions as least attractive to psychopaths:
    1. Care aide
    2. Nurse
    3. Therapist
    4. Craftsperson
    5. Beautician or stylist
    6. Charity worker
    7. Teacher
    8. Creative artist
    9. Doctor
    10. Accountant

    If you want to not be surrounded by psychopaths, stay away from CEOs, lawyers, journalists, salespersons and journalists, cops, civil servants and… the clergy!

    There is another good questionnaire, apart from the book by Jonson. In his book Mask of Sanity, Hervey M. Cleckley described 16 ‘common qualities’ that he thought were characteristic of the individuals he termed psychopaths
    1. Superficial charm and good “intelligence”
    2. Absence of delusions and other signs of irrational thinking
    3. Absence of “nervousness” or psychoneurotic manifestations
    4. Unreliability
    5. Untruthfulness and insincerity
    6. Lack of remorse and shame
    7. Inadequately motivated antisocial behavior
    8. Poor judgment and failure to learn by experience
    9. Pathologic egocentricity and incapacity for love
    10. General poverty in major affective reactions
    11. Specific loss of insight
    12. Unresponsiveness in general interpersonal relations
    13. Fantastic and uninviting behavior with drink and sometimes without
    14. Suicide threats rarely carried out
    15. Sex life impersonal, trivial, and poorly integrated
    16. Failure to follow any life plan.

    Now… do not try to self-assess on this: if you are a psychopath, your affliction will prevent you from answering these questions accurately!! ..:)
    If you answer NO to these 16 points, you may still be a psychopath, and if you answer “YES” you may just have low self esteem.:)
    Love to you all

    • Don’t know Dutton. But, glib checklisting can lead to wild labelling. For the best rundown on psychopathy I have also put in the recommended reading section of the blog Martha Stout’s ‘The Sociopath Next Door.’ I believe she isolated the strongest, most tell-tale common denominator (and explains it in some detail), abscence of conscience.

      • It’s a bit A=A=A but that is due to changes in name not in the case itself.

        First it was Psychopath than Sociopath than Anti Social personality disorder because every the public ran with the term sticking it on anybody or anyone they did not like or whoms behavior one didn’t like.

        I have been adressed myself as having trades of an Anti Social Personality by my therapist.

        Hell of a day

      • Abscence of conscience, that must be it, Feeling bad about things you did hurting other people.

      • Absence of conscience. That would be expected to be a common denominator or the anti-social. But what is conscience. Common advice is to follow and/or listen to your conscience. What is that exactly. Ones higher Power?The top of an individual Trinity? Grace? I am sure a person shut off from any of these could be a problem. Is conscience part of the being themselves, the thetan, is it something we “have”, or something we can be in touch with if we are “clean” enough to begin with. But i am curious what some here think “Conscience” actually is.

        • What is conscience you ask.

          From the last paragraph of chapter 9, on page 180 of the book “The Sociopath Next Door” by Martha Stout, “Emotional attachment is part of most of us, down to the very molecules that design our bodies and our brains, and sometimes we are powerfully reminded of it. Beginning in our genes and spiraling outward to all of our cultures, beliefs, and many religions, it is the shadow of the whisper of the beginning of an understanding that we are all one. And whatever its origins, this is the essence of conscience.”

          Works for me.

          • Thank you teacher. I think the author makes a statement that many will find acceptable. I appreciate the reference as I did not read the book. But beyond the emotional attachment and sense of oneness she links, citing genetic and cultural influences, I would like to think there may be more to it. More of a spiritual element.

            • You replied, “But beyond the emotional attachment and sense of oneness she links, citing genetic and cultural influences, I would like to think there may be more to it. More of a spiritual element.”

              While, I don’t have a direct quote for that, I do have a couple of ideas…

              1. There is a consciousness-evolution thread happening continuously. Conscience seems to be one of the concepts which informs that thread.
              IMO, Ken Wilbur is worth a closer look in this regard. “God-becoming” seems to be a related aspect of this process. Also,

              2. Conscience evolves as does one’s emerging relationship to this universe, and it’s associations. Between this universe and it’s associations are transitional areas, or edges. They seem to have extra consciousness associated with/within them, as in other membrane-type structures. There have been several interesting comments on this blog regarding membranes/barriers recently.

              The whole idea of conscience as something which monitor’s ones behavior as a function of ones individual persona (ego) seems a bit suspect to me. There’s more awareness-of-awareness here than that accounts for, in terms on conscience. As in Yo’ Mama…

              Hope this helps,
              Vic

              • “There’s more awareness-of-awareness here than that accounts for, in terms on conscience. As in Yo’ Mama…”

                This realization can be seen increasingly through science as …” the shadow of the whisper of the beginning of an understanding that we are all one…”

                In Non-Duality, as described in eastern literature, we find intrinsic relationship between viewer and object. Conscience, as an attribute of consciousness, helps unburden and resolve occlusion in this fundamental relationship. Or so it seems to me…

              • Vic, thank you for your thoughtful response. Good stuff.

        • I believe conscience is that faculty of awareness by which one monitors one’s behavior toward ensuring one’s actions are overall more optimally constructive than destructive, and in a manner that others can easily accept. That faculty, by necessity, includes the high ability to candidly and objectively review one’s intentions and whether one’s actions affect others in a manner that causes overall improvement or not. And if not, the willingness to make adjustments toward the line of least resistance toward a constructive objective. The difference with a “full-time sociopath” is they have permanently muted that faculty by a “survival at all costs” computation.

          I say “full-time sociopath” because, as mentioned in the TED Talk video above, everyone has “sociopathic” capabilities. I put “sociopathic” in quotes because that word, by its Latin roots, infers that any anti-social behavior is an illness per se whereas, under certain circumstances, “sociopathic” behavior is in fact the most rational response. But it’s only when anti-sociality underlies all of one’s actions in all circumstances that it is in fact a malady – the ever-present intention to destroy stuck in the “on” position.

          The hard truth is that through the course of our evolution as a species the ability to be ruthless, callous, unsympathetic and domineering was what enabled the fittest to survive. If you couldn’t manipulate game into the killing zone and coldly slaughter it, or ruthlessly butcher an intruding cave bear in the most efficient manner, you and your family died horrible deaths. Similarly, if an armed criminal is trying break into your house, you’re not going to invite him in for tea and a heart-to-heart chat about it. You’re going to respond with as much ant-sociality as your evolutionary hardwiring and experience can muster. In such do-or-die circumstances, manifesting anti-social behavior is not a malady but the appropriate, rational response to the circumstances in front of you.

          As such, one who does have the faculty of conscience can still over- or under-react through lack of ability or miscalibration of effort, particularly in the heat of battle. It is in this manner that social beings commit acts that look like sociopathy when they are not. They are merely correctable misjudgments or misestimations of effort. But put a number of individuals into similar threatening circumstances, real or imagined, and herd mentality –which itself is sociopathic – can easily become the dominant point of agreement and action, and thus the atmosphere in which “full-time sociopaths” rise to positions of leadership.

          So, we all have the ability to be mother-fuckers when necessary. It’s a question of who’s being a mother-fucker all the time. They are not actually any good even in genuine do-or-die circumstances and DO need to be identified. The next question is, what do you do with them? And how do you preclude them from getting into positions of authority?

          • Thank you Graduated. Your calling it a “faculty of awareness” is a fair description. Any thought on its “source”? Is it genetic and/or cultrual or is it something we are connected to which is outside of ourselve, in whole or in part?.

            • I think genetics and environment certain have a influence on one’s conscience but ultimately it comes from you – the ethereal consciousness – and is directly proportional to your quality as a being.

              • Thank you Graduated. I appreciate the opinion. “Conscience” has a source which is connected to us,but is also outside of us. And when it makes itself known, the battle begins. How often we hear of one battleing with his or her conscience. The upper self seeking to exert itself over the lower self. The Freemasons symbol of the Compasses(rightness and reason) placed on top of and keeping in check the Square(feeling and desire), with the letter G in the center, standing for the connection to what is part of you and also greater than you.

        • This is how I understand the meaning of conscience in terms of the definition of psychopaths and anti-social personality:

          In psychopathy, the observation is that the individual does not respond to expressive or emotional cues of hurt or pain from others. There simply isn’t a corresponding response, so there is no “conditioning” element regarding inflicting pain or on hurting others. As an example, most people react very intensely to a baby’s cries, an actual internally felt uncomfortable or painful response. Psychopaths do not experience any internally felt response to crying or expressions of hurt. So expressions of pain or hurt do not affect them in a normal way that would cause them to avert or avoid painful or hurtful behavior to others. Since its lacking, they may step up inflicting pain to a point where they can feel it — torturing others to “feel” them.

          This is not necessarily true of an anti-social personality. If they are not also psychopaths they can and do experience the pain of others, but they deliberately ignore it and possibly even take pleasure in it.

          • Thank you Maria. Any thought you care to share on “Conscience” in the larger sense? What is it? What is its source?

            • I think the etymology offers some good clues, but hey, if I had the definitive answer to the question I am pretty sure I’d be a nobel prize winner!

              Etymology: conscience (n.) early 13c., from Old French conscience “conscience, innermost thoughts, desires, intentions; feelings” (12c.), from Latin conscientia “knowledge within oneself, sense of right, a moral sense,” from conscientem (nominative consciens), present participle of conscire “be (mutually) aware,” from com- “with,” or “thoroughly” (see com-) + scire “to know” (see science).

              From what I understand of the psychopath definitions, there is reduced knowing “with” others and possibly reduced knowing “within” either in the sense of empathy or feelings. Disconnected? Disassociated? Unable to receive or interpret sensations? Combinations of these?

              • Thank you Maria. I feel confident in saying its a ray of awareness of what is right to do. The source of that ray of light, I cannot say with confidence. It is a part of us, but I sense its source is also outside of us. That definitioncould applies to us as well. Our spiritual nature.

                • Bewildered, I think I know what you are talking about. I call it the “truth detector,” which seems to function more and more accurately the more you use it. It does seem like a “ray of awareness” that can be badly trampled and disparaged and ignored but responds to any effort in the direction of sincerely wanting to do the right thing. Is this my imagination? I don’t think so. It has served me faithfully throughout my life, at least as far as I can tell. I am sure that there are those that would say it has deluded me and made me a “patsy” or a foolish believer but honestly, when I pay attention to that “still voice” I do better and I do not become more and more dissonant even when circumstances are less than enchanting.

                  • Maria, your exactly on point. Let your conscience be your guide, and you cannot go wrong. As challenging as it is to determine its “source”, its more important to be aware of that voice and follow it.

          • Good distinction, Maria.

    • Had not heard of Kevin Dutton, but since reading Martha Stout on Marty’s recommendation and taking a look around, I’ve come to a similar conclusion that it’s not an either/or trait, but more of a spectrum. Toward one end is the career criminal and the guy who works hard to gain your confidence while watching for the opportunity to screw you over. Toward the other end is the successful heart surgeon who is good at his trade precisely because emotions never get in his way. And then I’m seeing lots of people who seem to be very caring toward their family or group, but exhibit various degrees of sociopathic behavior toward outsiders.

      I wish I’d had this data 50 years ago. Spotting sociopathic tendencies, in oneself as well as others, is so crucial to a happy life that it should be the 4th ‘R’ in education: readin’, (w)ritin’, ‘rithmatic and recognition.

  11. ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITY, 1. the antisocial personality has the following attributes: (1) he or she speaks only in very broad generalities. (2) such a person deals mainly in bad news, critical or hostile remarks, invalidation and general suppression. (3) the antisocial personality alters, to worsen communication when he or she relays a message or news. Good news is stopped and only bad news, often embellished, is passed along. (4) a characteristic, and one of the sad things about an antisocial personality, is that it does not respond to treatment or reform or psychotherapy. (5) surrounding such a personality we find cowed or ill associates or friends who, when not driven actually insane, are yet behaving in a crippled manner in life, failing, not succeeding. (6) the antisocial personality habitually selects the wrong target. (7) the antisocial cannot finish a cycle of action. (8) many antisocial persons will freely confess to the most alarming crimes when forced to do so, but will have no faintest sense of responsibility for them. (9) the antisocial personality supports only destructive groups and rages against and attacks any constructive or betterment group. (10) this type of personality approves only of destructive actions and fights against constructive or helpful actions or activities. (11) helping others is an activity which drives the antisocial personality nearly berserk. Activities, however, which destroy in the name of help are closely supported. (12) the antisocial personality has a bad sense of property and conceives that the idea that anyone owns anything is a pretense made up to fool people. Nothing is ever really owned. (HCOB 27 Sept 66) 2. the suppressive person. You, in speaking of it, actually marry up with old technology because they have looked for this fellow called the antisocial person for a long time. Freud used the term. Psychologists use the term. They’ve used the term for a long time. They know there is such a person called the antisocial personality and this is the personality for which they have been groping. We’re calling it a suppressive because it is more explicit. (SH Spec 78, 6608C25)
    — L. Ron Hubbard
    Modern Management Technology Defined

    • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy

      Psychopathy (/saɪˈkɒpəθi/[1] is a popular term often used to refer to a person characterized by reduced fear, a lack of empathy, coldheartedness, egocentricity, superficial charm, manipulativeness, irresponsibility, impulsivity, criminality, antisocial behavior, a lack of remorse, and a parasitic lifestyle. As a diagnostic category it is outdated, having been replaced by Antisocial personality disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual.[2]

      While no psychiatric or psychological organization has sanctioned a diagnosis of “psychopathy” itself, assessments of psychopathy characteristics are widely used in criminal justice settings in some nations and may have important consequences for individuals.[citation needed] The term is also used by the general public, in popular press, and in fictional portrayals. According to the Scientific American, although the term psychopathy is associated with and conduct problems, criminality or violence, many labeled as psychopaths are not violent, and psychopaths are, despite the similar names, rarely psychotic.[2][3]

      Although there are behavioral similarities, psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) according to criteria in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders are not synonymous. A diagnosis of ASPD is based on behavioral patterns, whereas psychopathy measurements also include more indirect personality characteristics. The diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder covers two to three times as many prisoners, where as “psychopath” is not a diagnosis. Most offenders scoring high on the Hare Psychopathy Checklist (PCL-R) also pass the ASPD criteria, but most of those with ASPD do not score high on the PCL-R.[4]
      Contents

  12. Mister Marty Ratbun you did know that “Knowledge is free” stirs up some urge in me to post any content that is relevant dispite of my own convictions because Knowlege is Free is sacred to me.

  13. I need to dedicate my comments to Temy Knight who lived on stkTohis Road in Stough, as I have begotten her “Slant of life”booklet”printed in 1974, copyright 1965 from my very very good friend Terril patk

  14. Marty, so glad you had a chance to see Jon Ronson’s video.

    What I love about Ronson, think it’s his trademark, is that he discusses openly his questions with the people he is interviewing, a bit like Columbo, who feigns confusion right before solving the case. Ronson engages people and openly discusses his perception of their behaviour. He is able to do it as he is non judgmental, self deprecating, and above all, very interested in other people — i.e. not interesting as he doesn’t really discuss himself at all.

    • Whilst I love The Psychopath Test, I’d be very careful of calling Ronson ‘non-judgemental’; his character assassination of Anatoli Boukreev in Into Thin Air was the very definition of shoddy hack-like work. Really nasty, axe-to-grind reporting.

      It wasn’t until The Psychopath Test came out I started reading his work again, I found it that distasteful.

      Goes to show, no-one gets it right 100% of the time.

  15. How did the Masters of ancient past deal with the suppressive person?

  16. Thank you Marty! These books I have learned about and this subject I studied last year, as I found out about it on this blog, changed our lives here.

    Your last three points are vital information, on this one:

    “Never forfeit your judgment to some authority, no matter how apparently wise and judicious, when it comes to judging the merits of others.”

    I would like to point out that I had someone come by my home last year and tell me I was not to contact anyone in the Independent / Freezone movement unless I was “clearing it through them first”! Because they were K.S.W.. And the authority on these matters!

    This is how subtle some people will get at mocking themselves as “authority”. Even out here! The person was not K.S.W.. Yet wanted to operate as “clearance officer”. The “authority”.

    I have discovered a fantastic alter is in this arena! It is when people alter is “ethics presence” with “authority pretense”.

    “I have the authority to put ethics in on the Freezone / Independence movement” I have the authority to say WHO can do business and practice Scientology out here. I have the authority to assign conditions and declares. I have the authority to summon up comm evs out here. I have the authority to start up with hunts out here. I have authority to program, audit, train, C/S and call all of the shots from my desk and you have the duty to obey.”

    “AUTHORITY PRETENSE” is a major ruin in this arena!

    Nobody in the Church of Scientology has ANY authority except to refuse service! Just like a frucking diner! “We reserve the right to refuse service”. That is not even authority! It is a RIGHT to refuse service! The C of S is fully running the right to refuse to service. That is why nobody is getting Super Power! That is why people are not getting up the bridge.

    Be aware of “authority pretense”.

    Nobody in this arena is from any government agency or deputized with the U.S. Marshall’s department.

    “Authority pretense” is mocked up to push a BUTTON and dominate!

    Remember that training routine you did on your basic HQS where you wanted the P.C. to look at the wall and you were trained to physically restrain people?

    This was the beginning of a lot of “false imprisonment” and took the subject right down into the ENFORCE band.

    This is illegal. Nobody has the authority to physic ally restrain you in a counseling room.

    SOME people, took this to mean they had the AUTHORITY of the U.S. Marshall’s office to restrain and hold people!

    Those people were tripping. This is why we have “security guards” locking Scientologists in rooms and trailers!

    The Church of Scientology and the people dabbling in this occult super natural have only ONE “authority”, the right to refuse service. The same rights as a diner.

    “Authority Pretense” is not “ethics presence”.

    Thank you Marty!

    • The Church of Scientology has made it’s vast fortune exercising it’s right to ” refuse service”.

      “You can’t have _________ until you _________.”

    • TO
      You asked…
      “Remember that training routine you did on your basic HQS where you wanted the P.C. to look at the wall and you were trained to physically restrain people? ”

      Yes, I definitely know the drill you are referring to. It is in TRs 6 to 9.

      I know that the question was likely rhetorical, but it breaks my heart to hear that that was what you came away with from that drill. It sounds to me like you were definitely mis-trained on those drills.

      But I would like to offer another viewpoint, in the hopes it may shed a little light on the VALUE of those drills.

      The point was not to restrain, but to learn to assist the preclear to override the bank sufficiently enough to carry out a processing command. It helps to train an auditor to not Q and A with the PCs case, and to do it with just the exact right balance of intention/effort so as to not override the PC himself.

      The process itself, as applied to a PC, is designed to bring the PC to the self determined realization that he CAN in fact override his own case. That he CAN BE CAUSE over it. That he does not necessarily have to Q and A with it.

      The student auditor was NEVER supposed to be trained toward overriding the PCs self-determinism. In fact, the entirety of auditing was originally designed to RETURN the PCs self-determinism.

      The other thing that it does is that it is a physical demonstration on fixing and unfixing one’s attention, which ability is a key to sanity. … “Look at that wall, Walk over to that wall, Touch that wall, TURN AROUND.”… Look at THAT wall. (Auditor indicating a different wall)… etc It is a “reach and withdraw” process that helps to increase havingness and stabilize the preclear.

      The premise upon which it is based is that “since the mind is made up of symbolic representations of one’s physical environment, if one becomes better able to be cause over their physical environment, they will automatically become more able to handle the symbols that represent it. (the mind)

      I can definitely see how it could be mis-trained and misused,
      but DAMN…such a travesty.

      Eric

      • It really does come down to purpose and emphasis. I just coached/supervised someone through 6-9 this week. My emphasis is on Ron’s emphasis on developing the ability to develop a clean, no-effort intention and execute it. When done in this wise – as witnessed this week – it is significant spiritual experience.

        • Exactly. Wonderful stuff.
          Personally I had powerful wins on the actual nature of intention and “intention vs effort” from those TRs….and abilities gained…OT abilities I would say…
          I would wish no less for others.

          Eric

      • Eric, Thank you for your interest. I did not meant to suggest that I thought “restraint” was the ONLY purpose in doing those tr’s. I did read the references before doing the tr’s.

        We were taught while drilling them that physical restraint was to be used if necessary, with the p.c., to get them to execute the commands. Or to keep them going with the session.

        That was what I was alluding to with the “false arrest”

  17. I read ‘The Sociopath Next Door’ as recommended on this blog. I found great relief from it. I feel much better about spotting the sociopath (since so many of my fellow Scientologists have been declared) and relief from being declared myself. I’m not sure I would have gotten as much from it without having studied LRH’s PTS/SP tech.
    Thanks for having recommended it.

  18. I find the whole treatment of the SP/psychopath by the Co$ and perhaps by Hubbard in his later period revolting. When I studied the PTS references initially during my academy level 4, I found it to be a very practical approach. Somebody is making the life of a person hell to the degree that he is a victim and cannot maintain the gain he received from auditing. You help him find out who that person is. Then with the help of a few references he decides whether to mend fences with that person or to disconnect from him. This is all decided by the person alone with no coercion. If anything, the person helping the victim is supposed to sway toward handle and not disconnect. If disconnection is decided, it is supposed to be done quietly, with no antagonism involved. Even after disconnecting the person can at any time decide that he is now strong enough to reconnect.

    I was very distressed later to find a wealth of “tech” where people are labeled this or that. I find it totally against the early postulates of Scientology.

    I believe one observes and labels other people in his own mind. However, telling others how you label them is wrong. Even labeling someone as PTS is wrong. Help them handle the suppression in there life, but don’t tag them. For an organization to label people is on a class of evil all by itself.

  19. For what it’s worth:

    ‘Don’t find fault, find a remedy.’
    Henry Ford

    • martyrathbun09

      If you are referring to me, did you miss this?:
      Learn for oneself how to evaluate the worthiness and value of one’s fellows.
      ■Never forfeit your judgment to some authority, no matter how apparently wise and judicious, when it comes to judging the merits of others.
      ■Strive to be worthy of the trust of those you care about.

      • Words of Wisdom, Marty. Words of Wisdom.
        I liked it when I first read it and it was the same when I read it today.
        Also your recommendation of the book from Marta Stout, and then when Steve also promoted it over on Scientology Cult, made me courious about it. It’s a great book for anyone.
        I absolutley liked, espacialy, the last chapter (12). Very spiritual worldview.

      • Marty, I was not referring to you. I’m caught up in some insane crap occurring locally, upfront and in my face.

        Dramatizations are increasing. Sorry if I’m misinterpreted or misconstrued.

        • martyrathbun09

          Ok. What’s happening there?

          • Sorry for a belated response. We’ve been busy with IRS shit that rankles the mind especially on a philosophical basis.

            To answer your question, some friends and associates have gone seemingly bat-shit crazy.

            My tentative conclusion is that it’s financially or perhaps better yet monetarily contrived. Perhaps they’ve hit a wall of worry. I can’t draw a conclusion yet.

            Thanks again for all your efforts, Marty.

    • I love him exept for his Anti Semitism

    • He still hated jews

    • Tom Gallagher I feel you want to go one one one with me, I promisse you I will give Hubbard credit where he’s due, but you nah
      I am a lovable person, So what’s your beef ?

      • Cat Daddy,

        Ford has been vilified since his publication of “The International Jew”.

        He didn’t get it quiet right, IMHO. It’s really about this monster that’s so-called and self-identified as Zionism. It has nothing to do with ‘Jews’ or Judaism.

        These money changers are still at work. Watch what happens to us “the people” over the next 30 to 60 days. Ain’t going to be pretty and their still ‘in charge’.

        There is a hierarchy that exists on this planet.

        At the highest level, they aren’t our benevolent caretakers. According to their published papers, they want to see a majority of us dead. Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Queens, Kings, Morgans, et. al., can all burn in a hell of their own making.

        Give good folks space and opportunity and we’ll have a better world.

        • You are right, I do not have caretakers. i am pretty independant in my thinking but not in my life, meaning “people who need people are the beatifullst people….”Barbra Streisand

  20. ■”Learn for oneself how to evaluate the worthiness and value of one’s fellows.
    ■Never forfeit your judgment to some authority, no matter how apparently wise and judicious, when it comes to judging the merits of others.
    ■Strive to be worthy of the trust of those you care about.”

    Either that or one could just lever himself into the catbird seat of a multinational corporation, get a withhold sniffing dog and a couple of copper grounding rods to complement one’s management style…

  21. Marty, those three points of character you reccomend are beautifully stated, poetry of values that really matter. Words to live a finer life by.

    Very, very few people in the CoS still have any personal integrity and self determinism left. Most will abandon their own parents or children (not to mention trusted and lifelong friends) and divorce their spouses immediately upon being ordered to. There is “nothing in it for them” to keep any of these values you mention, and frankly, that’s pretty much all most Scientologists think about, the consequences to themselves at not toeing the line or being in group agreement. The saddest of many, many moments in Lawrence Wright’s book? To me, it was how Jenna Elfman and others turned on Milton Katsales because he was “stuck” at OTV and wouldn’t make his playhouse a WISE company (you have to read the book to understand this huge personal betrayal of people and a church he helped SO much, and a personal friend of LRH to boot). The case condition of Elfman and many others is absolutely shocking. Long time Scientologists, OTs stuck completely in service facs or frozen at the bottom of the Tone Scale. I don’t even consider the disconnection of friends I’ve had for 40 years any kind of betrayal. I now see they are not even “there” as beings anymore, they have dropped so low. It doesn’t matter how much help you gave or how many decades you contributed; you are thrown out with the trash and are considered evil the moment you don’t obey or show any kind of self determinism. You will be “killed” and it will all be justified by people who have dropped so low they think they are being “in ethics.” This is why the Church of Scientology will continue to be rejected by thinking and uptone beings. I pity OSA personnel who have to read this and lock in their own service facs in order to do their job. They are spiritually destroying themselves.

  22. Marty,
    Very good advice. It is just plain common sense.

    For the life of me I don’t understand why Scientologists in and out of the Corp. cannot maintain their own viewpoint, remain centered, and not become overwhelmed by LRH’s words and the Tech.

    It is a very high price one pays for forgetting who we really are.

    It has been very of plain to me since my beginning involvement with Scientology that the group’s think bears so much pressure on every member, that over the years, we inevitably end up lost to ourselves.

    The following is something I knew before entering Scientology and one of the data I kept referring to, not to lose myself to this cult. It is just plain common sense and brings the focus back to our own awareness, it is our responsibility to look, perceive and to know. No one can do that for you.

    There is no path to truth and there are not two truths.
    Truth is not of the past or of the present-
    it is timeless – and the man who quotes the truth of the Buddha,
    of Shankara, of the Christ, or who merely repeats what I am saying,
    will not find truth because repetition is not truth:
    repetition is a lie.

    Truth is a state of being which arises
    when the mind -which seeks to divide, to be exclusive,
    which can only think in terms of results, of achievement –
    has come to an end. Only then will there be truth.

    The mind that is making effort,
    disciplining itself in order to achieve an end,
    cannot know truth because the end is its own projection
    and the pursuit of the projection,
    however noble, is a form of self-worship.

    He alone shall know truth who is not seeking,
    who is not striving, who is not trying to achieve a result.

    – Collected Works, Vol. VI,134
    by Jay Krishnamurti

    • You and I have something in common on reading – and applying – Krishnamurti before Scientology.

      • Oh boy, Marty.Where have you been?

        • It’ll be recounted in some detail in my book coming out in May.

          • I read Krishnamurti in the early ‘80s after having my interest piqued by an LRH lecture in which LRH mentioned Krishnamurti’s stuff was pretty spot-on – LRH’s only critique being that Krishnamurti’s writing style assigned a monotone of importance to his points and that reading him, as a Scientologist, one could get much from it.

            “Hitler and Mussolini were only the primary spokesmen for the attitude of domination and craving for power that are in the heart of almost everyone. Until the source is cleared, there will always be confusion and hate, wars and class antagonisms.” Jiddu Krishnamurti

            I look forward to what you have to say on Krishnamurti, Marty.

          • I carried J. Krishnamurti’s The First and Last Freedom around in my backpack, as my only book, on a two-month hitchhiking odyssey around the western U.S. in 1968. Here is a quote I feel is relevant:

            “The moment you are aware of confusion, of exactly what is, you try to escape from it. Those sects which offer you a system for the solution of suffering, economic, social or religious, are the worst; because then system becomes important and not man — whether it be a religious system, or a system of the left or of the right. System becomes important, the philosophy, the idea, becomes important, and not man; and for the sake of the idea, of the ideology, you are willing to sacrifice all mankind, which is exactly what is happening in the world. This is not merely my interpretation; if you observe, you will find that is exactly what is happening. The system has become important. Therefore, as the system has become important, men, you and I, lose significance; and the controllers of the system, whether religious or social, whether of the left or of the right, assume authority, assume power, and therefore sacrifice you, the individual. That is exactly what is happening… – pp. 23 paperback edition

            This and other writings of his, bear re-reading – often. I find that when I read him, I come away from it feeling cleansed, challenged and enlightened – without any “goo” sticking to me from it. Ahhh – refreshed.

    • Nice quote Conan, enjoyed that.

  23. ■Learn for oneself how to evaluate the worthiness and value of one’s fellows.
    ■Never forfeit your judgment to some authority, no matter how apparently wise and judicious, when it comes to judging the merits of others.
    ■Strive to be worthy of the trust of those you care about.

    The solution is in being at cause as opposed to being a victim. I am talking about Jesuits or Buddhist monks in the old days who could walk through a battle field with thousands of insane people hacking each other to death and those people would step aside and let the monk through and go right back to hacking each other. What did that monk have that we don’t have on this post? Did he keep thinking that crazy people have no conscience and they are all very dangerous and he absolutely had to recognize them by evaluating the hell out of everybody he met?

    Would like to note the subtle change in tone of the comments to this post which reflects the subject matter. I am a bit surprised with the choice of this subject again. Goes without saying that this is Marty’s blog and he posts what he wants.

    These three points are spot-on except the 3rd one but basically they follow the Code of Honor which does not zero in on psychosis and so has a lifting effect. The Code of Honor does.

    The 3rd point per LRH is just “Be worthy of trust.” The additive “of those you care about” may immediately cut off a huge chunk of one’s dynamics and so could be itself a psychotic viewpoint unless one cares about a great multitude of people whom he doesn’t personally know.

  24. Fear
    Hatred
    Mistrust

    These are reflections of “exclusion”.

    Compassion
    Understanding
    Love

    These are reflections of “inclusion”.

    True freedom will only ever be experienced in terms of one’s willingness to experience anything, or everything, or nothing at all.

    Eric

  25. This morning when driving I started listening to NPR and the Ted talk was on the nature of violence and psychopaths.

    When I got home I searched for the original TED Talks on youtube and found this amazing talk by Stanford Professor Phillip Zimbardo, who conducted the experiment in 1971 called the “Stanford Prison Experiment”. I found a 24 minute TED Talk by him called “The Psychology of Evil”.

    During the talk he quantifies evil “as the willingness to blindly obey authority” and goes further to talk about situations are what enable evil to flourish.

    I highly recommend listening to this talk, notice the similarities between what has happened in scientology, how once good people have become blind followers etc …

    I chose not to post the talk as there are about 4 minutes of disturbing footage of the Abu Ghraib prison.

    The talk does end on an uplifting note — how heroes are ORDINARY people who at the RIGHT set of circumstances step out of the mind-set of following the crowd and act. He says everyone is capable of being a hero.

    I believe him.🙂

    Christine

    • I agree with you, Phil has done some excellent work and I do like his uplifting messages about how one individual can do the right thing and be an agent for change.

      Unfortunately, what is not disclosed in any of Phil’s information is the presence of private military company personnel (mercenaries) at Abu Ghraib and the role that they played in the events that transpired. The regular U.S. military has admitted to a 36% direct involvement of mercenaries in the torture, and the C.O. insisted that she had been scapegoated to cover up the what actually happened in Abu Ghraib, including the effects of utilizing mercenaries. This is borne out by the fact that the private military companies have been assessed with million dollar fines for their abuse of Iraqui people at Abu Ghraib.

      The information about the presence of mercenaries is critical to understanding Abu Ghraib. Their personnel are not subject to the same military courts and laws as regular military. The personnel are individuals who are not defending their country, but have CHOSEN a career of killing for pay, working for the highest bidder. That alone changes the perspective. Its very bad news to hear that this is permitted and passed off as the actions of patriots of a country.

      • You are probably very correct about the Abu Ghraib/mercenaries piece; however the Abu Ghraib mention was 4-5 minutes of a 23 minute TED Talk —

        The point of this TED TALK wasn’t Abu Ghraib but basically why good people do bad things … of which by your stats 36% were directly involved in —

        Most of us as current, former, anti, indie scientologists can relate to – having gone down a slippery slope until we were unwilling to do that any longer.

        Christine

  26. Grasshopper (Mark P)

    This is fascinating. I heard about this test a bit over a couple of years ago. There is an episode of “This American Life” from NPR devoted to it. I am reading The Sociopath a next Door now – great read.

    I agree with your conclusions. Unfortunately there is no blood test for sociopathy. I think the test does a good job of narrowing it down, but as the team on TAL found out, it is easy to get a false positive.

    • This issue of false positives is exactly why LRH balanced his criteria with a list of social characteristics. I think the recent advances in the field of psychology regarding sociopaths and psychopaths are an effective complement to LRH’s data on suppressive persons. Either body of data by itself has more opportunities to miss the mark than when used together.

      • Yes indeed. Ron did a great job of describing the Antisocial Personality. As I said, I am reading the Sociopath Next Door now – great book!

        One thing that is telling to me is that in Scientology, we feel we have a resolution to the SP – that an SP is A. basically good, and B. he or she can be brought out of it at some point.

        I haven’t finished the book yet, but all that I have seen on the subject tells me that Psychologists and Psychiatrists feel that the sociopath is incurable. That’s a hell of a condemnation.

        The most ironic thing of all in my opinion is that here we are supposed to have this great SP detection tech, and yet a major, major sociopath is running the church. How the hell can that be?

  27. What is the reference for the quote in the essay on judgment about the stable datum, the one that follows the definition of a computation?
    Thanks,

  28. Good posting! I was very disturbed by the “labeling” of Scientologists while in Scientology – “PTS to the Middle Class” because a guy was not willing to take out a second mortgage on his home for the Idle Morgue. This was a term the ED often used because she was the lead fund raiser for the Idle Morgue! She wore many hats in the Org but fund raiser was the one she was on the most…her other hats were done very poorly.

    Labels like SP, DB, PTS, Out Ethics, Out 2-D, Illegal PC … it really is not much different than the field of mental health with their labels. I was disturbed by the use of these labels and I could tell it had a very negative impact on the people that were labeled.

    I heard the term “gas lighting” recently and looked it up. It is an intentional act done by someone to make the other person feel crazy. For instance – if a guy changes the furniture in the room and his wife comments about that change and he denies that anything that changed – when that happens over a period of time – the person will question their own sanity. I felt that way in the Church of Scientology – nothing they promise is delivered. The auditor makes a mistake and I have to pay for it but they are the most ethical beings on the planet. The doctrine of exchange and I see people filing bankruptcy after donating to the IAS or Idle Morgues…which leads me to this question: When David Miscavige lies about the Idle Morgues, the expansion, the straight up and vertical stats…along with all the lies the “front” groups like WISE, ABLE, CCHR, VM’s are NOT doing because they get no help or money from the Church of Scientology – do you think it is intentional to drive people crazy or is David Miscavige just a victim of the tech that went awry?

    Did Scientology tech create David Miscavige or was he crazy at birth?

    Some of Scientology tech just makes no sense to me – like if a guy’s stats are up – its hands off from ETHICS…so if the guy lies during the regg cycle (that happens all the time) gets the PC’s money and is long gone – the PC has to deal with the aftermath of that mistake and in many cases – gave the regg all of his money so he cannot even get up the bridge and he is spinning from the effects and sometimes caved in….but….the regg’s stats are up so hands off! That seemed rather irresponsible from a group that is suppose to deliver what was promised and be ethical. It is not ethical and it is criminal. I finally left because it is criminal.

    • Gas Lighting = from a play but adapted to a movie —

      Ingrid Bergman and Charles Boyer — 1944 version.

      It’s a chilling movie. One I’ve remember although I think I must have seen it 50 years ago. (Yikes)

    • When I first joined staff back in the 80’s and read KSW newly, I was shocked to re-read “It is the bank that says the group is all and the individual is nothing”. My weeks of staff experience had shown me that the group was indeed all and the individual nothing! Too bad I spent the rest of my staff career trying to reconcile this and many other similar contradictory data. Can anyone say “Cognitive Dissonance”?

      As a further note, a senior once asked me how my first dynamic was. I replied sincerely that I didn’t know we were allowed to consider the first as a dynamic of importance, since the third seemed to carry greater significance for a staff member. Must have been the “right” answer, as she certainly didn’t disagree…….

    • Theetie Wheetie

      To answer your question one would have to review the definitions of “ethics” and “statistic.”

      If you do that you will almost certainly come to the conclusion that ethics was not really being applied at all. And “money for money’s sake” is not a viable statistic for ANY organization. It is a “false stat” and if pursued would eventually lead to the destruction of the organization. The current “church” situation is ample evidence that that is what is happening, as we speak.

      Regarding your question about “the Church deliberately trying to drive people crazy”, I have never seen any evidence of that personally.

      Eric

  29. gretchen dewire

    Yeah, I had that experience too. I also thought it was my falt that things went wrong, until I discovered Martys blog thank heavens.

  30. Regarding sociopathy, I personally think the most telling characteristic is lack of empathy. It is telling to me that LRH did not mention this. I found his list to be on the whole not useful. If you don’t know someone well you may not know if they complete cycles of action or if they most always talk in generalizations or only when they are upset and so on. I also found two of the characteristics to be self-serving as they seem to be veiled references to Scientology. In other words, the presumption for the purpose of this test is that Scientology is good and anyone who opposes it is bad.
    However, lack of empathy is pretty straight forward. You know it when you see it.

  31. I saw Krishnamurti for the first time in Switzerland, in Saanen, in July 1967. He would go there and speak every year. I was introduced to him by some yogi living in Ibiza island, in Spain, who would ride his bicycle to Saanen each year to hear him speak……While I was in Saanen, I remember, in San Francisco, at the Fillmore Auditorium, the Yardbirds, the Doors, the James Cotton Blues Band and Richie Havens were performing… These were the days…

    I followed Krishnamurti’s talks throughout the years (not too assiduously ) and was always fond of him. Here are some of my favorite quotes …

    “All ideologies are idiotic, whether religious or political, for it is conceptual thinking, the conceptual word, which has so unfortunately divided man. ….I maintain that Truth is a pathless land, and you cannot approach it by any path whatsoever… Meditation is freedom from thought and a movement in the ecstasy of truth. The flowering of love is meditation.

    And here are some beautiful words from him about meditation, every time I read them, I get moved..

    .” Meditation is freedom from thought and a movement in the ecstasy of truth. The flowering of love is meditation……I have drunk at the clear and pure waters and my thirst was appeased. …I have seen the Light. I have touched compassion which heals all sorrow and suffering; it is not for myself, but for the world. …Love in all its glory has intoxicated my heart; my heart can never be closed. I have drunk at the fountain of Joy and eternal Beauty. I am God-intoxicated.”

    That’s where I want to be at, that what I want to feel every day.. It does not get much better than that, does it?

  32. To be honest, I am a bit in confusion. Since years I have a look on the net about Scientology and L. Ron Hubbard especially. The usual is, that Hubbard is bad. Now, at least by my opinion, this blog is different. Maybe due to my lack of understanding the language this blog recently turned on my confusions about Hubbard and my ability to differenciate is lost about this subject since some weeks. To trust him, to what extend or not to. Or, can I pick out writings from him that I think are OK and other writings throw overboard.
    If I have a look at current Scientologists they appear for me to be crazy. DM is super, TC is cool and the best. Blind followership.
    Me as oldtimer never had doubts about Hubbard while inside. After 1992 I did throw Scientology overboard. Later informed myself about Scientology via the net. After I found this blog my interest in Scientology as a subject started again. I e.g. restudied the Philadelphia Doctorate Course Tapes and did apply it.
    Now a stable datum seems to be lost and the unresolved confusion is popping up. In case I can resolve it I let you know here.

    • martyrathbun09

      You must be referring to comments by user names in the comment section, since I have not painted nor called L. Ron Hubbard bad. As part of your resolution to this, I suggest you evaluate datums against the standard of whether they work for you.

      • It is not against you nor I want to blame anybody. This my confusion is popping up from the past and is a not resolved past thing of mine. Sure some commenting might play a role. Reminded me of things I could not handle within myself. Looks like that the „stable data“ I used masked the confusion. I need to have a better look and not put a datum there to handle confusion. This is maybe the mechanic those still in the Church apply. They observe something wrong, cannot resolve it and put a datum there instead of digging to the ground. Like David Miscavige is doing all things right. Or Tom Cruise is the best actor in the world and the most dedicated Scientologist on Earth. Things like that. I am not in the Church since years, but I also used this mechanic. Putting an arbitrary stable datum there to handle my confusions about Tech, Ron and Scientology in general. So, I am not very much different.

  33. Schorch

    You said…”Now a stable datum seems to be lost and the unresolved confusion is popping up.”

    Ahhh… This is good! Now you will find the door is open for you to learn something new. With a stable datum gone, you now have the opportunity to re-evaluate the data in a new unit of time.

    Marty’s answer to you here is an excellent approach to the resolution of your confusion, and should serve you well.

    Eric

  34. Pingback: Total Certainty – Really? | Moving On Up a Little Higher

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