Scientology: Hypnotism or Persuasion

Jefferson Hawkins began an insightful deconstruction of Scientology ethics in an interview with Tony Ortega at his Scientology Underground Bunker page.   I believe the techniques Jeff exposed had (have) broader application in the process that Scientology employs in implanting its constructs as hard-bound reality.  It is not limited to the indoctrination on ethics. I had noted this myself while spending several months of each day listening to a Hubbard lecture from the fifties and sixties.

In an early chapter of The Tao of Physics, Fritjof Capra gives an accurate and concise history of the evolution of logic and thought in the West and the East.  In doing so, he necessarily mentions virtually every significant philosopher who lived and wrote over the past couple millennia. I read that after the stint of listening to dozens of Hubbard lectures given over a two decade period.   Here is my contemporaneous margin note at the end of the chapter on evolution of thought in The Tao of Physics:

‘By this point (20th Century) in history, Hubbard has invalidated and laid to waste every great thinker who made possible and contributed to his way of thinking.’

One might recognize that Hubbard’s techniques of persuasion are used far and wide in today’s society.  In politics, in business, in advertising, in self-help, in religion, you name it.  Whether one wants to label it ‘hypnotism’ or ‘how to influence people’ or ‘persuasion’, it cannot be gainsaid that the  technique of indoctrination Jeff breaks down for us was employed throughout the history of Dianetics and Scientology.  And L. Ron Hubbard was a master of it application.

156 responses to “Scientology: Hypnotism or Persuasion

  1. The indoctrination and control techniques employed by L Ron Hubbard are not his. He applied the work of others. While its possible to draw parallels between “hypnotism” and “influence” going back centuries, the techniques used by Hubbard were, pretty much, developed by Freud and others, particularly Milton Erickson, during the 20th Century. Adam Curtis covers this in his unforgettable documentary series “The Century of the Self”.

    • Do a little research on Aleistar Crowley – OTO and Thelma. Compare the Rosy Cross with the Scientology Cross. Google: Jack Parson’s and L Ron Hubbard.

    • Crepuscule,

      You are bang-on in your indication of Hubbard using Ericksonian hypnosis techniques in his methods. My father’s Chiropractor in Oregon was a master hypnotist and also a close friend of our family. We spoke of the subject many times when I was a teenager. Erickson was his idol.

      If anyone doubts that LRH was a master hypnotist, read this synopsis on Erickson’s life and hypnosis techniques:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_H._Erickson

      • Why did Hubbard start Scientology? Check out what Jamie DeWolfe (L Ron Hubbard’s great grandson says about his family tree and why L Ron Hubbard started Scientology). It is entertaining as well as very telling from the “GE” pool of LRH. Just google: Jamie DeWolfe and watch his performance.

  2. The question for me still un-answered is why L. Ron Hubbard started Scientology. We can experience now, that Scientology had to fail. It had been setup a way it had to fail. It had to be used to control people. In case Scientology did not see the light on Earth, what could have developed instead? Scientology did grab people that maybe would have started or joined other groups if Scientology did not exist. What groups or movements? What has been stopped by starting Scientology?
    Scientologists would answer: „the destruction of Earth“, „We saved the planet and still do“!
    The very first time I sat in front of the Ethics Officer in an Organization I remembered (say I dreamd it up if you feel better with that idea) a situation I had been told (or persuaded or implanted) to help to destroy Scientology. So I knew that there are 2 opposing forces at work with different intentions. Maybe both sides are not good. I could not decide about it. The other side also used persuation (implanting). So for me both sides are not „ethical“ in my eyes.
    I know only of 2 opposing forces. Maybe there are more. Scientology is one of them. To point out how wrong one side is has its validity. I have experienced the „Ethics“ system the tough way back in the 80ies. But now I am more interested in the overall picture.

    • I think if you read some of the books written about the history of Scientology then it gives you some interesting information from which you can draw your own conclusions.

      If I was to state my own opinion, then I think you can see a man who had a huge amount of ambition, which outweighed his ability and talents (I know this is difficult for a Scientologist to believe). His ambition was such that he did not let small things like reality or the truth get in the way of his determination to make something of himself. But, over time, ambition does necessarily start to drag abilities behind it.

      Remember he did not simply create Scientology overnight, it was an evolution. He started by writing books where he allowed his imagination to run free, and which sold copies, and then he wrote a book in which he made very bold and amazing claims – claims which he allowed his ambition to make. Scientology grew and emerged later out of this.

      What was the ambition that drove this? You will have to decide but I believe it was money and power. Remember with very strong ambition you can achieve a huge amount, even without much talent. In fact if I needed to make $50 million and I had to choose between having a lot of ambition and a lot of talent then sadly I would have to choose ambition, and Ron Hubbard had plenty.

      The question then is, what would he be willing to do in order to achieve his ambitions? And I believe the answer is – sadly – “absolutely anything”.

      • Sid, I also think he was very interested in metaphysics. He was also motivated by a great passion for relieving himself of pain (mental, physical and emotional) but not self discovery, self realization.

        I also think adventure motivated him. He lived a make believe life with imagination as his god.

        But to support your view: As Mayo recounted being told by Hubbard,” I have an insatiable desire for power and money.”

        Ron was interested in freeing himself. But because he payed homage to no teacher, humbled by no wisdom, humbled by no true cosmic ethic, he dug a hole of infamy in which to entomb his legacy.

        Aside from his greed and egomaniacal manipulation of others, underneath is a soul moving toward the Light. His desire for spiritual power was really his desire for truth, filtered through his mental tendencies.

        One day he will get it right.

        • The early forms of ethics as punishment is illustrated by a women, Hana Whitfield, who was captain of one of Ron’s ships.

          She was close as close can be regarding accurate memories of ethics as punishment way before we even heard of DM.

          If understanding the source of this violence against people is important – how did it get this way?- as some ask, this interview with Hana is………. Revealing.

  3. The question is “why are most people so suggestible with so little strenght of character that they don’t have the most basic knowingness of what is workable according to their own individual needs and wants”?
    Any “air” of authority makes them crumble even in the face of obvious bullying.
    LRH explains the mechanism of control , creates processes to enable the individual to snap out of it and regain self determinism and then turns around to entrap with ethics tech.
    I am not suggestible , never have been.
    I don’t get it.

    • one of those who see

      Very well done to you for being able to hold your position in space. I think part of the problem is distance, space. In Buddhism, I think it is called witnessing. creating the quiet and space to look objectively at what is happening and how it is affecting you. In auditing you get that. The time and space to look and see what YOU think of a situation. Cognitions and therefore self determinism. I once helped a non Scientologist family member who was spinning in a situation by just saying ” don’t compromise with your own reality.” She came right out of it.

    • I admire you for not being suggestible. I am aiming for that. I found that the reason for my crumbling was not lack of character, but belief in an unworkable model. Like so many people, after a few wins, I started to believe rather than inspect and discriminate. I gained new insight into the manipulation used as a result of this and Jeff’s interview. I knew it was done, but not to the degree of calculation which now seems probable to me. I am much keener at spotting this in people now.

      • thank you Susie.
        What I don’t get really is how you help with one hand and take away with the other.
        I have read Laurence wright , Memoirs and still can’t grasp it.
        Was it the huge ego? the losses? what the hell was it?

        • That is perplexing. I guess people have conflicting intentions, some good and some not so much.

        • I read a book called In Sheep’s Clothing about manipulative people. My purpose in reading it was because of difficulties I was having with my mom. She can be extremely manipulative, but also she has some very good qualities, as well. While reading the book, I did get further insight into Hubbard and his methods. It was interesting to see the similarites between my mom’s behavior and his, notably the inability to look at self and admit to any wrongdoing. I also learned a lot about myself and why I allowed myself to be manipulated by these two people.

    • That is a really good question. We want to understand “evil” and those with an active intent to exploit or to harm but even more we want to understand how and why there are so so many more of us who do not have an active intention to harm yet give power to it, give up our power to it. What inside people causes them to become compliant and to participate for lengths of time in actions that before they would not have dreamed of and after are truly ashamed of. More than any individual, it is the surrender and compliance of the many to a perceived authority, following a leader, that lets “evil” happen. Trance has something to do with it. There may be innate instinctual mechanisms related to herd survival that factor in. But also there is the fact of childhood, more gruesome for some than others, but this is how we all start out, no rights, not free, easily owned. There are some studies that suggest that children exposed to inconsistent or and arbitrary regulation grow up with a preference for authoritarian environments – they cant tolerate flexibility, unpredictabilty – it makes them anxious.

      • Not to say all children respond in the same way, or in this way…

      • Most definitely, what causes the good intentioned to go along with the evil is THE important part. If they didn’t, the evil would be small and insignificant – kind of like an odd phenomenon to notice and be mildly curious about. One of the most important things I learned this life is the concept of “models” or paradigms. Models are how we think about and understand the world. If your model is the idea that scientology is the only hope for mankind and L Ron Hubbard is a god who knows more than mere mortal man could possibly understand

        • Continued: then you would be able to be convinced to do just about anything to forward this cause and you would not feel you were doing anything wrong. In fact, you would feel that you were helping save the planet, even if you lied, betrayed, etc. This would be a small price to pay. The earlier and deeper a model is embedded, the more likely the child

        • and, later, the adult, will blindly follow the model the agenda produces. This is why people who want to control others impose their models on children as early as possible (Hitler Youth, Young Pioneers, Sea Org). Models are also very hard to change. Facts that prove the model inaccurate will be discarded without inspection, or not even heard at all. Or they may even produce violence.

        • (Extreme cognitive dissonance). Created in the middle ages, janissaries were soldiers fiercely loyal to the rulers of Turkey. The soldiers were taken from their parents at a very young age, educated and trained to serve the ruler. They were totally reliable because they had been raised to think the way the rulers wanted them to think. The word janissary has now

        • come to mean a blindly loyal soldier who will do anything, no matter how horrible, to comply with their leader. When I realized that this is what was happening in scientology is the moment that I knew that the evil would continue and I had to go.
          The way to proof oneself against taking on destructive models is to be

        • aware of the models one is adopting and using sound logic and critical thinking. In the book I read about this, it said that if good people are getting hurt, suspect the underlying model. I think that is a pretty good rule.
          If children learn about models, critical thinking and logic, they have a

        • good chance of being careful about the models they take on, and of not being fooled by others who are ignorant or evil-intentioned. I have been doing this in my own life for the past several years and it is amazing how much I have learned now that my models are not so fixed, as they tend to get in scientology.

    • In my view, it would not be logical to blame victims for being hurt by an abuser masquerading as a savior — except that in the Scientology construct, the victim is the cause of his/her pain through the mechanism of “pulling in motivators” — a sort of karma. That Scientology view, taken as an invariant truth, protects all abusers from criticism. It is a control mechanism.

      I believe that studies of those who get involved in cults do not support that they are especially suggestible or naive any more so than the general population. People who understand this understand that all humans are vulnerable to cults and unsubstantiated beliefs.

  4. “spending several months of each day listening to a Hubbard lecture”? Come on, it only SEEMED like months!

  5. Scientology preys on the ego…its teachings and “laws” are designed to make one’s ego as huge!…That’s why it’s so appealing to the weak.
    They want to feel special…they want to feel like they are “above” the minions of earth…they want to believe with all their hearts that the planet won’t survive without them…Insanity at it’s best.

  6. Once I had the opportunity to carefully review the transcript of a WISE mediation as part of an investigation to determine how the mediator had been persuaded to abandon Standard Procedure and judge against the employee in a dispute between a Scientologist employee and Scientologist employer. Going into the mediation, there was good evidence of multiple violations of labor code by the employer. The employer used the “confusion technique” of “conversational hypnosis” as Jeff describes it. By the middle of the mediation the mediator got it all turned around and thought it was the employees who had committed the illegal acts. And by the end of the mediation the judgment was strongly in favor of the employer. To my bafflement, the mediator — on OT V — was MORE SUSCEPTIBLE TO MANIPULATION than an average non-Scientologist.

  7. Yes, the case mechanisms are considered solid. And one might wonder why would somebody engage -for example- to get Clear, if he is to realise that his being a preclear was just his imagination. It would seem like a strange joke to teach one about the bank and then show him it been just his imagination all along.

    I believe the reason for engaging into this is that many create a ‘case’ (although they don’t call it like that) to exist prior to finding SCN. I mean people who have ‘I cant’s, anxiety, depression, distrust and many many other things and that they think they cannot just quit creating those. SCN could give them a way to deal with that stuff.

    It can be awful to just learn about all those mechanisms without -soon after- realising it’s just your own creation/imagionation/mock up.

  8. Intriguing post – and Jeff’s conclusion is obviously true (for me anyway): “The determination of what is and is not “ethical” has shifted from the individual to “Scientology technology.” An individual can now only be ethical if he knows and applies Scientology technology.”

    I was mulling this over today and it occurred to me that the conditioning by stealth, the powerful suggestion techniques et al – I wonder all this may have been forgivable and even reasonable – IF and it’s a huge IF – the “Bridge” delivered what it promised – enlightened beings who actually were able and competent and compassionate? In other words, would it be a sacrifice worth making, to effectively allow oneself to be hypnotized for want of a better word – if the end result was a spiritual existence for one and all? (I think I’m answering my own questions as I write this…)

    • In my mind, this (allowing oneself to be hypnotized as a sacrifice for the greater good of a spiritual existence for one and all) is an impossibility. But this is, in essence, the bill of goods that is sold.

      • Yes, the MEANS are the END. No matter the stated goals of a group or individual, how it attempts to achieve those goals reveals its ACTUAL goals.

  9. What specific written and spoken communications did LRH have with DM to pass the baton?

  10. The Milgram experiment shows that some people will comply, even think and behave against their conscience if ordered by someone they “believe” to be an authority. Hubbard clearly presented himself as an authority. Miscavige presents himself as an authority. Use of religious absolutes and repeated reinforcements in Hub’s writings, promo, events, from staff and the general culture of the Co$ (ref Asch Paradigm) has created, imho, a level of zeal and “persuasion” that is worthy of study in its own right.

  11. Per definition, Indoctrination implies you can’t counter or express disagreement with the belief.
    Persuasion involves reasoning and argument.
    The basic trap was to consider that “it is the only one”, “no one else…”, “the only thing that…”- that in itself is a lie which, when accepted,becomes manipulation that ends in Indoctrination.

  12. I liked Mr “Clearbird’s” commentaries on ethics and justice:-

    http://www.freezoneearth.org/HolyCows/cows/06justice.htm

    One thing he does is look at all offenses and penalties weighed against
    The Creed, Code of a Scientologists etc.

    • Terril,

      I had seen that before too and liked it. I especially liked the way he separated out the “Constitution” of Scientology, and how more and more “unconstitutional” elements were added as the years rolled on.

      A very sane look at the whole thing.

  13. From the Tao te Ching, page 97:

    “…until you have nothing but the light: That is, until you heart is at peace. The great modern Indian sage Ramana Maharshi said. ‘ There is no greater mystery than this, that we keep seeking reality though in fact we are reality. We think that there is something hiding our reality and that this must be destroyed before reality is gained. How ridiculous! A day will dawn when you will laugh at all your past efforts. That which will be on the day you laugh is also here and now.”

    LRH and SCN does the opposite…it creates a problem by saying you can not be happy until you get rid of this thing, this case. You are thrown out of present time in a constant rush for something “out there”

  14. Hi Marty,
    I really like your blog. I like your approach and your willingness to explore other great teachings in the world.

    I just got the Tao Te Ching translated by Stephen Mitchell. Thank you for recommending it. I have other copies… however this is the BEST translation that I’ve ever read. It captures that which cannot be named. That Peace that we all rest back into and bloom from.

    Again.. I appreciate your work and your willingness to stay on your own journey of discovery despite what must be incredible efforts to influence from all around. Also.. your relationship with Mosey is obviously spectacular. She’s an amazing woman. I love to see your photos together…. your happiness is contagious.

  15. maxim46zbitnoff

    Marty, I’m reminded of the Garden Song… “Inch by inch, row by row, gonna make this garden grow…”

    In your case it is piece by piece your gonna de-construct a once conceived and believed mythical mountain that deeply affected many of our lives.

    I’m enjoying the process.

  16. The question I have had since reading Jefferson Hawkins’ brilliant analysis is, how do you undo it in yourself or another person?

  17. “There are various states of mind which bring about happiness. That state of mind which insists only upon freedom can bring about nothing but unhappiness. It would be better to develop a thought pattern which looked for new ways to be entrapped and things to be trapped in, than to suffer the eventual total entrapment of dwelling upon freedom only.”

    — Professional Auditor’s Bulletin 84, 15 May 1956, “The Reason Why,” by L. Ron Hubbard
    This version is printed in Volume 3 of the Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology, © 1991

    http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/writings/total-freedom.html

  18. Leaving aside the policies of later years that altered it, Scientology ethics is based on reason and optimum survival. I can’t see what is inherently wrong with that.

    “Ethics actually consist, as we can define them now in Dn, of rationality toward the highest level of survival for the individual, the future race, the group, and mankind, and the other dynamics taken collectively. Ethics are reason. The highest e t h i c l e v e l would be long-term survival concepts with minimal destruction, along any of the dynamics.” (SOS)

    “Ethics has to do with a code of agreement amongst people that they will conduct themselves in a fashion which will obtain to the optimum solution of their problems.” (5008C30)

    “Ethics is a personal thing. By definition, the word means ‘the study of the general nature of morals and the specific moral choices to be made by the individual in his relationship with others.’ (AND) When one is ethical or “’as his ethics in’ it is by his own determination and is done by himself. (HCOB 15 Nov 72 II)

    “That which is enforced by oneself, his belief in his own honor, and good reason, and optimum solution along the eight dynamics. (PDC 37)

    • “Leaving aside the policies of later years that altered it, Scientology ethics is based on reason and optimum survival. I can’t see what is inherently wrong with that.”
      I’m with you there if its applied with the purpose of personal empowerment
      to the recipient.
      More importantly its an open channel for ” executive C/Sing” and politics. So many stories of comm evs being kicked out for the wrong result.

      • Right, Terril. My postulate is that lessons can be learned from the mistakes, and something extremely valuable can be retained while throwing out the baggage with the bathwater (and mixing metaphors :)).

      • Gerhard Waterkamp

        “Leaving aside the policies of later years that altered it, Scientology ethics is based on reason and optimum survival. I can’t see what is inherently wrong with that.”
        The problem with that is, believing to have the correct data and reasoning when one actually has not. There are things like basic human decency and “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. Since with above formula the person believing to have correct data and correct reasoning can do anything and label it as “ethical” anything goes. I.e crooks calling themselves the “most ethical group on this planet.” committing crimes on a daily basis. That is what is wrong with that.

        • I always assumed, from the first book I read when I was 12, that common sense, decency, and rationality was an integral part of ethics. That seemed to be the ‘flavor’ of Ron’s writings. I guess it was true what I read on this thread earlier, “You get from Scn. what you bring to it”, to paraphrase.

        • “The problem with that is, believing to have the correct data and reasoning when one actually has not.”

          The tool to help the individual with that is the conditions formulas. The whole system is based on the viewpoint that the individual can be trusted enough to allow self-determined choice. However, there’s also the tool of “The Way to Happiness Booklet,” which is a moral code that provides the things you mentioned – “basic human decency” and “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

          As for the CoS crooks calling themselves the most ethical group on the planet – they aren’t applying “the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics” where the dynamics are supposed to be given equal weight.

          • Gerhard Waterkamp

            The old argument: “They just doing it wrong.”
            Beside the fact that whoever uses that argument, knows what the right application is?
            The reality is, if a rule is one dimensional and absolute and not backed up by dimensions of love, intuition and mindfulness, it is prone to produce disastrous results as demonstrated by the COS on a daily basis. A rule defined like that is prone to create radicalism. QED
            I bet if LRH did have that experience he might have done a number of things differently.
            At one point he elected to throw out anything and all the experience of the great thinkers of mankind and decided to start from scratch. Such a thing is called a prototype and usually fails.
            “..Scientology ethics is based on reason and optimum survival. I can’t see what is inherently wrong with that.”
            I can see plenty of wrong with that if treated as the total answer to ethics, because there is tons of stuff missing.
            Just look at the results and the answer is obvious, – and it is not “they are doing it wrong.”

            • “The reality is, if a rule is one dimensional and absolute and not backed up by dimensions of love, intuition and mindfulness, it is prone to produce disastrous results…”

              Why wouldn’t you include love, intuition and mindfulness in with the 7th dynamic?

              “THE SEVENTH DYNAMIC—is the urge toward existence as or of spirits. Anything spiritual, with or without identity, would come under the heading of the Seventh Dynamic.” (FOT)

      • That’s what I always got from ethics, Rationality and Reason.

    • “Leaving aside the policies of later years that altered it,”

      The punishing aspects of ethics are talked about by Hana Whitfield in my post above.

      This is on the ship and Flag in 60s 70s.

      Chronicled by Hana are forced abortions, being imprisoned, threats of excommunication, physical punishment etc.

      She was with the Commodore when ethics was first conceptualized by Ron.

      I am only posting this Miraldi because you stated that something went wrong “later.”

      I am posting my post not to counter you or bash Ron. I am only presenting data for you to look at that counters your claim of “things went wrong later.”

      I hope you receive the ideas in the spirit I offer them.

      • Hana and others are talking about what may in fact have occurred, which I have no particular reason to doubt. However, those things don’t necessarily fit into the principles of ethics as originally laid out in writing by LRH. What went wrong later, is that other LRH writings got added that altered the basic principles of the original ethics system. That’s what I meant by what went wrong “later.”

        Yes, I can receive your ideas in the spirit you offer them – but again, my focus is on what is still valid and valuable, rather than on what went wrong.

        • I see your point now. Separating the good stuff from the bad. And defaulting to the earliest texts.

          That is an honorable process. Adventurous.🙂

          My process has been to look for seed thoughts nutured by my studies in Scientology. That takes me to Ron’s writing also, but for the reason of finding connections in writings to inhumane acts.

          Because inhumanity and the Church of Scientology are eeriely synonomous. For every exteriorization and big cog, there is a mother besides herself with grief for loosing a child.

          Then you and I Miraldi are a perfect balance. It is good to find the good. And it is good to be educated to the bad so that others may not suffer the fate of a grieving mother.

    • “Scientology ethics is based on reason and optimum survival. I can’t see what is inherently wrong with that.”

      If one considers that there are subjective right/wrongs and forces them onto another, he is simply service faced, as per the definition of service facs😛 The ‘good’, the ‘right’ etc have been used in history to impose ugly stuff –not just in religion. Also, as per LRH, self determinism > ethics. No self determinism=no ethics. With such a point of view ‘in mind’, no manipulation would occur in the Church.

      But that’s just ‘noble’ bull…as somebody pointed out at me, recently. Because LRH said something pro-control in the freedom congress, let’s scrap everything else, because we can’t tell the difference between pan and other determinism. ‘Pan’ is about controlling others….’other’ is about controlling others too….so…coooooool. Thank you.

      • I didn’t quite get the last paragraph, Spyros. (Are you trying to confuse me so as to put me in a hypnotic trance??? :P)

        • Yes. But I think you’re a bit harder to hypnotise than that. Maybe a little repetition will fix ya…

          What about it didn’t you get? To give a general explanation, I was mocking what some have told/implied to me.

          • Ah, now I got it. Cool. You need to tell me when you’re just mocking or being sarcastic. I can’t hear your tone of voice or see your little devilish face.😛

      • Spyros.:”Also, as per LRH, self determinism > ethics. No self determinism=no ethics. ”

        “No self determinism=no ethics” is not a logical consequence of “self determinism > ethics” as it does not discriminate between “self” having “no determinism” and “others prohibiting self” from having determinism (a PTS condition.)

        Spyros:”‘Pan’ is about controlling others”

        Where did you get that idea?

        One of the wisest observations I can remember was a statement by a CL VIII from our org (mid 70’s) who was creamed shortly after returning from training. This guy was a University professor, probably one of the few high-level academicians to ever put a foot into Scientology.

        He and another very bright person trained, returned, tried to get tech delivered and were creamed because they didn’t achieve huge clearing numbers instantly. Probably also because they stood their ground on issues.

        So this guy’s wise statement…

        The guy said “It’s not Scientology that’s bad, it’s the people.”

        Now that may be a teensy bit general, but, damn, wasn’t it typically individuals most of us had a problem with? Not so much the tech, sometimes (often!) the admin, but typically the trouble started with some individual not liking something one thought or said. Or what one didn’t get done – if it was some bizarre order, or some such.

        And just about all of those problems would go back to a literalness of interpretation by that “someone” (the Why of that being another discussion) of some policy being used against you.

        The ugly thing was that a stat measure was most often all that stood between interpreting a policy sanely or insanely.

        In the end it came down to people using policy sanely or insanely. On all four flows.

        The various times our org was actually cohesive and expanding were times of relatively light ethics – just about everything being overlooked or only mildly chided – and a general attitude amongst the staff of desire to help. Staff parties were fun and looked forward to. So much hard work was compensated for by small food treats on a Saturday afternoon that we didn’t mind the low pay.

        The power of goodwill and sane conditions is absolutely amazing.

        Then, of course, we’d do really well and the next thing you know a Sea Org mission would be in the doors to rip off the best staff. Ya, that really worked.

        • Hey, what I meant was that self determinism is more important than ethics, as without it you cannot have ethics. I guess the symbol ‘>’ didn’t express that exact meaning. Sorry about that.

          And: “Spyros:”‘Pan’ is about controlling others”

          Where did you get that idea?”

          I was just mocking pov of others I had noticed –that they mixed pan- with other-determinism and justified commanding others with or without their ‘tone 40’ TRs and made them guilty in case they didn’t obey. I think that’s kinda rude.

          But other than that yes, I do think that full pan determinism is the expression of KRC to the fullest. But it’s also the expression of being the dynamics to the fullest. So then, there is no ‘cotrolling another’. There’s the control of self.

        • Me: “Hey, what I meant was that self determinism is more important than ethics”

          Me: Or else let’s implant people with some of our ‘ethics’ and get over with it. Why bother to audit etc?

          With auditing you’re supposed to ‘give somebody back’ his self determinism and consequently his ethics.

          Me: “I had noticed –that they mixed pan- with other-determinism and justified commanding others with or without their ‘tone 40′ TRs and made them guilty in case they didn’t obey.”

          I’m not making wrong TRs in general. I see them as drills to be used in session WITH THE FREAKING AGREEMENT OF THE AUDITED PERSON. If somebody went around giving commands to people on the street or at home or at work thinking others ought to obey, he would be a (bad word) or a Churchie or something.

  19. This thread is to me deep with insight into Scientology.

    I realized that the dissemination drills use a similar process of confusion–>certainty (find someone’s ruin, recognize the confusion and pain by so doing, and then introduce the solution of Scientology).

    Even the auditing process works this way. Whether you are “flying ruds” or looking for earlier similars on a chain, you start with uncertainty and confusion (i.e., you know something is wrong, but not what) and end with certainty on the source cause (via cognition/realization).

    Even study tech works this way. If you find something LRH said or wrote to be unclear or worse, wrong (gasp!) you are brought into a confusion. What word did you not understand? You are then scouring the LRH communication with an eye not to whether he made sense or not, but how _you_ messed up and did not understand the perfect truth of LRH. You are thus conditioned to accept that any problem you have with LRH is _your_ problem, and that the solution is to _correct your own mind and understanding_ — the certainty you must regain is that LRH is right and you were wrong to not be clear on that “fact.”

    I suspect (but certainly don’t know) that this is why some people go bonkers on Scientology. They are forced to portray a certainty on having achieved a state that deep inside they know they have not achieved. Some of those who get past the Xenu / Xemu story, for example, do so because they jam it one way or another into an acceptable slot in the psyche — maybe it is just metaphorical or symbolic, for example.

    (Ironically, one fact about human existence that is a little like body thetans is this. If you take the human body and the space it contains, only about 10% of the cells in that space are human. The rest of the living stuff is viruses — if you consider them living, bacteria, parasites, funguses, and maybe some other stuff. So in a way, we are all infested with a gazillion other creatures, many of which can and do cause various pains, mental states, etc. But, the reality of various life forms versus the claim of body thetans is the difference between science and belief.)

    • This sounds a little like, give people a problem, have them solve it your way, give them another problem, have them solve it your way again, give them… and that way prod them through the rat maze to where you want to have them? Or is is some sort of vastly intelligent spiritual puzzle, a kind of koan?

      • I have to agree, from my experience of 45 yrs., with Pierre Ethier that the ‘Bridge’ is not one dimensional from bottom to top, but more 3 dimensional. Yes, there has to be a gradient, but it is more from the center outward. There is not one single line to traverse, but a multitude of paths. What is right for one is not right for another. That some things need to be examined many times from different perspectives, at a deeper level with more wisdom each time. Such as is with the Lower Grades. The Tao should be studied many times throughout ones life with a greater understanding each time. A few things are not this way. A skilled auditor or Master Teacher becomes wise enough to recognize what is right for one at a given time.
        A funny thing is that freedom and serenity belong to those who are willing to well up the effort to search for it. A man of sloth will never attain true peace. That is a stable datum of magnitude.
        MarkNR

        • I am very sorry if I come across as ‘Superior’. Granting beingness and understanding others is a high priority for me, and has increased many fold due to recent discoveries. But, I have studied man and spirit all my life and have been an intent observer of livingness. There are a few things of which I have become certain. A saw will not cut a board without being pushed, Shelves will not assemble if one is unwilling to pick up a screwdriver. Trading philosophical opinions with a friend over a beer has very limited workability if one is seeking real improvement.
          Seek your path with intensity and vigor.
          I have learned much from all of you and I USE IT in life.
          I consider you my friends.
          Mark

          • “I have learned much from all of you and I USE IT in life.
            I consider you my friends.”

            Ditto! I have been thinking about what you wrote on your previous post, where you pointed out Pierre Ethier’s idea that the Bridge isn’t one-dimensional. That makes so much sense – it isn’t a laid-out path in the sense of being “a single line to traverse.” Just the fact that there are many processes for each Grade gives the pc a chance to look at the overall subject being addressed from different perspectives – and, even more significantly, from the viewpoint that was gained from the previous processes as well as the previous Grades. There’s also the fact that, to begin with, different pc’s start out at different levels of spiritual awareness and ability. Bottom line – some people see the Bridge as “one size fits all” but you (and Pierre) just made an additional case for the fact that this isn’t true. Thanks for that!

            • Thanks, Marildi: I have concluded, along with Pierre, that LOWER GRADES FOR OTs, is far overdue. It should be done at multiple points after the variable release point currently called Clear. Others have also pointed this out. An honest development of this is sorely needed and would be equivalent in gain to an L rundown. I have not personally been particularly bothered by BTs, but for most, the problem of “Recall an incident where………” is taboo after clear. There have been times when I wasn’t absolutely certain if a picture was mine. This would have to be resolved.
              HEY, any OT repair auditors out there want to do a research project??????
              I’ll join. I’ve made this offer before. The possibility of doing something needed and wanted that could do great things for many. What more could you ask for. From the self appointed “Enthusiasm I/C.
              MarkNR@hushmail.com

        • “A funny thing is that freedom and serenity belong to those who are willing to well up the effort to search for it.”

          Yes, I believe that not only will people find what they’re searching for but they will SEE what they’re LOOKING FOR, because that’s the filter they’re looking through. As an example, those who are looking to see LRH as a con artist will usually see him as such – which is perhaps the kind of thing Jeff Hawkins is doing in his interview with Tony Ortega.

          • Hi Marildi; Thanks for that added perspective. I wrote a post on that very subject a few days ago. It was actually a big realization for me as I saw some additional details on the subject. Hope you caught it.

          • Here is an excerpt from a previous post. It is incomplete but you can get the idea.
            On which whole track incidents I would find;
            “What I was searching for would lead me to particular incidents. Sounds so simple and obvious, eh.
            But then I saw it. Any auditing, whether done by another, or Solo will lead you down a particular path and to a particular conclusion, cognition.
            The key word here is LEAD.
            Now, practically every path that Ron had lead me, after further inspection, has been positive and useful, but I must always retain the right and ability to evaluate every path for myself for it’s rightness for ME. I may choose an occasional wrong path or come to a flawed conclusion, but those errors are absolutely necessary to attaining improvement. In fact, the ability to evaluate my own conclusions, in simplistic words, IS THE END PRODUCT OF ALL OF THIS. The Bridge, The Tao, Tibetan Tech etc.etc.
            I must be able to evaluate, instantly, every auditing command, every process, every exercise, every idea I read, right now, in present time for it’s value for me. I can have a hundred major wins in a row, but the very next action is looked at fully in PT with no belief or skepticism that it is right or wrong. That, in itself, is a form of the actual final goal.”
            Hope this adds some perspective.

      • I have not found that in my experience. An E-meter, although not perfect, under skilled hands, is very good at indicating a recognition of a conflict or confusion. Every time I got a good read, it was something that the individual wanted to resolve and was ready to look at. In my days, I never felt that I was giving the PC a problem to invent or construct. I have experienced times when we did not find everything we were looking for, but that is a very different thing than what is being presented here.
        If anything, assessment lists should be expanded and added so as not to lead one down any ‘chosen’ paths, but to include all paths. In sessions I have run/experienced, the puzzles that were addressed were within the PC and brought relief when the PC himself resolved them. I have had only 2 auditors that I considered substandard. Maybe I was just lucky.
        Mark

        • That comment was in reference to FOTF and Letting Go.

        • Good point on the e-meter, and I agree. The simple pinch test (person holds the cans, you pinch their hand, the needle moves and they see it; then they recall the pinch and the needle moves the same way and the person sees that) well, that persuades a lot of people that the e-meter cannot possibly be reading just hand pressure or movement.

          As an auditor, I could was confident in knowing a cognition (realization) was coming because I could see it on the e-meter (needle movements and Tone Arm / TA adjustments) before the PC (person being counseled) had any sense of anything being ready to emerge.

          I experienced the same thing as a PC. The auditor, seeing a certain kind of e-meter response, might say “What was that?” I’d look around in my mind and see nothing, and say “I don’t see anything” but I’d keep looking. Then the auditor would see the needle move again. “What was that?” he or she would ask. Soon I would often have a feeling a little similar to something being right on the tip of my tongue that I could not recall. Then each time my attention / consciousness would shine a bit of light in that “area” of my mind, the auditor would keep steering me. Pretty soon the auditor might be saying, “That,” “that,” “that” — at shorter and shorter intervals as we homed in. And then the memory/experience/situation would come into full view, and I would have some sort of realization (cognition).

          So I agree, auditing can start with a confusion in situations such as I’ve just described, but the specific certainty that emerges is nothing the auditor ever tells you (that would be a breach of the auditor’s code anyway). It is what emerges from your own mind. Now, the kinds of things that emerge as answers may have been influenced by the Scientology construct. That would be true of any religion, I suspect. A Catholic with a sense of another being hanging around might seek an exorcism and visualize a demon. A Scientologist would suspect another thetan or body thetan or cluster.

          From a Scientology view, this could be characterized as a starting point of “Whatsa / Whatsit” (a question that draws in mental mass and pictures as the person looks into his or her mind to answer the question) with the desired result of the PC reaching an “Itsa” (it is a …) which means the question has been answered, and certainty is regained, and some sort of release (of mental mass or tension) occurs along with a realization. So in this case (auditing) the transition from confusion –> certainty does not involve the auditor saying what that certainty is, though the Scientology construct may have certainly constricted the answers that the mind produces.

          In a way, Hubbard makes me think of Newton. Newton was an alchemist, wrote religious philosophy, tried to find the Philosopher’s Stone, and was a sexual anomaly (I think he died a virgin) — but he also gave us calculus (along with another person who is often not credited), and the theory of gravity, and insights into the nature of light. I sure wouldn’t throw out Newton’s brilliance just because he was full of caca in some other areas.

          Same with Hubbard. The fact that he lied on some things (marriage for example) and was dead wrong on some things (life on Venus, for example) does not mean he wasn’t right on some things. What I experienced as both an auditor and a PC was remarkable. I sincerely believe it and other techniques of Scientology could be studied scientifically and validated for the good use of all humankind. I do not believe that if something works, it will only work in a quasi-religious setting.

          Here’s a question for those who doubt that a religious construct cannot influence how you interpret and understand things. How many PCs on their own, without having been coached in any way, no matter how inadvertently, have independently come up with the Xenu / Xemu story?

          • Wow, excellent post. Good thinking, IMO.

            On your question at the end, that is the type of thing I’ve wondered about too: “How many PCs on their own, without having been coached in any way, no matter how inadvertently, have independently come up with the Xenu / Xemu story?”

            I haven’t done the OT levels but from what I’ve read, I would expect that when auditing BT’s at least some of them would come up with Incident II. I’ve also wondered if anyone has ever picked up an incident that involved the Galactic Confederacy, Marcabs, etc., indicating that these space civilizations do (or did) exist.

          • I have met a couple of people who saw parts of the so called disaster on their own before it was fed to them. Most don’t. The installed forgetor was quite effective. I’m not certain that everyone currently on earth was there at the time. But there are many earlier/similars to go over anyway. Some, as expressed on this and other sites. never got a solid reality on the incident itself. Whether they were actually there, I don’t know. Dating and locating incidents is critical to keeping out of trouble. That goes for all incidents.
            Just my observations.
            Mark

          • FOTF: I had cognitions about cognitions while reading your last post.
            Thanks, Mark

      • That sounds like ‘Buy all free space/resources on earth (from mother nature) and force everybody else to work for you, to have a right to occupy a little bit of that space, and maybe have something to eat, as well.’ But hey, only communists think you can’t buy space from mother nature. Capitalists (which is the only possible alternative to communism, God says) know her well, and they know she exists.

        • I am glad we have Dutchism here

            • No no,I am dutch and we have a happy mix of restraint capitalism and soialism

              • Ah OK. We have some of the worst of socialism and capitalism as well. Capitalists are in charge, they get 0 taxes, but the government does keep 40% of your ridiculous salary (you know about Greek salaries) so that you will have medical care (even though you may never ask for it) and so that you will get an amount of money analogous to that 40% as pension, after you’re 65 years old or something.

                • I think you imhereted the corrupton of the military regime that was in power.

                  My parents are very well of after careers as a teacher and my mom as healthcare worker.

                  • I don’t know. What I’ve noticed is that most greek business people are very selfish and very law-bending. You know I understand not wanting to pay taxes, if that money is to be used for stupid causes. But what about their ‘forgetting’ to pay their employees/or pay them the basic legal money, while those business people have some respectable amount of wealth? It’s just a slave system and I’m glad it’s crumbling and I don’t want it to ‘recover’.

      • To Letting Go: Please don’t use the word “koan” again. Spent half the morning on that word chain. Did you know that there are 6 categories of allusions. Restimulated memories of long nights in the course room. Just kidding.
        Mark

  20. In my opinion, Hubbard did set out with the intention to create a workable system of mental improvement. Along the way he discovered various techniques such as Conversational Hypnotism that lent themselves to manipulation of others, and being endowed with a touch of megalomania he couldn’t resist using them to aggrandize himself and solidify the loyalty of his followers. In the 1960s when he felt himself and his subject to be under heavy attack, these control mechanisms became firmly ingrained in the tech of Scientology itself.

    The irony, as Marty has pointed out, is that these techniques ultimately block the very gains that Scientology was created to produce. “Total Freedom” and being “completely on-board” are mutually exclusive, and this cognitive dissonance plays out daily in the minds of every Scientologist on the planet.

  21. Here is a hearty thanks to both Marty and Jeff for turning the key that opens the vault of all the conundrums and confusions regards this man, Hubbard. He was a master, though not always in the good sense or intention.

    I’ve now sensed that LRH, for whatever reason, wanted the historical acclaim of a Jesus or Buddha. In that quest I think he failed.

    The rest of the commentary is our shared experiences and histories. That and some want to sort out the mess.

    I’m just moving on.

  22. Grasshopper (Mark P)

    “There’s this religion. Fake religion really. Adherents are like zombies. They take the words of the founder literally. They shun people who speak out! The work small children all hours of the day and night! They force abortions! They lock people into holes! Oh! The humanity! Ah… But all you have to do my friends is realize that the founder was a hypnotist and shyster and all will be well!”

    My God! Conversational Hypnotism? Really? This pseudo-Scientific bullshit that you can learn on the internet in five easy payments? Ha!

    This is 100% hogwash, and Marty, you and Jeff should know better.

    Just think about it for a moment. Someone tells you of a problem – a confusion, if you will. Say the problem is something like “there’s way too much traffic in the city and it is all snarled up!” And then the person you tells this to you says “but wait! Here is the solution: wait for it… Traffic signals!” What you and Jeff are saying is that if you agree with this, you are hypnotized.. Hogwash! Complete and utter hogwash.

    This is a really good way to get people to stop looking. Tell them every time someone describes a big problem, and then posits a solution to that problem, that if you agree, you are hypnotized. What cussing bullshit.

    Mark Patterson

    • One name for you Grasshopper.

      Darryn Brown.

      Here it is in real time…

    • Not so fast my friend,

      Please explain, how did we go from the state of Clear, Self-determinism and personal freedom to an insane cult, where LRH is The Source, The Only way out, and where followers signed billion year contracts to Serve HIM and his Big Brother Church.

      How can so many intelligent, spiritual and freedom loving people allowed themselves to be entrapped, and generally degraded like a bunch of crazy monks?

      Yeah, not that easy to explain, isn’t?

      • Conan, I think people trusted Ron. It was trust that opened the door to compromising with conscience.

        Trust that this man “knew” the truths of life. More trust in this man than trust in self.

        And unfamiliarity with the subject of spiritual things.

        • Another reason is actual gains made. Actual realizations about life. I remember Helen Geltman at the NY Geltman mission helping me with communication problems with my mom. She told me to go home and listen to her. Ask her what issues she had with me and just put in TR O and just listen. I listened to my mom for about an hour and she brightened up and our realation got better.

          So my mind goes,” wow, Scientology is great!” As these little wins add up Ron starts taking on the “knowing more that me status.”

          This is the cheese that gets you trapped. Because as soon as Ron is given elevated status, then it is possible to move to the next step of cult member.

          I also think the constant applause for completions causes an infectious group bonding. If all these other people are constantly telling you how great you are for completing courses or auditing levels, especially if you are young looking for belonging, then the ego is boosted and supported.

          Aside from all the pontential real gains had with a philosophy, I believe it is the group dynamic that adds an extra bolt to the prison door.

          Scientology group dynamic was fun on many levels. And when all responsibility for the “road out” is given to Ron, there goes critical thinking, there goes conscience. And conscience leaves very quickly through concepts like “greatest good for the greatest number.” If I harm 20 people, 20 families and save the universe- that is a great deal!!!

          • There’s your MU, Brian. It isn’t “greatest good for the greatest number” – it’s “greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics.” Big difference!

          • Brian,
            “And when all responsibility for the “road out” is given to Ron, there goes critical thinking, there goes conscience And conscience leaves very quickly through concepts like “greatest good for the greatest number. If I harm 20 people, 20 families and save the universe- that is a great deal!!! ”

            Yes, that one resonates with me. Thanks

      • Grasshopper (Mark P)

        Exactly. It’s complicated. It’s a lot more that “I was hypnotized!” The claim that the entirety of Scientology is but a hypnotic suggestion is insane. And incorrect.

        • Mark,
          I agree with you, but I don’t think that was what Marty suggested, and I certainly don’t think that the entirety of Scientology is an implant. But it seems to have enough hypnotic spin to eventually put people on a kind of a trance.
          Thanks for your answer.

      • Conan: I can send you a paper (couple of pages) that precisely explains a big part of it. An exact area that went undetected and unresolved.
        Interested?
        MarkNR@hushmail.com
        Drop me a note.

    • Do you want to know what causes all your problems in life ? Do you want to save the world ?

      • Grasshopper (Mark P)

        I think I have a pretty good idea of what causes my problems and, yes, it would be a good thing to leave the world at least a little better off than how I found it.

        • Well I have this Bridge to sell you

          • Grasshopper (Mark P)

            And I have Harvard, Stanford, MIT, and TED talks to sell you.

            • Touché, but did you notice what I did, pushing some buttons of save the world and the solve your problems utton, And now factor in that damn personality test Scientology does that will always find out there is somemething wrong.

              You are teflon coated to those things but they are nevertheless the sales pitch to the ones on the street with troubled minds without your impressive academic acomplishments.

              • CD,

                You probably aren’t aware of this, but some new people actually score quite high on the test. Further, the exact same test is used throughout a person’s auditing, to gauge how the person is doing.

                It actually is a legitimate tool for Scn auditors. With that said, I do agree that as a tool for “recruitment”, it is questionable — at least in the way that it’s used, i.e. “find their ruin” aka introvert them.

                As a side note, I’ve always thought there should be various versions of the test, but that would be considered sacrilege in the CoS — even though LRH didn’t even write/design it. I was pretty happy to hear that multiple versions of the test exist in the indie field.

                • “The next suitable person you’re in light conversation with, you stop suddenly in the middle of the conversation and look at the person closely and say, “What’s wrong?” You say it in a concerned way. He’ll say, “What do you mean?” You say, “Something’s wrong. I can tell. What is it?” And he’ll look stunned and say, “How did you know?” He doesn’t realize something’s always wrong, with everybody. Often more than one thing. He doesn’t know everybody’s always going around all the time with something wrong and believing they’re exerting great willpower and control to keep other people, for whom they think nothing’s ever wrong, from seeing it. This is the way of people. Suddenly ask what’s wrong and whether they open up and spill their guts or deny it and pretend you’re off, they’ll think you’re perceptive and understanding. They’ll either be grateful, or they’ll be frightened and avoid you from then on. Both reactions have their uses, as we’ll get to. You can play it either way. This works over 90 percent of the time.”

                  -David Foster Wallace, The Pale King

    • Ethics are reason. Very simple. Confusion and the stable datum is a useful datum. The concept of reason has not yet come up in Hawkins’ write up. Maybe it will. So far, not so brilliant.

      The cutting and pasting of concepts from the writings of Hubbard to suit your argument is just what the church does.

      Come on guys.

      You disappoint me.

      • That’s how I saw it too. To show how LRH used hypnotism, Hawkins even picked a quote where LRH said it was a “dirty trick” to do that. As I commented on another post, he is looking for something to be there and thus he “finds” it.

    • “Hogwash! Complete and utter hogwash. ”

      IMHO this would certainly describe your post Mark.

      • Actually, Mark hit it squarely on the head.

        There is certainly a valid argument in the contradictions between The Creed of the Church and then the later Justice Codes (Crimes, High Crimes, SP Acts), as was brilliantly analyzed by Clearbird at:
        http://www.freezoneearth.org/HolyCows/cows/06justice.htm

        And there are also plenty of other landmines in the Admin Tech.

        But it’s laughable to invoke “conversational hypnotism” as some sort of appeal to fear. And Mark nailed it with the example with the traffic signals.

        I’m with you Mark. When I saw Jeff take those quotes out of context, and use this “conversational hypnotism” in his interview, I was stunned. If one follows his argument to its logical conclusion, then every great communicator is a hypnotist! From Ronald Reagan, to Oprah Whinfrey, to Tony Robbins, to the Buddha. Heck, even the guys writing about “conversational hypnotism” are trying to conversationally hypnotize you!

        This is the “victim” mindset. It’s the opposite of accepting responsibility and taking ownership of one’s life and decisions. It’s a pretty sad state.

  23. You should be ashamed of yourself.

  24. Hubbard was a great associative thinker, we will see what comes of it in the real world. Mostly Auditing has the most chanche to survive

  25. Has anyone looked into Aleistar Crowley’s stuff and L Ron Hubbard’s involvement with it including OTO, Thelema through Jack Parson’s back in LA? I would love to get some of your thoughts about it! Wild stuff for sure!

    • Check out my next book.

    • Maybe this sounds od but I understand what he was trying to get out of it

    • My opinion about the Crowely approach to evolving:

      If we take into account the reality or possibility of a multi-dimensional universe with varying strata of worlds inhabited with varying types of and qualities of beings, material and none material, it is my opinion that Crowley was seeking control by invoking a lower strata world to gain control over for his personal power.

      What type of being would be attracted to the call of a ritual that asks for that being to do the bidding of the invoker?

      In Vedic texts there are beings called Raksashas, a lowered nature being. In the chapter “The Resurrection of Sri Yukeswar” in the book Autobiography of a Yogi, the spiritual master Sri Yukteswar goes into descriptive detail.

      It is cautioned to not allow these negative dark beings into one’s body or mind. Thirsting for human experience through a willing host these beings can damage the brain by seeking control of the central nervous system.

      Opening our intuitive channels to the wise sages and liberated Buddhas is a far better investment in spirit dabbling. For they convey blessing and guidance for the truth seeker.

      Lower natured souls are hungry for power and sense gratification. Liberated souls are interested in our happiness and welfare only.

      When you go within, looking for thetans, be careful. Or simply give up the process altogether. Because they just may find you.

      • In my metaphysical meanderings, I have considered the possibility, that the Church of Scientology is affected by what I have stated.

        It is possible that announcing Anti-Christ status has it’s cosmic consequences. That is if you consider the possiblity of a multi-dimensional cosmos. Otherwise I’m just deluded in considering the possibility.

  26. This post, Marty, and Jeffersons brilliant interview on the Bunker put eloquently into words what I have been saying for years. Every step of Scientology, from the moment you read your first LRH words and listen to your first lecture and do your first patter drill, you are hypnotizing yourself into oblivion. For those of us lucky enough to have been in the Sea Org and for those of us EXTRA special few who got the privilege of “volunteering” for the RPF it went a step further than just your run of the mill hypnotism. It became PDHing on the most virile levels.
    Yes this was always L Ron’s intention. Total control. Total submission to HIS vision of the universe. HIS path to freedom. HIS way or no way. And ANY other way was not only wrong but evil and even to look at or think about any other path meant you were a betrayer on the worst order. And the brilliant thing is no one had to even tell you that. You told YOURSELF. You beat yourself into submission before any ethics officer even had the chance to.
    And for anyone who reads these words here and thinks to themselves, “wow, they must have so many OWs/Evil Purps” or that I have an unhandled case or whatever scio-speak that pops to mind, just realize, please, that you aren’t thinking. You are regurgitating predetermined responses to stimuli. AKA acting out hypnotic commands.
    Snap out of it.
    Be willing to LOOK at Scientology for what it REALLY is and see it, warts and all. L Ron did this. He set this up exactly as it is now. If he were alive he would be doing EXACTLY what Miscavage is doing. He would be raking in the money and throwing up monuments to himself wherever he could.
    It would just be more believable nonsense because HE would be saying it live instead of Miscavage making it up as he goes along.
    You can recover from hypnosis.
    You can actually look at life and see it through your own eyes and not through the Scientology colored goggles you are wearing.
    I encourage you to do so.

    • Ex-RPFer: If you have read any of my posts, you cannot help but know that I am an individual who thinks for myself. Argue with that then you didn’t read my posts. I wore a dirty rag on my left arm when I was 12, 45 yrs. ago. I knew it wasn’t a good idea then. I have been objectively looking at life, Scn. and many other sciences for a very long time. I apologize for your experience which prevented any real gain. If I had been more of a man, I would have straightened the church out long ago. That is a failure I share with many.
      But to flat out say it is ALL hypnotism, suggestion, always intended to be a cult etc.etc. is just plain idiocy. I have been told since I was 6 that I have a very practical viewpoint on life. I saw, a long time ago, to consult my own sense and observation with everything I ‘learned’. I never ‘believed’ ANYTHING. I found it easy to discount that which, to me, was observably untrue or even harmful. I have put in the work. I have also discovered and increased my ability to recognize what is right and worthwhile.
      A structured, methodical method of examining your past, while learning and verifying the learned and verified attributes of life is a very worthwhile endeavor.
      Expose and kick out a few incompetents and assholes, repair the rest with love and skill, and the church would be surprisingly easy to correct. And there are already several other organizations using primarily LRH methods who are improving the lives of many. Many know, after 60 yrs. of experience not to discount the vast knowledge of other philosophies, not to treat people like shit and how not to brainwash people.
      You had a very rough time, but it’s nothing compared to what you and I have been through in the past. You and a few others are in a unique position to help with the repairs. We need your help. It would be worthwhile to you and me.
      Mark

      • Mark,
        I am happy that you had a good time in Scientology. I am happy for you that you enjoy the “tech”. As to your ability to see what is right and worthwhile that is entirely opinion. You believe that you have a superior ability in this area. I don’t know you from Adam and can only see your observations here on this website.
        My opinion of your ability is irrelevant.
        I have no desire to fix up the church. I don’t like it or anything that it stands for in the slightest.
        And this has nothing to do with how or what tech I had applied to me.
        Yes there were times I had “fun” receiving auditing. But I am a fun person. I made life on the RPF bearable for me and everyone else around me by making jokes and keeping things light. I am good at that. I probably would have cracked everyone up on the Titanic. That doesn’t mean that we all wouldn’t have drowned but at least we would have had a laugh while we did.
        But this time I have decided to NOT be on the Titanic.
        I see Scientology for what it truly is and it isn’t help. It isn’t a way out of anything. It is a circular track that goes nowhere and leaves you tired and unable to do anything but keep running in circles until you die.
        I have moved on to the world around all of us.
        I am a student of life and the universe. I look everywhere and at everything that I can do discover as much as I can about the world, the universe and my relationship to those things.
        There is no one single path to that.
        There are MANY, many paths and you have to find the bits of each that keep you moving forward so that you don’t end up like a hamster on a wheel just running.
        I appreciate you acking my “rough time” in the Sea Org/RPF. That really doesn’t begin to cover it. It was hell. I could probably swap POW stories with John McCain. It was that bad. I will never align myself with anything associated with Scientology again. It was a hell I wouldn’t wish on Hitler and I will never go through it again.
        I hope you can understand my viewpoint. This isn’t a personal attack on you or what you believe or choose to practice or believe. This is what I went through and what I know to be true for me.

        • To ExRPF: Excerpt from my latest post:
          SORRY if I have been insulting to those who have been horribly, even engramically, treated by individuals in the name of the church. It was often your recognition of wrongness that brought cross hairs to bear down on you. Then you finally had the balls or guts to get out. For that, you all have my respect.
          Mark

  27. Relating this issue with some of your previous posts regarding the various constucts created by Ron.

    ‘By this point (20th Century) in history, Hubbard has invalidated and laid to waste every great thinker who made possible and contributed to his way of thinking.’

    From my recall of the various tapes, policies and books I think this is an accurate statement. The evolution of the “only one” attitude aligned with the evolution from a full acknowledgement of those who went before him, to an utter disdain toward the thinkers he originally credited. Don’t think with anyone else, don’t read anyone else (I’ve done that for you), don’t evaluate anyone else and especially don’t investigate if my interpretation of anyone else is accurate or not.

    I’d already had some great wins on Grade 0 when I listened to a tape where Ron had invalidated krishnamurti. I was really put off by this inval. I loved the Prophet and had found it very helpful at the time. My thought was “why the hell did he have to say that?” I never voiced the thought or raised the objection, though I should have.

    The construct of, “We of the church believe that all men have inalienable rights to think freely to talk freely and to write freely their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon the opinions of others,” became STFU or you will be declared and disconnected. Quite a contrast in constructs.

    One could take everything good that LRH ever wrote and show how it was hypocritical nonsense. One could take every bit of hypocritical nonsense LRH ever put out and show how it was not what he really meant. Depends on what construct one wishes to convice others is the real and valid one.

    One could take much of what Hubbard wrote or said as covertly hypnotizing others into his web. Or one could assume that he was utterly sincere in his stated goals for his research and developments. Or, one could assume that he simply failed to achieve many of his goals and rather than admit failure he tried to BS his way out of the admission. Or one could assume that there is nothing of value, or assume that it’s all perfect and GAG II will be the ultimate success.

    My current viewpoint is that there is quite a lot of valuable info and there are processess which I can use to help people get over their hangups and achieve a greater freedom. Almost all of the valuable info can be acquired from other sources. Very few of the processes are available elsewhere.

    Personally, I think Ron was sincere in trying to develop processes that would help. I also think he used his charm to pull the wool over your eyes when he really didn’t know what he was talking about, or when he wanted to cover something up.

    I think I have a pretty good handle on the good, the bad and the ugly of it all. It’s a shame that organizationally the good was so overshadowed by the bad the and ugly. Makes many want to reject the whole lot.

    • Great post.

      I’m not sure that “Almost all of the valuable info can be acquired from other sources” but it does seem that “Very few of the processes are available elsewhere.”

    • Les,
      Yes I remember that tape, he actually called Krishnamurthy a Psychiatrist.
      Really pissed me off.

    • one of those who see

      ” Almost all of the valuable info can be acquired from other sources. Very few of the processes are available elsewhere. ” Excellent. I had the thought the other day that LRH went over the top. “The race between Dianetics and War” may be why. It really could have been (and still can be) all the great eastern philosophy and the addition of the processes to help people become freer and more self determined as to better achieve what is in that philosophy. This seems to be Marty’s direction from my observation.
      And even if there is a race between Dianetics and War – this, to me, is still the correct direction. Do you solve the frantic chaos of a situation with more frantic chaos? No, be still, calm, at peace and effective. The more restimulated the case, the lighter the technique. There is so much truth in Scientology. So much that can help. We have just hit a little bump in the road in history. I am confident that the good in the tech, policy, philosophy will shine on and improve conditions in the long run. I think a lot of us already get it and are dropping the unworkable pieces. The present church is just a set back we didn’t expect. ARCX I am so happy that Marty chose to create this blog and communicate his journey.

  28. Marty you could make a long list of tought stopping phrases regarding Scientology

  29. I have onley these two clips of one lecture in october 1954 to offer on the subject.

  30. Printed and inserted into the proper place in my book Marty, Thank you very much for this.
    Cece

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