Scientology Ethics Deconstructed

For those who don’t frequent Tony Ortega’s Underground Bunker, there is an excellent series running on the scientology ethics system.  It is a series of interviews with Jefferson Hawkins.  Jeff deconstructs the system and exposes it as more of a means of control than an attempt to upgrade personal and organizational integrity.  I suggest you read the interview segments in order as Jeff analyzes the Introduction to Scientology Ethics book from beginning to end.

1.        Opening interview.

2.       The Optimum Solution.

3.       Honesty.

4.      Statistics.

5.     Conditions.

6.     Suppressive Persons.

7.     PTSness.

8.    Knowledge Reports – institutionalized snitching.

9.    High crimes and misdemeanors – the justice code.

10.  Justice proceedings.

 

157 responses to “Scientology Ethics Deconstructed

  1. Thanks for organizing these links, Marty! I found this series of discussions — conducted by email, I’m guessing? — truly helpful in understanding the cult mindset in its own terms. Hawkins is remarkably articulate, too: lays things out clearly and objectively without resorting to flights of rhetorical drama. A kindred spirit of yours, in that way.

  2. Roger From Switzerrland Thought

    Great articles from Jeff !

    Lrh wrote a lot. Also many nonsenses and as long people believed everything he uttered, there was no need for him to work scientifically.

    I Just had a very interesting experience and I realized how foolish I was to believe anything he said.
    I falled with my bycicle with highspeed, as there was a tiny spot of ice on the road. I was a little bit confused but didn’t feel too much pain.2 minutes later the same thing happened to my wife, but she fell onto the nose and was bleeding heavily. She neither didn’t experience any pain, but just was confused for some minutes. We went to the hospital to check her nose. Everithing was ok, just some scratches. While she laid on the bed in the hospital I asked her, If she wants a touch assist. She smiled and meant”No”.
    The doctor asked if she has to check me too ! I refused as I felt OK. I didn’t know !
    We went happily away.
    Only about 3-4 hours later we both started to feel heavy pain. We couldn’t move normally. Gradually the pain disappeared and we are ok now.

    We didn’t understand what was happening when we compared it to what we learned in Scientology. As the theory says as soon as you feel pain you go a little bit anaten and if there’s lot of pain you are unconscious. We had a heavy shock, didn’t feel any pain ( by googling it we found out out that the body produces a “painkiller” in such moments) and very fast had a good mood again and weren’t anaten. We thought it doesn’t make any sense if one compares it to dianetics !

    So, I googled more and looked up the definition of pain, there was more to it then just heat and cold as described in ” Engram running and the time track”. Also I found out that as soon the body is injured the healing process starts immediatdly by the body sending more blood to the area and the nerves doing all kind of things (biochemically), which meand the body goes into com with the injured area and this is totally contrary to the theory of touch assists !

    It’s an interesting experience. my wife was a little bit worried about that something was wrong with us (PTS ? Overts ? etc…); I just had to laugh about it and meant what was wrong was the the tiny spot of ice ! I don’t think that people go pts to ice on the road ! In the hospital they were smiling and meant quite some people had accidents with their bycicles because of the ice. We weren’t the first ones.

    It’s a pity that Lrh never did some scientifical work on his own theories. Did he think he knows everything and there’s nothing new to learn !

    Dianetics and Scientology could be great subjects toda today if Scientologists wouldn’t have swallowed anything he said,.
    Perhaps one day some people will do the work he didn’t !

    • I think this is one “stable datum” held dear by most Scnists that rarely is challenged – All accidents, illnesses or mistakes are the result of a PTS condition (more or less). How does one even begin to evaluate this “truth”?
      First of all, it is presented as an absolute.
      Second, the amount of data you would have to collect, or the number of cases you would have to observe would be truly immense.
      Third, taking the suspected PTS individual and interviewing them for Type I and Type II situations…well, 99.99% you’re gonna come up with SOMETHING, mainly because you HAVE TO. But all that proves is that man has had their share of suppression and counter-intention. Just because the person came up with an answer to the question does not mean you have uncovered the CAUSE of the mishap. Yet most Scnists believe just that.
      And in my 30 years of dealings in this area I have NEVER seen a person miraculously recover from their condition because a PTS handling was done.

      • Roger From Switzerrland Thought

        me neither !

      • Hi statpush

        “All accidents, illnesses or mistakes are the result of a P.T.S. condition”. This is a truth which I believe to be self-evident, if one understands how the mind works.

        All accidents etc. are the result of lowered awareness and all lowered awareness is a result of being out of Present Time; and the only reason a person would be out of present time is that a memory is in re-stimulation.

        There is a little Buddhist tale that goes like this. At a particular monastery the novices decided to play a prank on the head monk who was renowned for his awareness of present time, so when he came to inspect their dormitory they balanced a bowl of water on top of the partly opened door thinking when the head monk fully opened the door the bowl of water would fall on his head. When he arrived he carefully squeezed round the door without disturbing the bowl of water.

        The novices were well impressed thinking he had some sixth sense that made him able to discern the trap they had set. When they asked him how he had done it he said it was easy. They had cleaned the windows so thoroughly that he could see the reflection of the door and the bowl of water before he entered the room. THAT IS AWARENESS.

        I think any car driver who has ever run into the car in front would have to admit that if they had only noticed the brake lights go on a fraction sooner the accident would have been avoided, just another example of not being in P.T. Any Christian worth his salt would totally concur that IN TRUTH there cannot be an accident for either every single thing in this universe has a purpose or nothing has a purpose, and everything is an accident, and there is no God.

        • Pip:
          Very good post.
          What I see lacking in the Scn. Church is a lack of experience and understanding of the big picture.

          Example: When one shows any indication of a study problem, most course Sup.s will beat you to death with “Look up your MUs” until you and he are at your wits end. Then they may try something else or just send you to ethics. Study is a very large field with many handlings for many problems.

          Similarly, when an individual has a cold or sprains his ankle, there are many effective handlings, starting with nutrition and assists. Is the person PTS? Of course, why do you think he is on this ‘out in the boondocks’ planet. Assisting one with illness or injury is a skill, a talent and a gradient. It is very individual. There is a lot of knowledge to draw from and finding the right help to give at the right time can be magic. PTS handling for a particular event may be immediate or a few years away.

          You know this. I’m just sitting on the couch trying to sound smart. Got some handling to do on my own.

          Thanks for your patience.
          Mark

          • Hi Mark

            I love the study tech but unfortunately it can be used to invalidate the student.

            When I first started studying the Dianetics course I was overwhelmed by the amount of material I had to understand and it actually brought me to tears. Fortunately the course supervisor was an old time Scientologist and he suggested I might need word clearing. During the word clearing the meter was reading on the word ‘a’ and I was asked to look it up in the dictionary. It said “the indefinite article”. I still did not get it so the word clearer respectfully asked me to look up the word ‘the’ and guess what! It said “the definite article” – well it was as if a light had gone on in my head. Here I was 26 years old and I didn’t know the difference between A CAT and THE CAT.

            No one needed to tell me the importance of understanding the meaning of words after that. Talk about “cognitions being the milestones of case gain”!

            I love everything about Scientology but it has to come out of a HEART OF LOVE.

            LOVE without UNDERSTANDING is ineffectual
            UNDERSTANDING without LOVE is dangerous
            LOVE and UNDERSTANDING IS DIVINE

    • Sweet write-up

      Regarding research one name comes to mind : Alan Walter

      http://paulsrabbit.com/The-ESMB-Posts.pdf

    • Hi Roger –

      I like your story.

      It clearly shows your process of coming up out of “thinking with” Scientology.

      There is a certain logic which a person uses when he thinks with Scientology. He begins with some Scientology “stable datum” such as “All illness in greater or lesser degree and all foul-ups stem directly from a PTS condition.”

      Beginning with that principle, the person then goes onto reasoning with it and making conclusions about his experiences. The problem is that the Scientology principle is usually overly simplistic, and in this case, actually false!

      So a person who thinks with Scientology “stable data” is trapped into a reasoning process which goes off the rails right from the beginning. He ends up being trapped in a fixed “logic” which can only make certain conclusions and never others.

      This is how a person gets trapped in the Scientology mindset: He thinks with Scientology, just as he was taught to do by L Ron Hubbard.

      But your post shows the process of beginning to replace Scientology stable data with outside ideas. This process is very productive and rewarding. It creates new and more open reasoning which tends to incorporate actual facts, rather than just fixed Scientology “stable data”.

      That was a very cool post you wrote, Roger. It is a very clear snapshot of the process of coming up out of the Scientology mindset.

      Thank you.

      Alanzo

      • Hey Alan,
        Drop me an email at statpush88008@gmail.com
        It’s been a long time.

        StatPush

      • Roger From Switzerrland Thought

        ” So a person who thinks with Scientology “stable data” is trapped into a reasoning process which goes off the rails right from the beginning. He ends up being trapped in a fixed “logic” which can only make certain conclusions and never others.”

        You’re totally right . I’d an accident. What caused the accident ? Ice on the street !
        A scientologist would have thousands of other reasons like: Pts to..a motivator for …not in pt…bad auditing..hm…ot case restimulated….hm…out-int—-ptp—pulled it in…

        Fortunately we have the internet to find data of comparable magnitude and so be able to evaluate the teachings of LRH.

        • Roger wrote:

          Fortunately we have the internet to find data of comparable magnitude and so be able to evaluate the teachings of LRH.

          Scientology Logic 8
          A datum can be evaluated only by a datum of comparable magnitude.

          I’ve always found that word only to be very instructive. It’s why I bolded it.

          Logic 8 is the route out of cultic thinking with Scientology. Through its use, a Scientologist can venture outside of Scientology, looking for things outside to compare with things inside, and thus ground a Scientologist’s thinking into its proper contexts.

          Hubbard told Scientologists things like “Dianetics was a bolt from the blue”, which of course means that he is saying Dianetics has nothing of comparable magnitude to which Logic 8 can be applied.

          But that’s not true, and it is statements like these that, for me, reveals Hubbard’s true intent with regard to Scientologists: He wants to trap them inside his Scientology bubble lest they become loyal to someone else.

          Here is an article that I found by a pure wog which applies Logic 8 to Scientology, and in this passage, Dianetics:

          In 1950, Hubbard’s first work on Dianetics appeared in Astounding Science Fiction magazine, with editor John W. Campbell hailing it as “one of the most important articles ever published.” Walter Winchell said of its rumored release, “From all indications it will prove to be as revolutionary for humanity as the first caveman’s discovery and utilization of fire. [2] Stripped of obvious hyperbole, Dianetics — literally “through mind” — was a bold attempt to push Psychoanalysis into the age of Univac. Drawing liberally on Sigmund Freud’s Standard Edition and Alfred Korzybski’s Science and Sanity, Hubbard constructed a logical model of the human stimulus/response mechanism which he called “the reactive mind.”

          http://www.larabell.org/ladder.html

          Right there, by applying Logic 8, the Scientologist can study these subjects to get data of comparable magnitude to Dianetics, and their judgement and reasoning will begin to improve.

          It was Korzybski who first said that you can not understand anything in isolation from anything else. And it ws Hubbard, knowing and understanding exactly what Korzybski meant and said, who worked hard over many decades to get Scientologists to do just that.

          If you did that, what would you have to be thinking to do that to Scientologists?

          Alanzo

          • singanddanceall

            nice write up Alanzo. And nice links.

            But the bottom line is that there are no OT levels above OT8 created by LRH.

            as Marty has posted here on his blog some time back.

            What does that tells us if one examines and remembers LRH saying they were available in note form, I believe,

            But, if one examines the Bridge to total Freedom Grade Chart, why it shows levels above OT8.

            But as Marty has confirmed, none exist.

            What does this mean, really?

            DM has no choice but to keep people going down the Bridge, until he DM dies. And then what?

            Interestingly, LRH says a “cleared planet”, as opposed to a “OT” planet.

            One has to wonder?

    • Roger,
      Wonderful. If you have not already read it, the book ” The Biology of Belief” by Bruce Lipton, contextualizes Dianetics.

      http://www.amazon.com/The-Biology-Belief-Unleashing-Consciousness/dp/1401923127/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1390056869&sr=8-1&keywords=the+biology+of+belief+by+bruce+lipton

      • There is a lecture of Lipton’s on YouTube of the same name. He cranks through all his research in an hour long summary that is very worthwhile. And as for Jeff’s write-ups, there is someone who had the intelligence to observe what was happening to himself and others around him. DM had a longstanding bone to pick with Jeff because Jeff got DMSMH to #1 on the NYT bestseller list.

        • Dan,
          I got it. Also for what I can gather from a distance, Jeff has that wonderful quality of beingness, which is often a magnet for sadists psychopaths like DM.

        • Dan,

          Your commentary, like so much of what other ex really in the know staffers lived, is priceless.

          Wish you and Mariette really long lives, and I enjoy your thoughts and I hope you later on get interviewed in depth. You and Russ Williams and Mickey Lipton and other old “RTRC” staffers have pricelessly important Scientology history to tell!

      • Roger From Switzerrland Thought

        Conan,

        I just looked at a summary of it. It makes some sense and could be the missing data in dianetics, but in the moment I’ve no envy to read about new theories. I’m just sorting out the false theories running around in my head.
        I’ll look at it at a later time.
        The essays of Jeff about ethics help a lot to sort out out all the false data in my head and it gives a peace of mind and a security about being able to reason normally and I’m happy with that. The same is when I’m learning about how the body really functions.

      • Thanks for the recommend. Looks very interesting. I will read it.

  3. I like this deconstruction.

  4. I agree. This is a must read for all Scnists (in or out). I found Jeff’s viewpoint and insight into the subject to be refreshing and revealing. For myself, this is an area of large amounts of uninspected data; data you simply took on-board as “truth.” Jeff’s dissection helped me to reevaluate and decide for myself.

  5. It’s amazing how much open detailed discussion of the Scientology “scriptures” is being done today, and commented upon by the hundreds of ex members who lived years and years of life in Scientology.

    Just in the last 10 years a whole new crop of ex senior leaders and former official public followers, have written so much, there is just a whole more detailed look into the whole ongoing Scientology system.

    Great summary of links, for the best commentary on the “Introduction to Scientology Ethics” book.

    PS: Your 3rd book, Marty, just is hugely underappreciated, for all the new history of Hubbard’s final years which you made public in your 3rd book, thanks again for all you wrote there!

    • I agree Chuck about Marty’s new book. I had a friend come by (an X from the SO) and I had her read the chapter about Sarge’s comments (24) aloud to me while here. It was very good for her. Ron was just a man with his viewpoint. We did not HAVE to agree 100% with him but many of us did. That was the lesson we needed at the time I suppose. For myself I came out of it in pretty good shape and in better shape then I went in since I can recognize ‘traps’ much better. At least I am sitting in a position I can view now where for many years I stopped myself from viewing to a large degree – and could have stayed that way into eternity if not for us all sharing the viewpoints and it being OK to do that and of course me being willing to look and listen again to others. But I did not start looking objectively at life against the Ron viewpoint until I landed up overwhelmed when I knew that as an OT III I should not be. It was then that I knew something is wrong with m stable datum’s as they were no longer stable nor did they lead me to truth. I had to re-adjust my views considerably to make headway. False Data Stripping however it is done is key to advancement.

    • singanddanceall

      “Socratic method (also known as method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate), named after the classical Greek philosopher Socrates, is a form of inquiry and discussion between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to illuminate ideas. It is a dialectical method, often involving a discussion in which the defense of one point of view is questioned; one participant may lead another to contradict himself in some way, thus strengthening the inquirer’s own point.”

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method

      The scientology courseroom no allow this.

  6. Very educational. I would say it is highly recommended reading for those wishing to de-compress after decades of ethics “handlings”….it sure helped me understand what was going on.

  7. Great Marty.
    Jeff made an impeccable deconstruction of the Ethics system, I think that “Introduction to Scientology Ethics” book should be renamed “Introduction to Scientology Brain Washing”.

    By the way I’m looking for a copy of HCO PL 13 Nov 74 “HCO May Do Confessional Lists”

    Cat Daddy or anyone ?

    • http://standardtech.wordpress.com/out-tech/hco-security-checks/

      “Then in November 1974, HCO PL 13 Nov. 1974 “HCO May Do Confessional Lists” was released which canceled HCO PL 26 Aug. 1968, “Security Checks Abolished”. [Although, it did not cancel HCO PL 15 Nov 1970R] It stated the following:

      The right to do Integrity checks is given to HCO.

      Any data, HCOBs, tapes relating to ‘security checking’ or ‘Integrity Processing’ may be done by HCO.

      The practice of doing only meter checks is no longer required.

      The reason given was:

      THE MAJORITY OF THE TROUBLES ORGS HAVE, TEND TO VANISH, WHEN HCO DEPT 3 USES CONFESSIONALS AND INTEGRITY LISTS CORRECTLY AND OFTEN WHENEVER TROUBLE MOUNTS UP IN THE ORG.”

    • The whole enchilada on one page

      Exerpt:

      http://www.wiseoldgoat.com/papers-scientology/hubbard_vs_sec-checking.html

      Then 2 months later in November 1974 we get the reversal to Sec Checking sort of authorized by HCO PL 13 Nov 74 “HCO May Do Confessional Lists”. Indeed noteworthy is that this also cancelled the HCO PL that had abolished Sec Checking earlier in 1968, it notes: “Cancels HCO P/L 26 Aug 68, Security Checks Abolished”. It further says:

      “The right to do Integrity checks is given to HCO.

      Any data, HCOBs, tapes relating to ‘security checking’ or ‘Integrity Processing’ may be done by HCO.

      The practice of doing only meter checks is no longer required.”

      With reason given:

      “THE MAJORITY OF THE TROUBLES ORGS HAVE, TEND TO VANISH, WHEN HCO DEPT 3 USES CONFESSIONALS AND INTEGRITY LISTS CORRECTLY AND OFTEN WHENEVER TROUBLE MOUNTS UP IN THE ORG. …

  8. Marty, Thank you so much for posting this. It gets rid of some (a lot from my viewpoint) false data that may be preventing understanding other enlightening teachings. Good or Bad, Right or Wrong, we all may have collected false data from the ethics tech and thus until ‘cleared’ of the ‘held down 7s’ making us handicapped in ways unbeknownst to ourselves.
    I advise a good look at Jeff’s writings also especially for any that lived LRH’s thinking ‘it is the only truth’.
    It was not allowed (thought stopped) by ourselves (and policy) to question objectively the ethics tech. Now we can and should. Multi view points are good to look at and save one time in the path of advancement. Thank you.

  9. Hi Marty

    Thank you very much for your latest thread, I see I am the first to reply but maybe by the time you get this others will have responded. So far I have only read the “opening interview” but that has so much material in it I wanted to respond forthwith.

    There is a saying in Christian Science that goes like this “If the premise is incorrect the conclusion will be incorrect”. As with Scientology and the ‘inerrancy’ of L.R.H., so with Christian Science, and the “infallibility” of Mary Baker Eddy.

    Scientology Ethics is the most precise system every devised by man. The flaw does not exist in the system but in “MAN HIMSELF”. In fact Ron has said that man in his abarrated state cannot be trusted with ethics. Yes it is true that “ethics is a control mechanism” but how it is used is down to the “beingness” of the user.

    There is no doubt in my mind that the application of Scientology Ethics can give a person power – the ability to START – CHANGE – STOP conditions, but as long as the person applying the ethics technology is motivated by SELF AGRANDISMENT they will use it for DISTRUCTIVE PURPOSES.

    I let rooms for a living and without the application of Scientology Ethics my lodgers would be purely lodgers and I would just be a landlord. With the use of Ethics we can be friends and we can find the solution to very problem where everyone wins.

    Unless Ethics is applied from a Pan-determined viewpoint it will always entail a destructive element. The only outpoint in applying Scientology Ethics is when the purpose deteriorates from DISCIPLINE to PUNISHMENT. I speak from experience having been declared ENEMY at least four times and EXPELLED three. If anyone can better that do get in touch.

    pip_threlfall@yahoo.co.uk

  10. I am so happy that people are finally looking at Hubbards written works with reasoned criticism.

    A freedom that he personally would have called out the black ops hounds on you for doing.

    Thank you internet, for being the overwhelming force allowing ex members to decompress from Ron’s brainwashing techniques.

    You said something recently Marty that sums it all up and I paraphrase:

    Scientology in its present state cannot survive the age of information.

    To those that feel uncomfortable with criticism towards Ron I would suggest doing it in a small gradient.

    Allow youself one thought a day. Go back over your own mind and memory and recall a time that you agreed to something that just did not feel right, that you agreed to because “Ron said” or “I have MUs” or “My overts” or ” i just don’t understand.

    Go over some written words of Ron’s and spot an inconsistency.

    ALLOW YOURSELF THE FREEDOM TO HAVE A CRITICAL THOUGHT. IF YOU FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE HAVING A CRITICAL THOUGHT IT IS BECAUSE SOMEWHERE ALONG YOUR TRAINING YOU HAVE SURRENDERED AN ESSENTIAL PART OF YOU MENTAL HEALTH:

    FREEDOM!

    • Brian,
      “Go over some written words of Ron’s and spot an inconsistency”

      HA,HA,HA,HA!!

      I was thinking last night of proposing to run a process on die-hard Scientologists:

      Spot an outpoint in Scientology?

      • Yes Conan, I to have thought of a process, or two.

        It’s a repetitive process.

        The first is:

        Have a critical thought of L.Ron Hubbard…….. Thank you
        Have a critical thought of L.Ron Hubbard……….Thank you

        Continue until:

        EP- VGI’s and ability to have a critical thought of Ron comfortably with no uncomfortable feelings. Seeing Ron as he is. Freedom to agree and disagree with L.Ron Hubbard. Rehabilitated self determinism.

        Another fun process would be:

        Find something in Scientology you agree with……….. Thank you
        Find something in Scientology you disagree with………Thank you

        Continue until:

        VGI’s and ability to see those doctrines that are your truth and comfortable with the knowledge of doctrines you don’t agree with.
        Free to use Scientology as you see fit and the recognition that Ron is not Scientology.
        That Scientology is a free process of knowing how to know which belongs totally to you.
        Free from the erroneous thought that Hubbard-ology is Scientology.

        Scientology…… The love and study of knowing how to know.

        Hubbard-ology….. The love and study of what L. Ron Hubbard knew, discovered, plagiarized or imagined.

        You get a cert that qualifies you as a Free Scientologist.

        Able to run any process, develope any process, audit, meditate, chant, introspect, self analyze with self or another at anytime you want, anywhere you want with whom ever you want, to continue as a Scientologist, to dump the whole thing as bunk, to love the whole thing as wonderful wisdom, to embrace criticsim of Scientology as a great opportunity to demonstrate granting of beingness and to have no reaction at all to criticism of L. Ron Hubbard. Button flat….. Nada, fini, done.

        And to embrace those critical of Scientology and L. Ron Hubbard as regular human beings with the right to have their own view point without one’s panties getting bunched in a wad.🙂

      • I think “what’s right about Scientology?” might work better.

        • By spotting both Valkov, it will help a being to differenciate between what is truth for them and what is not.

          If you think Scientology is simply just the truth and Ron is perfect than I see your point.

          But if you already think it is all true than this sort of investigating is meaningless.

          But there are some of us that don’t see it that way and desire freedom from assumed falsehoods.

          • And the words “agree or disagree” are words that consider the individuals sovereignty, their own causation in the matter, their own personal inner choice based on their own understanding free from authoritative dominance.

            Yes, free from authoritative dominance. Free to have ones own point of view, comfortably, and not give a fuck of what “those that know” say.

            That is personal power. That is self determinism. That is OT cause.

            • singanddanceall

              while LRH said the most important point of the ARC triangle was communication,

              I actually have found the most important point in Scientolgy is agreement,

              to keep scientology working.

          • Yes, it may be necessary to alternate “What’s wrong about scientology”. But the first question I believe will often bring the wrongnesses to view, because it is the rightnesses that are the driving force and are making the wrongnesses persist, if you get my meaning? First postulate, second postulate?

          • Brian, if you want freedom from assumed falsehoods, then you need to spot the times when you believed the falsehoods were true. You’re ultimately the one who gave power to them.

            • Great Valkov! Run it from your point of view, with the words that make sense to you.
              Run it and let us know what happened.

              I don’t think it matters the sequence of the question.

              Our powers of discrimination are more powerful than the sequence of a question.

              The only prerequisite to seeing is looking as one’s self. With no assumed mind filters.

              Run it and let us know what happened. Maybe you can help people.

      • I would add to that:

        “Good. Now spot what goes on in your mind.”

        • Ha ha yes Letting Go, it’s always good to spot what is going on in the mind. Lately for me it’s been, “dissolve the mind.”

          It is such a noisy beast!

    • Brian, your comments are always insightful. This one is no exception. Today in Scientology (Co$) the ability to think or speak freely is simply unthinkable!

      I think LRH was at war when he wrote much of this Ethics/OSA/spy stuff. It was intended to protect the “Source” that is his auditing tech, but In the wrong hands 40 years later i.e. Miscavige, it’s a disaster. Today, the OEC volumes and ethics tech, etc.. are used to protect and promote a psychopath!

      LRH thought he could win the game on earth in his lifetime, but obviously he was wrong. And, in the end he was manipulated so his “checks and balances” for the future of Scientology went into the toilet before his body reached room temperature.

      • Thanks Robert………………

        Planetary take over, mixed with “I am the only human being to free humanity from disaster” plus knowledge of intelligence and mind control is what caused this trainnwreck and the perpetuation of crimes against our citizenry, that led to disastrous self created PR.

        It is possible if Ron didn’t need to be so god damn right and had sympathy and interest in opposing views, Scientology could have been something good.

        But even before DM, the seeds of discontent were sowed. The players were already in place for self defeat.

        Love did not rule the camp, and tyrany ruled the “ethics” computation of “greatest good.”

        • Yup, tyranny rules ethics today, but it has not always been so.

          Heavy handedness worked to motivate a lot of “laid back” seekers of “the answer to the universe” (which included a lot of hippies) in 1960’s and 70’s. And they, in turn, beat up the biggest government in the world. But, when this heavy handedness got pushed too far, particularly on its own members, LRH knew when to let up.

          Today the heavy handedness is always “on”. There is no “off”.

          LRH left a powerful weapon behind: the weapon is to allow people to peek into “the answer to the universe” but then control them with the power to cut them off from seeing more if they don’t do as they are told. He also advised us that this weapon has historically been used to enslave, which is exactly what has happened. And so we have an Independent field.

          • Robert from the nightmare stories on Apollo, I would have to say the heavy handedness was far from a naturing force for wayward hippies.

            And Paulette Cooper would certainly not agree with you.

            Is violence more prevalent today? Absolutely. But the blueprint for violent behavior came from Ron. He instructed DM to beat people, spit in their faces and validated him for it.

            DM was trained and nurtured down a line that was already immanent In his psyche. From Ron and his written words of war.

      • Hubbard knew, as early as 1973, when he was telling Scientologists that there were “15 levels above OT VII fully developed but existing in unissued note form,” that that was a lie.

        According to David Mayo, Hubbard, in 1978, redefined ‘Clear’ “for PR and marketing” purposes.

        Sure, Hubbard believed in some of his own stuff. He believed that the images on the book covers would have an hypnotic effect on the “wogs.” He believed in his own brilliance, but there are plenty of example of his deceiving Scientologists, including deceiving them about the “tech.”

        The guy had a hidden agenda. Hidden goals.

        He was doing something other than what he publicly said he was doing.

        It isn’t that he just “tried to hard,” etc.

        • And that’s “tried *too* hard.”

          Insight into what Hubbard was really doing can be found in his late 1940s ‘Affirmations’, and in his mid 1950s ‘Textbook on Psycho-Politics’.

          “Men are my slaves.”

          “Assert and maintain dominion over thoughts and loyalties through mental healing.”

          He knew what he was doing.

          • In all my looking at Ron the word “immoral” describes the best. With no moral rudder to stear one’s thoughts and actions, right and wrong become realtive to one’s ego. And ego then becomes the final arbiter.

            A moral and decent man could have contacted Paulette Cooper and said,”Good day Miss Cooper, I am sorry you feel that way. Can I help you in your life? I will give you free auditing to help you. Then you can come to your own conclusion.”

            That is what a world saviour worth anything would have done.

            But Ron had an immoral unchanging policy to destroy critics.

            Critics can become your best well wishers and advertising when won over by truth.

            But truth was not Ron’s goal. Power was, planetary take over, KSW, Bolivar etc.

            What made it crazier is he had paranoid tendencies and fought an invisible war with invisible aliens who became the ultimate evil that needed to be destroyed so the earth could be saved.

            And the GO/OSA signed up to become his willing hounds who would care not to “hurt others in a ……………Just………….. Cause”.

            Immoral and mentally unbalanced. A very dangerous combo.

            • Brian – Ron was not immoral, he was AMORAL. I know because so was I when I was a Scientologist. It was only when I became a Christian that I started to understand what morrality was really all about.

  11. Based on my personal experience in the SO I concur that the control methods were even abused as far as ‘determining the value of the person based on his statistics’. Irregardless of the person’s honest purpose to help another or irregardless of the good performance/service he could have made during that week, if the numbers were not high, as represented by statistics, he was judged to be in a certain state or ethics condition that in fact would not reflect his value as a person or his performance. This eventually caused introversion, invalidation, a rote method to judge another, thus control was easily exerted and extremely abused.

    Common sense, following your path and being honest with yourself can get you to higher levels without the need to solidly work it out with ‘Ethics Conditions’.

    Additionally morals enforced by Ethics within Scn did have the purpose to ‘close you in a frame of mind’ that all was for the group thus ignoring the other valuable and fun aspects of life; personal creation was impeded and controlled.

    Is good to see it, analyze it, come with new views and carry on with what I think is very rewarding: create your own life and feel good with yourself while doing so.

  12. I found particularly helpful the description of the “confusion hypnosis technique”.

    I realized that indeed I have been hypnotized by Hubbard, and seeing how it worked is quite a liberation.

    By pointing to the existing confusion in the fields of religion, science, psychiatry, philosophy, justice, etc. as well as in my own life, Hubbard could successfully implant his own viewpoints.

    No wonder current scientologists swallow everything from the management: they are implanted and hypnotized.

    I am grateful to these guys who are undoing the machinery, Marty, Rinder, Ortega, Hawkins and others, as that helps me an others undoing the implants.

  13. Other professions / groups code of ethics for interest value:

    http://www.socialworkers.org/pubs/code/code.asp

    http://www.ala.org/advocacy/proethics/codeofethics/codeethics (For librarians)

    http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp ( For Journalists )

    http://www.nursingworld.org/codeofethics (Nurses)

    http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx ( Psychologists)

    http://www.dsa.org/ethics/ (Direct Selling Association)

    http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/medical-ethics/code-medical-ethics.page (AMA)

    http://www.realtor.org/realtororg.nsf/files/R_COE-Pledge-of-Performance.pdf/$FILE/R_COE-Pledge-of-Performance.pdf (Realtors)

    http://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/model_rules_of_professional_conduct_table_of_contents.html ( lAWYERS)

    https://kb.defense.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/461 (Military)

    http://www.riversidesheriff.org/department/ethics.asp (Riverside Sheriff)

    http://www.dps.unc.edu/DPS%20Policies%20&%20Procedures/Appendix/3LawEnforcementCodeofEthics.pdf (Law Enforcement)

    http://aaeteachers.org/index.php/about-us/aae-code-of-ethics (Educators)

    http://www.discipleshomemissions.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Min_Ethics_document-2011.pdf (Christian Ministers)

    http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/200404/200404_102_code.cfm (Pastor / senior minister)

    http://reformedcelticchurch.org/webcontent/scriptorium/Clergy/RCC_Conduct_Code.pdf (Catholic Celtic)

    Most codes of ethics are designed to forward a purpose to help others, and to care about the person in front of you. Anyone reading through the hundreds of codes of ethics of various groups will not be surprised to understand there are frequent breaches in every group.

    There are also penalties, suspensions, fines, and dismissals / loss of licenses to practice in all the above groups. And, internal investigatory procedures within each profession.

    Conditions, well, these are generally reserves for market and economic analysts and the ordinary Joe Blow is not supposed to be aware of any conditions except the model of car he is driving and how the brakes are holding up. Maybe, some dents. A leaky roof in his ceiling.

    Of course, none of us were to have understanding of the human mind or character or a person’s propensities. These were reserved for “mental Health Experts”.

    And people in society are expected to hid inside and call 911 if any force is floating about on the streets.

    Hubbard had a way of taking the very “lofty” and placing it in ordinary hands.

    The results are the same as the 13 year old soldiers running around some cities with rifles and shotguns.

    Running a CAN HAVE can cause as much distress as running a CAN’T HAVE.

    I got a speeding ticket a few weeks ago. Through the Internet and Paypal I was able to pay an attorney to go to court for me for 49.99 and he got the charge reduced to a parking fine. Just like that, I was able to pay my local government and Attorney to falsify records. And all of these people have a code of ethics.

    Did all of us involved in that cycle make the world a better place to live in? I think not. Did I have the power to buy down the truth into a lie and have it entered onto the record as a truth? That was a power. The Internet, an Attorney, 49.99 put some power in my hands. But I am really not supposed to stare at these conditions, it is politically incorrect. I am not supposed to understand “local government” or “the legal process”.

    Nevertheless, with recent technology I did have the power to handle sending someone to court for me, to speak for me, to haggle for me, and the truth is buried between four of us out here. Me, the police officer, an Attorney and a Judge.

    We are in a time where “the lofty” has fallen onto the common folk.

    There was a time when a very select few could even report the news.

    • Oddly enough, without even trying, I have noticed Marty has adhered to the ethics code of a journalist. Where others embedded in this profession have fallen a wide distance from this code.

      It is a beautiful code.

      Preamble
      Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist’s credibility. Members of the Society share a dedication to ethical behavior and adopt this code to declare the Society’s principles and standards of practice.

      http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp

  14. In this modern culture we have many laws and regulations. We in Germany add to that list of laws and regulations around 60.000 pages a year full of new laws and interpretations of law and regulations. Do we all follow those laws and regulations? If you are in Germany, follow each traffic sign while driving exactly. Observe what happens.
    Everyone is excpeting that we use common sense in life. And now a Scientologist acts not that way. He is following those Scientology laws word by word. At least Jeffs sayings should tell this story. I cannot say if this had been his experience or not. I only can tell, that until I left in mid 90ies we used also common sense. We had not been stupid cult fools that had been brainwashed to beleve everything and follow every word Ron uttered without inspection.
    Sorry, I find this an insult. We tell the world what stupid brainwashed cult followers we all had been. This is simply not true. Maybe it is true for some. But not for the majority.

    • “We tell the world what stupid brainwashed cult followers we all had been.”

      Correction, not WE. I agree.

      It is stereotyping. I am not claiming to be one of the “stupid brainwashed cult followers” either. But then again, if David Miscavige had bitch slapped me like he did Jeff Hawkins, he would have ended up in Intensive Care or in lock down.

      I wouldn’t have sucked it up thinking, “What’s wrong with me?”

      You have to understand out of the MILLIONS of people that have explored Scientology, a very, very VERY small percentage ended up at the Int Base.

      These should not be used as the slide rule for a Scientologist. That is just unfair. In fact, it is not fair at all to judge or stereotype an entire civilization of people based on a few.

      Scientologists are very different. Not everyone joined CMO. Not everyone joined the Sea Org. Not everyone joined staff. These are smaller percentages. Plenty of people have explored Scientology, millions. The membership is only about 10 thousand.

      That tells you only a very small percentage even wanted to remain in any membership identity.

      • From the code of ethics for a journalist:

        — Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible.

        — Diligently seek out subjects of news stories to give them the opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing.

        — Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.

        — Examine their own cultural values and avoid imposing those values on others.

        — Avoid stereotyping by race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, geography, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance or social status.

        — Support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.

        — Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.

        — Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.

        — Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.

        — Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone’s privacy.

        — Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.

        —Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.

        — Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.

        Be Accountable
        Journalists are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other.

        Journalists should:

        — Clarify and explain news coverage and invite dialogue with the public over journalistic conduct.
        — Encourage the public to voice grievances against the news media.
        — Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
        — Expose unethical practices of journalists and the news media.
        — Abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.

        So, if you read an article ripping “Scientologists” apart for ethics, practices, experiences, values, etc. consider the source. Consider the writer has very little regard for ethics to begin with.

        An interview with one Christian could not possibly define every Christian into a stereotype that would be fair.

    • “We had not been stupid cult fools that had been brainwashed to beleve everything and follow every word Ron uttered without inspection.”

      I believe this sentence alone is a perfect example of how the system of control imposed by Scientology works.
      Of course you were expected to inspect every word that LRH wrote! But weren’t you also expected and trained to duplicate, and agree with everything he wrote? So you can complete that course? And go up the bridge? I think that is one of the most insidious systems of control: To have people actually believe they have freedom of choice while that very system only allows them to take one course of action. That is double-think, straight out of Orwell’s 1984.

      What I see here is people coming to realize what kind of mind-set they were in, once, and being honest about it.
      There’s no insult to this. I have been a fool many times in my life in many situations. But that’s okay. That doesn’t make me a bad person. It would make me a bad person if I didn’t learn anything out of these experiences.

      • Dr. Faust,
        „But weren’t you also expected and trained to duplicate, and agree with everything he wrote? So you can complete that course?“ Yes, but there is a power of choice for every person.
        Sample: I had been class 5 auditor and had been for happiness rundown training in the AO. After demonstrating that I can handle bugged cases others could not handle I had been ordered to do all training from beginning again. Starting from Student Hat (same dramatizations as Golden Age of Tech back in the early 80ies). I did refuse and got SP declared.
        Since the beginning of past life clears I had insisted to be clear. Had been ordered to do other things like Objectives (same dramatization going on today with golden age of tech phase 2 or super power). I did refuse. Result: no more progress up the bridge since 1979.
        But you see, either you talk about personal integrity or you live it. Even if you have to face severe censequences.
        By the way, the dramatizational pattern repeats and repeats starting from the advent of David Miscavige. Regarding clear or not, retrain after retrain, new meters, objectives and more. Scientology is in a stuck time track since that time.

        • You are speaking for a silent majority (“We tell the world what stupid brainwashed cult followers we all had been. This is simply not true. Maybe it is true for some. But not for the majority.”), and the freedom of choice everyone had.

          I have observed this in many conversations that I’ve had with Scientologists in good standing, and even with one not in good standing who was still defending Hubbard: You are free to choose to believe or not believe what Hubbard wrote! Hubbard even said so himself!
          However, that choice, as you have made quite clear in your own words, with that story about the SP declare, in practice ultimately really boils down to:
          (a) Give up independent thinking, so you can stay in the Church of Scientology
          (b) Think and act independently but be prepared to get kicked out of the Church of Scientology with all its ramnifications.

          So the notion that the majority of people who were once members of the Scientology organisation (and I mean not only on paper) weren’t at least for a limited stretch of time blind cult followers does not seem very real to me. The word “stupid” was your own addition so as to turn this opinion into an insult, when it really is not.

          In the end, it really comes down to Jeff Hawkin’s excellent deconstruction of Scientology ethics, which, as he has explained, is a very powerful tool of control over its members, and which holds the key reasons why the Church of Scientology is a cult. He also explained in detail what techniques are used to replace an individual’s moral code with that of Hubbard.
          And in my opinion, if someone once agreed to and adhered to the core principles of Scientology ethics, this someone was, at least at one point in time, in a cult mindset. There’s really no point in coming up with a nice euphemism for it.

        • Schorsch, You are not speaking for a silent majority. Millions have explored Scientology and Dianetics and they have about 10K members right now.

      • There is some alter is here. I never read anywhere that I was expected to agree with everything he wrote. Understand him, yes. Agree? No. Not sure what year and what Org you came in but that wasn’t the case for me.

        I never saw myself at the mercy of some insidious system either.

        Honestly, I think the brainwashing is thicker on this side of the fence.

        And if you stand up for yourself, you are considered :brainwashed” or “blind”. The effect of some invisible monster system.

        I am not saying that is not true for some. I know it is. But it isn’t true for me and if he is saying it isn’t true for him, why are you overriding his origination and discounting what he has to say and invalidating him?

        • > I never read anywhere that I was expected to agree with everything he wrote.

          Then you should re-read KSW point 3 and 7

          > why are you overriding his origination and discounting what he has to say and invalidating him?

          It might be because I don’t agree.

          • Well here we have you. You reject a right item for him. Discount everything he has to say. Accuse him of being deluded, dim witted, unaware and so fragile he doesn’t know he has been brainwashed. This isn’t “Scientology” or some religion, it is YOU.

            And this exactly the point I am making.

            • It is all well and good to point out mistakes, habits and policy written 50 years ago that doesn’t seem to fit in today. Just like big black rotary phones!

              But when you CHOOSE to NOT USE the advices about human courtesy that make for healthy social intercourse that BENEFIT others, you are dramatizing the very thing you are complaining about.

              It is because of every single one of us that made these choices, that set everyone up for a loss.

              I am tired of people looking in a mirror when they look at me. I am not you, or them. I had a different life. I did not make the same choices. I don’t need for people to discount everything I have to say because of some agenda they have. I don’t need or want people to evaluate for me or invalidate ME because of THEIR life and THEIR choices. I don’t need the abuse and I don’t need any sympathy. I don’t need to run with any herd on a witch hunt. These are all purposes.

              My purpose is to have the conversation.

              • And not a conversation that ends with the other person on the other end mentally disabled because they chose to have a conversation with me.

                The ONLY thing a person has to gain in Scientology is help fining out who they really are. If they want to come to the conclusion they are clueless fragile that were brainwashed and that is who they decide they really are. That is ON THEM and their decision about THEMSELVES.

                A lot of people got involved and began to find out who they really are, and they didn’t like what they found. And it is someone else’s fault! Guess what? That happens in marriages too! Work places! On hiking trips! Relationships!

                I didn’t send anyone to the RPF, I didn’t kick anyone out, I didn’t sit on any comm ev, I didn’t order anyone to get an abortion, I didn’t throw my team mates under the bus, I didn’t disconnect from anyone EVER because of some declare, I don’t piss my pants at the sight of golden rod. I didn’t make myself financially dependent on David Miscavige. I didn’t get pregnant in the Sea Org. I was not involved because I needed an extended family or someone to provide for me. I am NOT the same as every other Scientologist and NO TWO OF US are THE SAME.

                That IS stereotyping. And it is LAZY social intercourse. And it is JUDGING . You don’t need a course a Scientology to know this. Victor Hugo enlightened the world when he wrote Les Miserables!

                • > I don’t need for people to discount everything I have to say
                  > because of some agenda they have.

                  If you go back to my first reply to Schorsch, and read especially the last paragraph, you may come to the realization that my agenda is to defend those commenters here on the blog who have the courage to admit to themselves and in public that they had indeed been manipulated in the way that Jeff Hawkin’s explained.
                  I do have a tremendous amount of respect for these people, and I don’t like it when people come out of the woodwork and start going “oh it was the others that were stupid brainwashed cult followers, but it was certainly not me!!!!”, when these people really are not stupid.

                  >>> I never read anywhere that I was expected
                  >>> to agree with everything he wrote.

                  >> Then you should re-read KSW point 3 and 7

                  > It is all well and good to point out mistakes,
                  > habits and policy written 50
                  > years ago that doesn’t seem to fit in today.
                  > Just like big black rotary phones!

                  Oh man. m(

                  > And not a conversation that ends with the
                  > other person on the other end mentally
                  > disabled because they chose to have
                  > a conversation with me.

                  Best. Thing. I’ve read. On the internet. Ever.

                  – Best regards,
                  Thilo

              • Ahhh…blowdown.

            • > Accuse him of being deluded, dim witted, unaware and so fragile he doesn’t know he has been brainwashed.

              Seriously? Do you actually read what you’re writing before you hit “post”? Dim witted? Where do you get those adjectives from? It certainly isn’t my posts.

              On the contrary: Schorsch in his opening comment was applying exactly these adjectives (“stupid brainwashed cult followers”) to people here on this blog who say in public they had the wool pulled over their eyes. Talk about invalidation.

  15. An excellent series indeed. And not just a few powerful posts as a result of it.

    This one for example:

    “I don’t often post, because I usually see everything I would say already said. But after 40 years in and only recently working my way out I read this today and cried. I had to post and say:Thank you Jeff, for one of the most concise and illuminating explanations of what was done and how. I’m reeling and angry and relieved all at the same time. Intro to Scientology Ethics was the book I hated the most, next to Dianetics. I saw more abuses and crimes committed using that one body of information than I can easily stomach remembering. I’m a helluva lot less confused now though!”

    Now I know there are some very sharp people here. Knowledgeable, experienced and battle tested so to speak. Which provides me with a certain confidence someone here can offer some insights on a multi-part-question about the series and Ron I have.

    Namely:

    1. The first copywrite of the book “Introduction to Scientology Ethics’ was dated 1968 (I mention for context). In hindsight it seems only one of two possibilities exist in regard to Ron Hubbard’s role in the writing and disseminating of Scientology Ethics to his adherents. Of Which/whom ultimately became ‘it’s adherents).

    being either A: Ron understood the inherent ‘mind-catching’ properties his ‘technology of ethics’ presented, along with the inevitable zomby/puppy like state it would/could produce in those that bought it….

    or B: He didn’t.

    The answer is significant to me as I imagine any doctrine or system of behavior-modification that results in a remarkably consistent individual experience of emotional & mental suffering and pain, coming about by pure accident (i.e unaware of its inevitable consequence) is on some level of being, far more disturbing than imagining such came about, on purpose.

    I’ve heard numerous accusations of L. Ron Hubbard becoming increasingly delusional/disoriented in his older age, but if he was consciously aware of the inevitable ramifications of his Scientology Ethics effects on his followers, in 1968, he was not only delusional, but more, back then. Which is to say, cruel and selfish (as his ethics were not, and never were, for him).

    The last part of the question is this:

    Would it be possible for someone intimately familiar with Scientology like Jeff, to do a series on the same subject ‘Introduction to Scientology Ethics’, and make sense of it, in lieu of exposing the ‘trap’ side of it?

    Over and over again Jeff makes clear the ‘set-up’ of specific parts and or statements in the book. Can those same specific set-ups or statements (or any others in the book for that matter) be presented in a light or manner that would make the author of them appear to be a benevolent, good & brilliant man instead of being a cruel, evil & selfish one?

    In other words is there anything in ‘Scientology Ethics’ worthy of a complete re-construction after the complete de-construction of the subject has been done?

    Is there a Phoenix in or amongst the ashes?

    Or should the whole subject of ‘Scientology Ethics’ be disposed of, quietly and without sorrow? (and fanfare).

    Larry

    • I was very interested in the conditions. Still am because conditions exist.

      The rest I ignored. I had my own ethics codes before I came in and those were working great for me. I didn’t swap or do a trade in.

      • I don’t think it is so much about the subject but how people chose to live with it and use it. A young girl died in a hospital recently from having her tonsils removed. Should we shut down every hospital? Fire every doctor? Bury every needle?

        So some crazy people got a hold of an ethics book written half a century ago and used it to harm attack suppress. Mainly themselves! Do we burn the books? Kill off all the people?

        So some kid shot someone do we outlaw all guns?

        This is kind of radical thinking. The ethics book has not made an ethical group. In fact the planet is putting ethics in on the Sea Org. Therefore it lacks credibility. There isn’t any need to do anything about it. If it is not something you can think with, or that you want and need, ignore it.

        • That said, who cares about the past? It is Marty and his wife that are on the front lines and securing our civil rights and putting order into this chaos. And Mike, and Karen, and those of us out here that have supported these efforts. We carry the torch and we say what goes based on Freedoms that were fought for hard. Our civil rights.

          So use your power to create a better future, the past has been played.

          Please donate whatever you can by hitting the donate button. Use your power for a better tomorrow.

          We don’t know how much Marty has been suppressed in speech as a result of the current burdens he is carrying. We are not walking in his shoes.

          This is not the time to beat ourselves up. Self ridicule, introspection, self abasement, personal doubts, only serve to weaken our position.

          This is the time to rise up. To believe in ourselves and our ability to know what is right and wrong.

          WE carry the torch now.

          • Did we make a difference? Yes. Will we make a difference? Yes. Did we make the world a better place? Yes. Was our purpose noble? Yes. Do we have a right to explore? yes.

            Please do not permit others to devalue you.

            It is a wrong indication. You matter. How we have lived, matters. What we believe, matters. Who we have helped, matters.

            Do NOT buy into indications that you are liability that never really mattered.

            I do not care to be made into a useless joke. I paid to play. And so did all of you. And we very much matter.

            These indications that “You never really mattered and you are all a bunch of clueless ignorant s” is not something I care to buy into. Don’t think David Miscavige is the only one pushing this indication.

            We have been more right than wrong. We pushed the envelope and looked into mirrors that others never did.

            After 40 fucking years of being involved in Scientology and ONLY having my face rubbed into my errors and mistakes and overts and fuck ups I landed at Trey Lotz’s house and he asked me what I hoped to accomplish with my auditing.

            I had the NERVE to say, “Positive gain”.

            I was wondering if it would ever happen! If I had EVER been right about anything! Ever!

            My auditing and my “Scientology Experience” took a sharp left turn.

            I have had more gain than I ever hoped for, beyond my wildest dreams.

            We MUST stop beating ourselves up and inviting others to do it to us.

            This is wrong. We CAN make ourselves and one another RIGHT.

            We CAN be right. We do not owe it to anyone to be humiliated degraded and abused just because there is a little chaos here on our track.

            We are good and intelligent people that care.

            EVERYTHING else you have been told about yourself is a wrong indication!

            • This idea that we don’t amount to anything because David Miscavige didn’t, is bullshit.

              • There is a whole lotta A=A out here. There are people that think that since DM is a royal fuck up they must be too!

                This IS PTS! That fuck figured out how to suppress people by being a fuck up himself.

                I do not associate with that little coddled Scientology fuck! I wasn’t given a free pass at age 12. Because I was wheezy mother fucker.

                • I worked my ass off as public to pay for my bridge. He never did. I worked at Missions and Orgs as a volunteer. He never did. I bought raw public in and put them on the bridge. He never did. I body routed. He never did. I started supporting myself at age 14. He never did. I spent six years on the front lines of the Sea Org. he never did.

                  Why the fuck would I compare that man to me?

                  Why would any of us? He is not here on the same terms of ANYBODY!

                  Like I have to lay down and take a hit right now because of this “special case”?

                  • And these “expert reporters” that also have not walked in my shoes, do not represent me. Or you. Just like David Miscavige does not represent me. They have not had auditing, They have not been on staff. They remind me of this Bruce Willis film reporter:

    • Larry, take a look at Pip’s comment having to do with having the right purpose (or intention), and Schorsch’s having to do with using common sense (i.e. not being too literal).

  16. “You can’t wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.” – Navajo Proverb

  17. “My Nine Lives in Scientology” by Monica Pignotti, is a short memoir written by a young woman who spent 5 years in Scientology, much of it on the ship with LRH. It is an interesting look back on her adventure to become an auditor and how the ethics and punishment that was in effect during that time, broke her spirit and caused her to leave.
    http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/pignotti/#commodore

  18. Sorry, Larry, I don’t have a definitive answer to your questions. To really know what was in Ron’s head you’d have to ask him on the meter. (Joke) But I do know that each of the random essays that were compiled to make the Ethics book were created to solve a particular situation or prevent one from recurring. If you were there you know the story, otherwise you are in the dark.

    There is a somewhat trivial example – my roomy at Gold was with Ron on the ship. He told me that one day, Mary Sue’s toilet got stopped up. He was supposed to handle it, and of course a bit of panic and urgency accompanies such a situation. The Hubbards did not suffer incompetence kindly. So my friend grabbed a nearby fire hose to flush out the toilet. Now, if the stoppage was right in the toilet itself this might have worked, but sadly the pipes were blocked further down and the fire hose simply made the shower drain suddenly explode with a fountain of raw sewage. As you can imagine, the Hubbard family was not pleased. So a certain fairly sensible Flag Order titled “Wrong Tools” came to be, which we all studied on the EPF and attempted to follow in our Sea Org careers. It simply advises not to use screwdrivers to hammer nails and so on.

    So what is the story behind the Ethics book? 1968 and the beginning of the Ethics materials is a great crossroads in the history of Scientology. I suggest reading “A Piece of Blue Sky” by Jon Atack, or finding online accounts of the disasters on the early Sea Org vessels that led to the creation of “Scientology Ethics”. Overboarding, chipping paint in the bilges, ethics penalties that threaten life itself, you will find such horror stories and more. The testimony of Hana Eltringham comes to mind. Some of the worst abuses, such as mandatory sleepless hours depending on your lower condition, were eased in later years but the general atmosphere of stress, degradation and fear still comes through. You could say that the amount of pain inflicted by Ethics Officers on their crew depends to some degree on circumstances and statistics, that there is an element of judgement, of leniency when things are going well in general. In practice the maximum penalty and pain is the norm. Things are never “going well”. Your high production does not protect you and you can’t maintain it anyway.

    I personally think we can safely jettison the “Ethics Tech” without sorrow, others may disagree.

    • Hello Bruce.
      Interesting and insightful comment.
      In my 45 yr. study of Scn. and my study of eastern thought, my work recently with the methods outlined on Vinaires blog, the info gained on this and others sites and a few other sources, along with my own research, I have gained a fair ability to look at and evaluate data.
      One attitude and ability which I have found valuable is to look at every single bit of info on its own, while simultaneously understanding the context and intended communication being put forth.
      A one hundred page instruction may have two pages or paragraphs or sentences which are in error. This does not discount the other data, except where it is used as a basis for other data. And then it can still be used to learn how the error came about and was agreed to. 98 pages may be crap, effectively hiding 2 pages of valuable data.
      Fully understanding the communication is necessary to fully evaluate it for workability. This carries an inherent danger. Few people can understand a communication without some subconscious agreement or disagreement, making it difficult to evaluate each part and the whole.
      Next there is assigning relative value, grade weight. Using the right tool for the job is a valuable piece of data to be understood. It needs to be considered in 4.7% of ones admin activities. Ron failed to mention this at the time. Perhaps he too would put all his attention on his latest thought. Perhaps he would assume others would automatically put his latest thoughts in perspective. Either way, it would drive staff crazy when they suddenly put 87% of their attention on the latest PL., leaving little left for anything else at the moment
      Anyway, I look at every single piece of data in present time. I try to understand the whole communication. I attempt to put everything in its proper place. I learn from the outpoints.
      This may or may not assist you, but it will at least give you and others a perspective on my work and intentions.
      Thanks, Mark.

      • Roger From Switzerrland Thought

        “Few people can understand a communication without some subconscious agreement or disagreement, making it difficult to evaluate each part and the whole.”

        Sorry, but your comment is a typical “Know best ” Scientology arrogance comment in best tradition of Lrh comments.

        It implies of containing some workable truth but in fact just învalidates the people the comment is adressed to.

    • Scientology Ethics is a Suppresive System

      It deserves its own SP declare

    • Alsoo thank you for telling your story Bruce, don’t be a stranger😉

  19. Very very good Marty.
    Boasting higher spiritual states attained by living in a culture of threats, money extortion and escalating punishments….
    It is policy that someone speaking out about the Church is a Guilty of a HIGH CRIME.
    But
    Beatings within, assault and battery, kidnap, held against will not reported to
    to authorities is no crime, not even mentioned in Suppresssive acts.
    Inhuman treatment, sleep deprivation, sadistic lock downs in confinement, raping a person for all their life’s back accounts til they go into foreclosure with bogus promises is not defined as suppressive, but reporting criminal conduct to authorities is a criminal act !

  20. I’ve been reading Jeff’s take on the ethics conditions as they have come out. Each one has been very well thought out.

    Ethics in the Co$ assumes that beings are basically rotten and need to be micromanaged into being obedient in order to get anything decent done. While holding this viewpoint the Co$ has gotten very little done that is factually decent.

    LRH basically states that no one has ever managed anything worth anything until he came along with admin tech. He makes the same kind of assertions regarding the ethics formulas. Man never had them and that is why they failed.

    If one simply looks at the accomplishments of many, many men and women over the last two thousand years, it is so obvious that LRHs assertions are untrue. It’s also obvious that he is making nothing of those who came before and assumes the viewpoint of “only one.” Miscavige has picked up that valence and is running with it.

    L Ron Hubbard came out with some great processes. If delivered with
    ACT 1 fully in, and audited and C/Sd for the PC, they can really help people.

    A long time ago he said that a monopoly on the subject was a bad thing. He also said the tech is free, keep it so. If he had heeded his own advice on these two issues, a tremendous amount of good might have been done.

    I think that the ethics conditions have some value if used by the individual for the individual. The so-called justice codes were the beginning of the end for the free use of any of the good aspects of the tech. They also set the stage for and masterminded the creation of what is now one of the most unethical groups on the planet.

  21. Grundoon at Tony’s Blog

    grundoon BosonStark
    • 11 hours ago

    The “fixed dedicated glare” isn’t just for the Sea Org. It’s one of the most famous phrases in Scientology, from KSW 1, HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 FEBRUARY 1965, “KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING,” which is the first checksheet item on virtually every major course. Every Scientologist studies it and must comply. The quote in context:

    When somebody enrols, consider he or she has joined up for the
    duration of the universe — never permit an “open-minded” approach. If
    they’re going to quit let them quit fast. If they enrolled, they’re
    aboard, and if they’re aboard, they’re here on the same terms as the
    rest of us — win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half-minded
    about being Scientologists. The finest organizations in history have
    been tough, dedicated organizations. Not one namby-pamby bunch of
    panty-waist dilettantes have ever made anything. It’s a tough universe.
    The social veneer makes it seem mild. But only the tigers survive — and
    even they have a hard time. We’ll survive because we are tough and are
    dedicated. When we do instruct somebody properly he becomes more and
    more tiger. When we instruct half-mindedly and are afraid to offend,
    scared to enforce, we don’t make students into good Scientologists and
    that lets everybody down. When Mrs. Pattycake comes to us to be taught,
    turn that wandering doubt in her eye into a fixed, dedicated glare and
    she’ll win and we’ll all win. Humor her and we all die a little. The
    proper instruction attitude is, “You’re here so you’re a Scientologist.
    Now we’re going to make you into an expert auditor no matter what
    happens. We’d rather have you dead than incapable.” – L. Ron Hubbard

  22. This is why Scientologists become staring machines

    “When Mrs. Pattycake comes to us to be taught,turn that wandering doubt in her eye into a fixed, dedicated glare and she’ll win and we’ll all win.”

    • It took me a while Cat Daddy, after my overts made me blow Scientology in hopes of becoming a solid rock forever, to rethink the whole TR-O thing.

      It was as if my mind was stuck on having to look into a persons face all the time and every time I looked away there was a mirco flunk triggered in the background of my mind.

      I told my mind, “now see here mind! you are looking away because you are looking at info within yourself not because you are “not being there.”

      The other one I had to ease up on was the dreaded cut comm. I realized that a good healthy exchange of ideas is a combination of good comm and frustrated comm sometimes.

      All of these behavioral triggers! My my.

      I kept the ones that made sense and sent the ones that I did nit agree with on their merry way.

      What can I say? It’s what squirrels do!

  23. I have enjoyed each article by Jefferson Hawkins as they were released at The Underground Bunker. He takes you right out of the Scientology box and shows you a different way to look at this aspect of the tech and its purposes. It’s great to see a part of Scientology explained for once outside of Scientology, rather than by continuously referring back to LRH. I found it to be a breath of fresh air and am very grateful to Jefferson for taking the time to deconstruct the system in such clarity.

  24. I haven’t read through most of the comments.

    But Ethics save my life and probably someones else’s by helping me get off of alcohol.

    After being at Flag for a week, I was told that Scientology could not help me because I wasn’t high enough. As I was routing off of Flag and I could hear one supervisor in an office area. Scream. I am paraphrasing “How nice a fellow comes down for help, and we can’t help him in the center for technical perfection.”

    I was quickly put in front of an ethics officer and she was pushing all kinds of buttons.

    I finally screamed out “I am so fucking confused”

    I stopped and said in an excited voice. “I know how to get out of confusion”

    I uses the learning cycle formula.

    Confusion
    Look
    Duplicate
    Understand.

    I did a bit of auditing cleaning up overts and withholds, took a course that was based on the Code of Honor.. I can’t remember the name.

    I walked out of flag never to drink again…

    I really hate reading the articles of Scientology not delivering the promise. I was saved in so many ways. My life, the people around me are doing so well. Suppressives don’t even exist in my world.

    I wish I had the money to go on with an L-10 and the rest of the bridge. But like many here the Church is just not a comfortable place. I think it suffered from the federalism like top down management. I could never understand the fight for the statistics in the organization. How many times did we see Flag just rip off the members.

    They should have had all of the processes on the church level and kept it the grass root movement that made it successful.

    I really dislike all of the WOG comments on this site… Like I have said many times, buy and study 0-8 Book of lists, preferably the older one. Study the Factors and Scientology Axioms and peruse the rest. Truly that alone can give you an enormous amount of freedom. And Total Freedom was Ron’s only promise.

    Even Freedom from the COS.. LOL

  25. Karen wrote,
    “It is policy that someone speaking out about the Church is a Guilty of a HIGH CRIME…. but reporting criminal conduct to authorities is a criminal act!”

    Exactly. In other to be able to detect the mind control and brain washing embedded in Scientology’s Ethics/Admin systems, we need to use investigative LOGIC.

    The biggest OMITED FACT is the lack of integration of Scientology with society’s general justice system. That in itself violates the charitable purpose of a Religion, and it is counter to its stated purpose of bringing sanity to civilization at large.

    Scientology is a Religion, so its Ethics System cannot be compared with other profession’s Ethics codes, as the code itself puts Scientologists on a collision course with the laws of society around them, which all professions must abide to.

    The CONTRARY FACTS, are that the Scientology’s Ethics Codes purport to enhance the individual survival and quality of life, but in reality, they diminish the already existing civil rights that Scientologists enjoy.

    By heavily restricting Scientologists rights to freely communicate and associate, the Ethics codes actually impede individual self-determinism, and so are also at odds with the stated purpose of Scientology auditing and training.

    ADDED FALSEHOOD. The Scientology Ethics codes are a tacit admission that auditing/counseling does not work, and that forceful methods need to be employed to bring people to a higher level of awareness.

    ADDED FALSEHOOD: The Scientology Ethics codes imply that all men are intrinsically dangerous and basically out of control.

    I’m sure there are more out-points to be found. But for people who have naively walked into Scientology, or who were born or grew up in it; here is the advice from another spiritual traveler:

    “A man goes to knowledge as he goes to war: wide-awake, with fear, with respect, and with absolute assurance. Going to knowledge or going to war in any other manner is a mistake, and whoever makes it might never live to regret it”

    ― Carlos Castaneda, The Teachings of Don Juan: A Yaqui Way of Knowledge

  26. I have a success story today. I had written a number of reports to RTC about gross basic violations of LRH policy which received no acknowledgment at all. However; that has changed. I have finally been validated for my work. I found out on the Internet that I have been declared suppressive! As my Fitness Board stated that I had done 23 years of commendable service, clearly I was not declared for anything I did while in the SO. Just as the executives on the ship did not tell me that I had tested positive for HIV; they are continuing that tradition by not informing me that I had been declared. It is fortunate for myself and many others that suppressives cannot complete a cycle of action. Otherwise I would be dead. What tiny doubt I had that what I was saying was true is now gone. I ham honored to join the straight up and vertical group of persons declared by the church. I wish I had a copy of the issue, but I am sure that they will wait for the statue of limitations runs out before they post it.

    • As the planet puts ethics in on the Sea Org things are getting very murky. They are witch hunting on the customers now. Ethics missions planet wide and the targets are the customers. Not that they ever liked the customers. At the Flag Land Base they were called “pool pigs”. Since the fund raising for the Super Power began, the line has been that it is necessary to release Super Power because all of the OT’s are out ethics. And now, the witch hunts are on for the customers!

      Personally, I think the Church as an entity is in the process of a psychotic break.

    • Nice to see you posting here, Wear your SP declare proudley as a badge of honour, alsoo try Mike’s blog and all the blogslinks on right of the page

      http://www.mikerindersblog.org/

  27. I’m amazed at the quantity of comments on this blog. Thank you Marty for what you do here.🙂
    …and a word to any CofS OSA types reading this blog: truely confront the vast number of stories of the ill-effects the CofS has had on people’s lives. Its really interesting how someone can read all of this and not question if they are on the wrong team. Are you truely “As-Is’ing” whats going on in SCN? “Seek to Live with the Truth,” …no matter where that truth takes you.

  28. Sorry to break up the love-fest.

    I read the first chapter and cried bullshit. “Conversational Hypnosis?” Give me a break. There was no value in the first piece. Scientology ethics is not “brainwashing”, and you are not hypnotized if you read Ron’s words and apply it.

    But, in respect for Mark I read the rest of this stuff.

    I cannot deny that ethics has been abused beyond all recognition. I certainly had my share of ethics abuses. But, I will not throw out what does work with does not, as Hawkins is doing in these articles.

    The concept of “greatest good for the greatest number” is a good yardstick of what is good vs. bad. What does Hawkins suggest in this series? That ethics is a gut instinct – that you just “know” what is ethical? Bullshit. You grow up in a society and what is ethical and what feels right is what you have grown up into. Suicide bombers are praised – lauded – loved by a large number of people who look at martyrdom as the highest cause. Their gut tells them that to refuse the offer of martyrdom is being the lowest of the low. Kids born into leftist families “know” that the struggle of the proletariat is the greatest cause, and that women have a right to do whatever they want to do with their bodies, including flushing out unwanted fetuses. Their “gut” tells them so. Kids born into right-wing families know that aborting a fetus is killing a baby. Their “gut” tells them so.

    On the other hand, analysis of actions based on how it affects the survival of all concerned is the rational thing to do. I think we learn this in school – sometimes at least. It is obvious to people who are looking at screwing themselves to make the next donation level that this is unethical – but to them, screwing their finances beats out ostracism. But abuse of this concept by unscrupulous bastards does not mean the concept is untrue. Rather, it shows how true it is because it is so obviously violated.

    Look at the result of people blindly agreeing with the SO concept that the Church and the SO is the “greatest good” and who let themselves get talked into going against what they KNOW is true. Neglected kids. Personal poverty. The hole. Idiots dressed up in stupid T-Shirts and head cams harassing people.

    Just because people misapply a concept does not mean the concept is not true.

    And Hawkins chucks out all of it. He makes it sound like Ron’s intention all the time was to cuss people up. That is not true – Even Lawrence Wright could see that. Hawkins chucks out “Overt/Withhold” tech as if Ron was planning on using it to forge chains for his followers. It is obvious he doesn’t understand O/W tech. Confessionals done right are very freeing. Just because SO bastards took this and turned it into gang-bang sec checks and cleaning a clean sec checks and all the other abuses does NOT mean that the underlying concept is bogus.

    How many of you read and loved “The Sociopath Next Door?” Great book, eh? Suppressive people DO exist. Again, just because Ron decided that since Scientology was the greatest tech ever invented and that therefore anyone who is against it must obviously be against people does not mean that there are NO people who are suppressive in nature.

    But, there is no doubt Ron way overreached – and then allowed kids like Miscavige and Rathbun and Rinder to cuss people up with impunity. At least Rathbun and Rinder woke up.

    But what does Ron say happens to people who continue to live in an out-ethics manner? I.e., who live in a manner contrary to what is best for all concerned? Well, you get shrinkage, abuse, death, and eventually nothingness. Is there any doubt that’s the direction the church is going? It’s a cruel irony isn’t it.

    You guys can do what you want with the tech. But there are pearls there to see if you are willing to look. It is too bad it got so clouded up with BS.

    • “Just because people misapply a concept does not mean the concept is not true. And Hawkins chucks out all of it. He makes it sound like Ron’s intention all the time was to cuss people up.”

      Grasshopper, thank you for pointing out the emperor has no clothes. Apparently, the reason Jeff does not differentiate the intention of the materials from how they were misapplied is that he simply doesn’t understand the materials. For example, in the following section of the interview, he says, “Something doesn’t add up with this proposed handling” and then goes on to explain what he means by saying how obvious it is that certain people are not actual SP’s – which is exactly what LRH states in the issue That was the key point in this particular Policy Letter about PTS handling.
      ———————————-
      JEFFERSON: Now we get into the “handle or disconnect” section. The person is told that they must either handle the SP or disconnect from them.
      Hubbard gives various steps one can do to “handle.” The first step “…may consist of requiring him to actually answer his mail or write the person a pleasant good roads, good weather note or to realistically look at how he estranged them.” Then: “Fill in any vacuum of missing data with factual data about Scientology and to prove any lies, rumors and false data encountered to be false.”

      THE BUNKER: There’s a real oddity with this “handling” step. As we saw last week, Hubbard described an SP as a totally evil individual who hates and attacks any effort to help mankind, who cannot be helped or improved, and who hates the thought of anyone getting better. So how would writing pleasant letters or educating them on Scientology handle an SP?

      JEFFERSON: Exactly. Something doesn’t add up with this proposed handling. It becomes obvious, as you read this section, that he is NOT in fact talking about some irredeemably evil, antisocial being who is out to destroy all mankind, as he earlier described. He is talking about the Scientologist’s friends and family who may be antagonistic or critical towards Scientology. He advises Scientologists “Don’t create antagonism.” Well, that would be a stupid statement to make regarding an SP — the SP is already as antagonistic as he’s going to get — if you go by Hubbard’s definition.
      ———————————

      He didn’t duplicate the PL! And his misunderstanding was insidiously passed on to thousands of people. Last I saw (over a month ago) there were well over 1,000 comments on that interview, and I bet not one of the posters pointed this out. Why? Because virtually all of the posters there – many of whom are former Scientologists who are hatted on this basic PTS tech – are only looking for the negative and therefore that is all they can see.

      • marildi, I’d like to expand a little on what you posted.
        One thing is, LRH himself said over and over and over again, as a senior datum, that “man is basically good”. This obviously includes SPs.

        The recently posted quote of Abraham Lincoln – “The best way to destroy your enemy is to make him your friend.” comes to mind. Isn’t that exactly what the “handle” step prescribes the PTS person to do? Contrary to what Jeff, in agreement with Mark Bunker, say “doesn’t add up”? Their view of life seems not to be similar to mine at all, nor their understanding of LRH.

        At the same time, I cannot help but lay the responsibility for these misunderstandings right at LRH’s feet, because he was the one who conflated the technical definition of SP, with the “administrative” definition of SP, which was obviously a control tactic. LRH created the confusion in the first place, which I do not thank him for. It must have seemed like a good idea at the time, but it strikes me as an attempt to overwhelm rather than reason with others, or even just allow them their self-determinism. It was a lazy solution driven by God only knows what. Desperation, I assume. But it led to today’s sorry scene in the CoS.

        • Val, I can’t disagree with what you say and have posted comments to the same effect – that LRH made some gross errors, violating his own principles and tech. I’ve come to the conclusion that, first of all, we almost certainly don’t have all the data. And secondly, that LRH wasn’t the only one responsible – meaning, not just those in power but the rank and file. In any case, the most important thing is to move forward and make the most of what he developed that has great value. I think Mary Freeman has the right idea, about the ethics tech and about moving forward. Check out this video:

          • Hi Marildi

            I loved the video of Mary Freeman. You said “I’ve come to the conclusion that first of all, we almost certainly don’t have all the data” That is true, but the missing data is not easily confronted. It concerns our true identify.

            I will endeavour to spell it out in Scientology technical terms. The first thing to recognise is that mankind is in a condition of ENEMY with regards to the 8th dynamic. Scientology is basically a HUMANISTIC philosophy, and because of this will inevitably erode ones’ INALIENABLE RIGHTS.

            Because we are made in the image and likeness of God most people at some level are aware of both theirs and others inalienable rights. However there is a minority that have lost sight of the fact that they have inalienable rights, possibly because other beings have so overwhelmed them all they can now do is over-ride others inalienable rights. This is your SP or Sociopath/Psychopath. As I have said the whole human race is in a condition of ENEMY and some are in a lower condition.

            What makes it so insidious is the enemy formula in Scientology; “Find out who you really are”. As a Scientologist we have all accepted the meaning of the word REALLY to mean AGREEMENT. So that formula is understood to mean find out who you are in terms of the agreement in Scientology, and of course the answer is A THETAN. The trouble is that is not who you TRULY are, that is only who you are in THIS UNIVERSE. Who you truly are is THETA; you BECAME a thetan when you entered M.E.S.T.

            What each of us has to do is REPENT – TO CHANGE OUR MIND. We were designed to share the one mind – THE MIND OF GOD – God is THETA – THETA is LOVE. When we share the MIND of God we share the LOVE OF GOD; first towards God and secondly to both ourselves and our neighbour. So we have THETA = LOVE, THETAN = UNDERSTANDING.

            Love and ARC
            Pip

            • Hi Pip,

              Glad you liked the Mary Freeman video. She obviously knows how to apply ethics tech with understanding. As regards the Enemy Formula, I do realize that the usual interpretation of Scientologists for “Find out who you really are” is that the answer to be given is always “a thetan.” But as far as I can tell, that is one of those false datums that has spread through the whole group and become an “everybody knows” and group think. The only LRH reference I know of on this point is one that has to do with doing an Enemy formula on one’s post – where Ron gives an example, such as a person would find out “I am the Qual Sec” (i.e. fully accept responsibility for that post) So to me, that same idea would apply to any dynamic or other area of life that one is doing a conditions formula on – such as Enemy on the 2-D, where the person would find out that he is “a husband” or “Susie’s husband,” for example. (Note – you or anyone else can correct me on this if there is some reference I am missing.)

              As for the topic of “Theta is Love” and other impinging posts you’ve written, I just wrote a reply to Valkov about a new forum which I thought you might be interested in too. There are already some posts on it about Oneness, btw. And I remember now that simple tech of the Quakers that you wrote about one time – it IS a tech! Here’s the link for you: http://workabletechnology.com/?author=1

              Love and ARC, marildi

              • Hi Marildi

                Thanks for the link to David St Lawrence’s site. You will notice I have joined. As for the Enemy formula, I hear what you say and no I don’t know of any reference on this. However it is my understanding we each have many valences, some of which we are in below the level of our awareness, so I see Scientology as a process of becoming aware of our valances and if they are NON SURVIVAL letting them go; but ultimately it is going to end up between oneself and the eighth dynamic, where we will stand naked before THE THRONE OF GRACE. There will be no valance in which to hide. I believe this happens every time we die, but if we have not prepared to meet our maker we are able to continue our journey to ONENESS or THE AT-ONE-MENT (atonement) through further incarnations.

                Love and ARC
                Pip

                • “… if we have not prepared to meet our maker we are able to continue our journey to ONENESS or THE AT-ONE-MENT (atonement) through further incarnations.”

                  Pip, you have a way with words in this whole area. Have you missed a calling as a minister?🙂

                  Love and ARC,
                  marildi

          • I think LRH was responsible for publishing his PLs, even if he delegated writing or compiling the drafts to others at times. And I think there is plenty of testimony to his labeling people SP when they were not technically the “SP case”. And “declaring” some of them, too. It must have seemed a good idea at the time? Were those “errors”? I don’t know. He obviously felt he had sufficient reason to do so.

            • Believe me, I know what you’re saying, Val. There are a variety of different theories on what happened to LRH and why he did what he did. Actually, I just read a very plausible one on David St. Lawrence’s new forum – if I remember right, it was David himself who basically said that LRH’s entity case had not been handled with the NOTs tech, which his research has found to not necessarily be workable.

              I wanted to tell you about that new forum anyway. You may have seen some of my posts where I’ve written that I wished there was a blog (or forum) that simply discussed tech. Well, I just found out about this one of David’s, which started as of January 1. Here’s a link where he introduces it: http://workabletechnology.com/?author=1.

              He describes it as “a place where all sorts of spiritual technologies could be presented and discussed in detail with no distracting interruptions…The discussions in this forum cover new practices and methodologies and all of the efforts made to extend and expand older spiritual technologies.”

              There are already a large number of posts and comments because he transferred the posts from the facebook discussion group (I think he said it had been Dexter G’s) to this new site. What I’ve read is very interesting info and I’d like to see you there! (As well as here on Marty’s for these types of discussions.)

        • Hi Valkov

          Ron has indeed said many times that “man is basically good” which is a statement that is wide open to misunderstanding and I prefer the statement of “I believe in the basic goodness of man”. The fact is that not everyone believes in the basic goodness of man, and that’s the point, the SP doesn’t.

          That is why Jesus said “love your enemies, do good to them that persecute you”. The SP is an SP because he no longer believes in the goodness of men, because he/she is projecting their own mis-deeds outwards. By continuing to love them you are hopefully denying their reality.

          Further thoughts on “man is basically good”. Is this a sound datum? Axiom 31 states “goodness and badness, beautifulness and ugliness are alike considerations and have no other basis than opinion”. So the statement “man is basically good” is nothing other than an OPINION.

          Traditionally Christianity has spoken about “the total depravity of man”. The book The Mystery Experience by Tim Freke which I am currently reading, points out that everything is basically a paradox and this would include the goodness or badness of man

          • Pip, my background is Russian Orthodox, in which generally the view is that Man IS “basically good”, and wrong or “sinful” actions are viewed as a secondary “stain” on the basic goodness.

            Logically, if “in His own Image and Likeness created He him”, as God is said to have created Man in His own Image and Likeness, then if God is good, Man must also be basically good.

            • Hi Valkov

              Great to be in comm. with a Scientologist with a working knowledge of Russian Orthodoxy
              I was sort of aware of this difference between the East and the West. In the Roman Catholic Church man is seen as the subject of “original sin” the reasoning being you cannot commit a little sin in the eyes of an All Holy God. There is a saying in evangelical circles that goes like this. “Pure + Pure = Pure. Pure + Impure = Impure. I’m not saying I agree with it, but it is a commonly held view point.

              Yes God made man in his image and likeness but in Geneses Chapter 2 it says “Man became a living soul”. The bible makes a clear distinction between spirit and soul, something LRH failed to do. You might find this article interesting by a Russian Orthodox priest. http://www.leithart.com/archives/003435.php

      • Hi Marildi

        Everyone is a mixture of LOVE and FEAR. When the FEAR component eclipses the LOVE part the person has become a Psychopath – an SP. When a person connected with the SP becomes fearful rather than loving they have gone P.T.S. and it is time to handle or disconnect. Ideally if one can continue to love even when being invalidated then handling is the sane option, but if fear is the dominant emotion it may well be time to disconnect until such time as one is strong enough to love again and to handle.

        Love
        Pip

    • Grasshopper – Excellent, it brought in all my “good indicators”! A “love-fest” how descriptive. I thought of sharks when they small blood. Talk about “the bank following the line of least resistance”!

      To me Ron made massive strides towards leaving this universe, but just as has happened with many great explorers, he died in the attempt; now it is our task to take up where he failed and complete the job. But that will depend on each of us individually making our peace with the 8th dynamic. This is the missing PIECE “the PEACE that passeth understanding – ARC.

      Love
      Pip

    • Thanks for posting this Grasshopper.
      I have not read all of Jeff’s posts, but I read several of them when he originally put them up on his blog, and concluded at the time, he had not entirely duplicated LRH’s original thoughts on the subject. I’ll give one example: Jeff equated and conflated Utilitarianism’s “greatest good for the greatest number”, with LRH’s “greatest good for the greatest number OF DYNAMICS”. To my mind, the concepts are worlds apart, because t best Bentham and Mills’ idea extends, at best, to the first 3 or 4 dynamics, the human social world. The scope does not compare.

      At that point I decided Jeff simply did not understand LRH’s basic concepts of the nature of Ethics. I decided Jeff was accurately describing how Ethics was understood and applied by “the church”, which was to me manifestly wrong. So I stopped reading his essays on the subject. To me it was another indication that it was right for me to stay away from the Church and continue my own solo study of LRH.

      It’s good to know I am not alone in my assessment of this, so again, thanks for posting your thoughts on it all.

      • Yep. So, the problem here is that here Jeff was in the business of being the main marketing guy for Scientology, and he was never trained in it. Sure, he had staff statuses, and no doubt did the various missionaire’s courses and other bric-a-brac that passes for study in the SO. But ALL of Scientology stems from the core – the auditing technology, and ALL of Scientology is (or should be) designed around how to get people audited and thus better off.

        So, if you hear that people can only have accidents if they are PTS, or only get sick when they are PTS – and it is written in iron in the policy letters, well, you learn that that is not always the case (at least not as one thinks PTS-ness is) when you actually learn the tech. People get sick from out lists, out int, ARC breaks, all sorts of reasons. People have accidents because of all sorts of reasons to – they can even have accidents because they are so blown out after a session they forget where their body is. I’ve walked into a door jam after going exterior in session, for example.

        BUT – The justice side of Scientology is seriously flawed – to the point where is it worthless in my opinion, and Jeff has that part dead-on, and is one of the embodiments of how flawed it is. I have been involved with Scientology for over 40 years, and I can safely say that I have never seen justice properly applied as Ron said it should be. I have never seen an impartial Comm Ev where the members actually are impartial. I have never had a real MAA action at an org that was truly a proper handling. I personally was declared a “borderline SP” in 1983 because I supposedly got low TA in session (the sessions were M1 wordclearing where I was off the cans most of the time – no TA there, eh?)

        The justice codes are wrong. Flat-out. The assumption of the justice codes is that Scientology is always pure and those at the top are always perfect, and so therefore any actions “against” them are therefore suppressive. This of course is not true. The proof that the justice codes are imperfect is that everyone in Scientology now is guilty of one or more high crimes as listed in the justice codes. In or out of the church.
        The main question anyone involved with Scientology needs to ask himself when it comes to Scientology is which High Crimes is he willing to commit?

        The justice codes and (in my opinion) the whole of Green on White is proof that Ron believed in the best in people, because only saints could read Green on White and do it correctly. David Miscavige and his helpers are not saints. The only saints I knew in Scientology are long gone – Yvonne Jentzsch, Dianna, a few others. In the toxic environment of the SO, saints leave one way or another, leaving only assholes to run the show.

        This is the big dichotomy. The core of Ethics makes sense – it does (but to me it is junior to tech as it must be. After all, ethics exists to get tech in). Justice has been screwed up since day 1. Ron showed real hubris there – and it is telling as noted above that he apparently never thought it would be abused the way it has been.

        So – we have people who were long-term – decades long! – SO members who committed themselves whole-hog to a religion they did not understand. Hawkins being one, but there are many others. That in and of itself is one the biggest condemnations of the church and Ron.

        • Grasshopper:
          Beautiful post. I saw bits and pieces of this from as a teenager, but you put it together and nailed it.
          Thanks, Mark

  29. Hi Marty et al

    Have you ever had something to say but have not known how to say it? This is where I find myself.

    Some 30 years ago one night as I lay in bed, thinking as I had a million times why I had been expelled from the Church of Scientology, and how could I ever know if what I had learnt was true or a huge deception – I heard a voice. Not just with my ears but with my whole self. The voice said “You’ve sold your soul to the devil”. This experience stopped me dead in my tracks, and as a result my whole world was turned upside down.

    Soon after this I got involved with a Christian organisation called L’Abri Fellowship International founded by Francis A Schaeffer. I now realise just how important the teaching from this man is and I urge all of you to watch and listen to this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pW6xOw9AZZM

    I have just watched it after 30 odd years and I see now it is the answer to every outness we observe in the CofS. Scientology has become a HUMANISTIC ORGANISATION, in fact, I now see that it always was and has only ever given lip service to God.

    When Ron Hubbard became aware that past lives were a reality he believed he had discovered the very essence of LIFE when, in fact, he had discovered the fundamental of LIVING. He never truly differentiated between SPIRIT and SOUL and that is the fundamental outness in Scientology. The truth is that we are SPIRIT and we BECAME LIVING SOULS. The concept of soul is the SECOND POSTULATE. Without the realization of our spiritual essence (MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD) there is no basis for personhood. Only God can and has given us INALIENABLE RIGHTS and no government, state or organisation has the right to take them away. We have allowed the CofS to take away our inalienable rights by buying into what was in fact a HUMANISTIC WORLD VIEW. Please WATCH/LISTEN to the video.

    Love
    Pip

      • Hi Cat daddy

        “Humanism is Love”. That statement stopped me in my tracks. Humanitarianism may well be defined as love, but not humanism. As per the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pW6xOw9AZZM

        Humanism is defined as “only energy or material in some form which has existed forever and is taking its present shape by pure chance.” Humanism means that man is the measure of all things. This is as far away from love as one can get. It is the basic LIE, the idea that ARC will ultimately lead to LOVE. That is as silly as saying that counting will eventually lead to infinity. It just isn’t going to happen.

        That is why the Scientology Bridge leads to NO WHERE – TOTAL CONFUSION. Scientology starts with self = A THETAN – a soul. A Thetan has MASS and is LOCATED in SPACE and TIME. As such it can never rise above A.R.C for you can LOVE UNDERSTANDING but you cannot UNDERSTAND LOVE. Understanding can come out of love but love can never come out of understanding.

        A humanist may well UNDERSTANFD but they can never LOVE.

        With LOVE and UNDERSTANDING
        Pip

    • L Ron Hubbard did not get aware of anything he stole shit.

      • Dear Cat daddy

        I am failing to make sense of your comment. My understanding is Ron’s reality on past lives came as a direct result of Dianetic Auditing when he realised that addressing only incidents in this life time did not produce a “stable clear”. His mistake was believing there was no basic difference between THETA (which is pure spirit) and A THETAN which is THETA plus SOME THING (MEST). Thetans have past lives; theta does not, for theta is LIFE ITSELF.

  30. Thanks Cat daddy.

    I do love to communicate with someone who is obviously not running a service facsimile.

    Love and ARC
    Pip

  31. Pingback: Why Are No Journalists Asking The Obvious Question Of Why Cathriona White Installed 5 Security Cameras A Few Days Before Her Death? - Scientology Bollocks

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