What's new

”Evaluation” and ”Invalidation”

Disinfected

Patron Meritorious
The problem inherent in scientology is that item #2 and item #1 are the same. The whole of scientology would be considered disproven if only one part is disproven. Scientology as an ideology, as the various doctrines, as a church and as a therapeutic technology all exist as one inseparable unit.

This monolithic approach is part of cult-think, IMO. I see it perpetuated on Marty's blog, where he is very protective of the monolith while claiming to be "Independent".

That said, I could not disagree more with "The whole of scientology would be considered disproven if only one part is disproven". No, what is disproven in that case in the monolith.
 

TG1

Angelic Poster
You say this almost in defense of Scientology as if you're saying ”well everybody does this anyway so who cares”.

That's not actually the case. Most people have a logical argument behind their faith in something, or they understand and acknowledge that there is no scientific proof or objective proof of their faith. They understand the difference between objective and subjective truths.

Scientologists do not. They believe going clear makes it so you don't have to wear glasses, and yet they continue to wear glasses, for example. That is pure insanity and it is a sign of a radicalized following.

LOL! No, I didn't mean "well everybody does this anyway, so who cares." Your dad's behavior might be more extreme than others. I don't know him, so I can't say.

However, I did think you might wish to consider that your dad could be going through a number of things right now -- and that "My dad is a stupid Scientologist" might not help either of you improve your relationship. However, that was an assumption on my part.

In my own experience, "most people" cannot offer very impeccable logical arguments to justify their faith in something, whether it's about their religion, career, diet or child-rearing. What they have are a few anecdotes that demonstrate their faith works under some circumstances, some group agreement with others who share their belief, a long history of practicing their belief (grooved-in habits), sloppy or no means of logicizing causes and effects, virtually no scientific skills or knowledge of the scientific method, and a big fat fear of learning that what they have KNOWN for years might not be true after all.

Also, half the people in the world have an IQ of less than 100. Belief and faith are useful operating bases from their point of view.

Therefore, in my experience, most people no matter how smart they are (or aren't) don't go through life building and testing competing hypotheses. They go through life trying to get home in time for dinner.

With regard to whether your dad's behavior is unique to or exaggerated by his connection to Scientology -- and to help you build and test your own competing hypotheses -- you are hereby invited to my house for Thanksgiving later this year to meet about 50 of my relatives, none of whom are Scientologists. You might think you were eating turkey with your own relatives.

But I could be wrong.

:roflmao:

Seriously, Adam, I wasn't trying to trivialize your dad's blind spots. I was just saying it like I see it. We also don't have to agree -- and there are lots of valid reasons why we might not.

TG1
 
Last edited:

Adam7986

Declared SP
No, Adam, they are NOT the same.

Someone believing in theta or the tone scale or whatever else may or may not be believing something that is correct or false or whatever else, but those things do not rip a person off or cause him to lose his or her family or anything else. A person can practice Scn outside CofS, even do it outside the FZ.

But the cult convinces people that if someone says to him "Hey, those stats they keep publishing, they're not true and the pix of the crowds at the events are photoshopped, and have you looked at all the people who lost money in the Ideal Org campaign?" that this is the same thing as "oh, hey, there's no such thing as a thetan etc etc."

If I agreed with your thesis (which I don't) then nobody could be any sort of Christian, Jew, Hindu, etc.

Let's use Christian worship as an example. Catholicism and the Catholic church are the prevailing entity on earth which seek to control and organize the worship of Jesus and God. When a group of people disagreed with the Catholic church they simply formed one of the various protestant groups. The Bible itself does not require you to be in a catholic church to worship God.

However, while various Scientology processed can be practiced at home or in an office, the religion of Scientology to be practiced in the form that Hubbard laid out, must be done while in good standing with the church and must be done with the approval of RTC which commonly requires some supervision by the church. This is not including Dianetic processing which was minimized when Scientology was created. It became only intended as an introduction to scientology and not the be all end all

You cannot do the OT levels without studying and training on them in an advanced org. Hubbard designed his religion to rest upon the skeleton of the church in its name. Therefore you cannot practice ”standard tech” while also denouncing the church.
 

Adam7986

Declared SP
LOL! No, I didn't mean "well everybody does this anyway, so who cares." Your dad's behavior might be more extreme than others. I don't know him, so I can't say.

However, I did think you might wish to consider that your dad could be going through a number of things right now -- and that "My dad is a stupid Scientologist" might not help either of you improve your relationship. However, that was an assumption on my part.

In my own experience, "most people" cannot offer very impeccable logical arguments to justify their faith in something, whether it's about their religion, career, diet or child-rearing. What they have are a few anecdotes that demonstrate their faith works under some circumstances, some group agreement with others who share their belief, a long history of practicing their belief (grooved-in habits), sloppy or no means of logicizing causes and effects, virtually no scientific skills or knowledge of the scientific method, and a big fat fear of learning that what they KNOWN for years might not be true after all.

Also, half the people in the world have an IQ of less than 100. Belief and faith are useful operating bases from their point of view.

Therefore, in my experience, most people no matter how smart they are (or aren't) don't go through life building and testing competing hypotheses. They go through life trying to get home in time for dinner.

With regard to whether your dad's behavior is unique to or exaggerated by his connection to Scientology -- and to help you build and test your own competing hypotheses -- you are hereby invited to my house for Thanksgiving later this year to meet about 50 of my relatives, none of whom are Scientologists. You might think you were eating turkey with your own relatives.

But I could be wrong.

:roflmao:

Seriously, Adam, I wasn't trying to trivialize your dad's blind spots. I was just saying it like I see it. We also don't have to agree -- and there are lots of valid reasons why we might not.

TG1

Okay I understand what you are getting at. I do not mean to trivialize the dangerous situation either one of my parents are in by saying they are stupid scientologists. What you are reading is actually frustration and anger at the church and ”religion” not at my parents. Scientology already claimed the life of my aunt. It is slowly claiming the life of my father. My mother is working herself into exhaustion. It has.also claimed my brother by swallowing him in that cesspool called the sea org.

By no means do I see any scientologist as a stupid scientologist. Let's clarify this right now: I see them all as victims.
 

Adam7986

Declared SP
This monolithic approach is part of cult-think, IMO. I see it perpetuated on Marty's blog, where he is very protective of the monolith while claiming to be "Independent".

That said, I could not disagree more with "The whole of scientology would be considered disproven if only one part is disproven". No, what is disproven in that case in the monolith.

Thank you. That is actually what I meant.

There is no clause in scientology that says ”rendering one portion of this invalid does not necessarily mean the rest is invalid.”

In fact KSW is the complete opposite of that.

Scientology may have various truths scattered around in it, you cannot pick and choose what you want and still say its any kind of scientology.
 

TG1

Angelic Poster
I hear you loud and clear, Adam. Thanks for explaining that so well.

Really appreciate it.

TG1
 

Adam7986

Declared SP
I hear you loud and clear, Adam. Thanks for explaining that so well.

Really appreciate it.

TG1

Cool. English was not my strong point, i'm better at math. So sometimes my points are not always clear. Sorry about that.
 

Disinfected

Patron Meritorious
Thank you. That is actually what I meant.

There is no clause in scientology that says ”rendering one portion of this invalid does not necessarily mean the rest is invalid.”

In fact KSW is the complete opposite of that.

Scientology may have various truths scattered around in it, you cannot pick and choose what you want and still say its any kind of scientology.

Actually there is plenty that says exactly that. "Scientology is just a workable system" and all that. Hubbard was a smart guy. He did not create a monolith. Folks that needed a monolith, needed a guru, needed a god, created that out of his work. Not to say that Hubbard did not create an oppressive system or a con but that is another matter altogether.
 

Adam7986

Declared SP
Actually there is plenty that says exactly that. "Scientology is just a workable system" and all that. Hubbard was a smart guy. He did not create a monolith. Folks that needed a monolith, needed a guru, needed a god, created that out of his work. Not to say that Hubbard did not create an oppressive system or a con but that is another matter altogether.

Well maybe i'm misunderstanding, but I think that KSW basically turns everything into a monolith.
 

A.K. Myers

Patron with Honors
From Hubbard's Auditors Code

"(1) I promise not to evaluate for the preclear or tell him what
he should think about his case in session."

First off an OT is not a preclear. Second, he is not in session.

"(2) I promise not invalidate the preclear's case or gains in or
out of session."

This applies to the auditor, not friends relatives or even regges.

:coolwink:
 

Disinfected

Patron Meritorious
Well maybe i'm misunderstanding, but I think that KSW basically turns everything into a monolith.

Your premise is that Scientology is an all or nothing proposition when it come to the "truth" of it. I am saying that that does not come from Hubbard and he would have been too savvy to say anything like that. KSW just says that what we have will work, you fuckers didn't help, and you'd better not fuck up what I, me, all by myself, invented.
 

Adam7986

Declared SP
Sure. My point is that there is no "gotcha" like where you say "everything I say is a lie" and it all self-destructs.

Well of course there's no self destruct on scientology. And this comes back to my original point. Try to tell any scientologist that any part of the tech is a lie and it is brushed off as an evaluation / invalidation.
 

uniquemand

Unbeliever
And policy includes RTC and the Church.

Policy does NOT include RTC, actually. The issue type that set up RTC is called "Scientology Policy Directives", which, itself, was never authorized by HCO PL or any other authorized issue type.

Anyone who completes Staff Status II should know that. RTC is a bogus entity.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
Let's use Christian worship as an example. Catholicism and the Catholic church are the prevailing entity on earth which seek to control and organize the worship of Jesus and God. When a group of people disagreed with the Catholic church they simply formed one of the various protestant groups. The Bible itself does not require you to be in a catholic church to worship God.

However, while various Scientology processed can be practiced at home or in an office, the religion of Scientology to be practiced in the form that Hubbard laid out, must be done while in good standing with the church and must be done with the approval of RTC which commonly requires some supervision by the church. This is not including Dianetic processing which was minimized when Scientology was created. It became only intended as an introduction to scientology and not the be all end all

You cannot do the OT levels without studying and training on them in an advanced org. Hubbard designed his religion to rest upon the skeleton of the church in its name. Therefore you cannot practice ”standard tech” while also denouncing the church.

Wellll...nooooo...

There are plenty of Christians who broke away from their church but still practice Christianity. I've met many.

Also, I know lots of people who do the OT levels in the FZ. In fact, one is more likely to find an FZer who delivers an older, "Ron approved" version of the OT levels OUTSIDE CofS than in it, given DM's propensity for mucking about stuff.

I know what Hubbard designed. However, the current church does all kinds of stuff that Hubbard did not design or envision so it's meaningless anyway. (Anyone who thinks any of the Christian churches are like Jesus or even Paul of Tarsus envisioned would also be barking up the wrong tree.)

My feeling is that the cult intertwines the "you're/they're attacking my religion" benchmark vis a vis explaining that DM beats his staff with "I do SO wanna believe in theta." and I think critics unwittingly hand the cult ammo on that...
 

Veda

Sponsor
Actually there is plenty that says exactly that. "Scientology is just a workable system" and all that.

-snip-

Hubbard stated that Scientology was the only workable system, your next agonized trillions, every man, woman, and child, and all that.
 
Last edited:

Veda

Sponsor
Policy does NOT include RTC, actually. The issue type that set up RTC is called "Scientology Policy Directives", which, itself, was never authorized by HCO PL or any other authorized issue type.

Anyone who completes Staff Status II should know that. RTC is a bogus entity.

Anyone who completes Staff Status II doesn't have a clue.

Anyone who does have a clue realizes that Scientology, by its founder's design, has been run as a criminal conspiracy since its inception.
 

Disinfected

Patron Meritorious
Well of course there's no self destruct on scientology. And this comes back to my original point. Try to tell any scientologist that any part of the tech is a lie and it is brushed off as an evaluation / invalidation.

Actually, if you "Try to tell any scientologist that any part of the tech is a lie", they will probably tell you that you are suffering from one or more of the barriers to study. If they bother to tell you anything at all. Saying the tech is trash is different from inval/eval of a person's case or abilities. I think Scientologists can deal much more readily with someone saying the tech is trash than someone invalidating their gains.
 
Top