Hi there,
My exposure to scientology began years ago and included me doing some rudamentary courses. I knew a lot of people within the organisation all of whom are now out I believe.
These are a few questions I have for the ex scientologists who post on this site:
At what point did you start questioning the faith? .
I never felt I had a "faith". I was born into a Scientology family who said religions were for weak people who couldn't take responsibility and that Scientology was a "technology" that claimed religious status so it could get a tax break. Sounded fine to me at 15 when I guess you could say I started thinking for myself and when I signed my SO contract. Today I wouldn't claim any 15 year old has enough variety of thoughts to choose their own. They have the thoughts their parents have, their teachers, books, TV and their peers, that's it to choose from. I first questioned the whole paradigm about 10 years AFTER I had left, when a death in the family had me finally realise that I didn't have all the answers. Up until then I fully expected to be able to contact someone who had just dies for example. Finding out I couldn't was a complete shock, it was the first time I questioned my "faith" and began to realise that my beliefs were not neccesarily truths just because I believed them. Until then I was a walking talking advertisement of "what you believe is true is true for you." I finally opened my mind and began to read and listen to others. The other ways of looking at the world that I had held in contempt and seen as inferior, were now open for me to actually see without that pre-judgement I had grown up with. And I only realised how much "faith" I had had - after I lost it.
I remember at the age of 20 seeing the people within this organisation speaking in their own made up language using words that don't exist (some still do on this messsage board), standinig in judgement of others with different philisophical view points and labbeling people according to the tone scale and thinking to myself "this is a farken crock." I arrived at that conclusion within months of having a look inside. Why didn't you?
RE: language
- You confuse "doesn't exist" with common usage. If you understood etymology you wouldn't make this mistake. By your way of seeing things, the quantum physisists are all using language that "doesn't exist" and are all fools. As are medico's, tax attorneys and film makers. Do you really believe that anything that is "correct" can be found in the Oxford English dictionary? That's a lot of faith to place in the academic authorities of the day.
You show a lack of compassion in not understanding WHY people find comfort in familiar terms and relief at actually being understood when they use concepts and terms that mean something to them and haven't to the general population around them. Have you never noticed how foreigners LOVE to go to their home country? They come back romaticising about hearing their own language spoken? Any foray into the world of neurology or even basic psychology would have given you an appreciation of the very normal need to contact the familiar. Languages have their own neurons and when they are exercized again after a time of being dormant - wow, it feels good, like relief and excitement all in one. Have you ever gotten together with a bunch of old friends after a long time and talked about old times? Part of the joy is re-using language and images and concepts that belonged to you back then which you have not exercised for a while.
You also forget that people had big wins (yes there's a word you wont like, yet it is prevalent in many other practices actually) within their lives during their Scientology years. They achieved goals they had set, they managed to help people, (be it their juniors on staff, public or individuals they trained - even if the entire technology was fools gold, finding the shiny stuff still felt good - remember a value does not have to be a true value to be enjoyed - just something that is desired) and so there is probably some aspect of good feeling connected to those times. Reminiscing is a human pasttime and not solely the weird activity of ex-cult members.
Surely you are aware that adversity can bring people close? There was always a current adversity in the orgs, if it wasn't Int Management or quicksilvering unreasonable seniors, it was tough targets, the birthday game or "the planet that needed clearing" - the adversities don't have to be real to help people bond, just agreed upon - ever watched reality TV shows?
You claim to have dismissed "standing in judgement of others" years ago as somethingyou observed in the org and rejected. And yet here you are doing it right now - about those still in the church and those who are out of it. You're labelling us right now, as you read this I am sure. You certainly were when you wrote yourpost - in your head if not in your words. Pithy, your contempt shines through.
Secondly - very quickly I also realised that the organisation was in fact designed to control people. I realised that the organisation thrived on knowledge and needed that knowledge to control people. I also realised that it was designed that way to ensure there wern't too many people who strayed from the flock. So my second question is why didn't you realise that?
I can't talk for others but I grew up within the Scientology paradigm, when did you expect me to realise it? When I was 3, 5, 10?
You're in a paradigm right now, which one I have no idea of, perhaps a middle class paradigm, perhaps a military one, perhaps a lower class thugs one - you know gang affiliations, secret handshakes? Who knows? And it has its own truths and ways of seeing and some of them, I can guarantee it, are as stupid as the scientology ones, and some are helpful and provide great structure to live your life in.
Furthermore, the entire employment paradigm of the western world is designed so very few stray. It is a structure of thought that controls enough people to keep the economic fires burning for the enrichment of a few and with varying levels of reward for the workers. Some of whom are 70 years old and work for tips - barely eaking out an existance.
Individual endeavour is not supported by the underlying paradigm.
Think about the ridicule and ostrasing suffered by those who choose not to get an education and get a real job? What about Mr and Mrs Average?
How many people live in their home town just because they were born there? Not because they choose to? How many would-be-artists are accountants or housewives because that was expected? Because they believe they have to have a family and a house and a mortgage etc. When they could be free to follow a dream instead. Why don't those people realise it?
When did I realise it? Only after I had been out of Scientology's physical paradigm for years and finally stopped justifying the way I saw things ( the scn way) and could see there were other ways of looking at things. I could finally step out of themental paradigm. Some people who had stepped out of their own paradigms helped, (mostly not scn) people who had stepped out of financial paradigms, relationship paradigms, etc. You see ANY belief system is potentially restricting.
If you realised it so quickly how crap scientology's paradigm was, you know what - YOU NEVER ENTERED INTO IT -good on you. I mean that, sincerely, but it gives you NO RIGHT to think you understand what it is like to have been in it fully and then found a way out. You are kidding yourself about your imperical viewpoint here.
When will you realise the ways in which
you are controlled now? By your current group - your current culture- your current think. Do you really follow every dream and fullfil every potential you have? What thoughts/group agreements keep you from doing that?
And finnaly to those who still say, despite the fact they now consider themselves ex cultists, that they gained something out of the cult and the tech and that it is the organisation is the thing that is flawed not the tech and that things were different pre 10 years ago: How can you still stand by a technology which included the fair game policy? Which sort to destroy it enemies? Which sort to ostracize people who didn't believe? Which sort to slander people who had the gall to disagree? How can you still stand by and say I gained something from an organisation which is by design evil?
Ever have a bad thing happen in your life? Can you honestly say you got NOTHING from the experience? Ever had a relationship go wrong? But you had honestly been in love with that person? It wasn't all bad - ever. And to blanket the people on this board as standing by a technology? Well, if you had read this board before you opened your mouth and showed us your thoughts you would know that most of us don't stand by "the tech"and those that do - how about dropping that judgementality you were bagging a few lines ago? How do you know that they didn't get value from it? Maybe it was worth the pain for them? For example, I feel pretty able to communicate, always have, but who's to say someone else who had problems with that all their life and perhaps reading some stuff, or doing level 0 or something changed that for them for the better? And maybe that was worth ten years of RPF's RPF for them? It's all relative to something you have no access to - THEIR PERSONAL EXPERIENCE AND VALUES.
You mention how the church didn't accept dissagreement - but you don't either! Your view or no value in the view - that's what I am hearing from your post.
You insinuate we percieved gain from something that had evil in it. Good question. Let me ask you. Do you gain anything by eating meat? Well, do you have ANY IDEA the cruelty , pain, suffering and degredation the livestock goes through to ensure you get your steak?
Do you enjoy your Nike shoes? Ever had a bit of coke or drugs that orriginated in a third world country? Do you know what working conditions were suffered by those who made your nike's or your bit of chemical joy? Any idea how many people went to jail or died to get it to you?
Even if you do realise it, there was still a percieved benefit to you, wasn't there? The benefit is not wiped out by the evil that was connected to it's creation. And so it is an individual value judgement - And can only happen AFTER one finds out about the evil. I never heard Lisa McPerson's name until decades after I had left. I never knew the abuse being suffered by SO and staff children, the abortions forced on women, the other deaths due to Scientology organisations going insane. I never knew all those OT's were anything but completely happy and satisfied and getting their full bridge defined gains. How could I? My thinking went, well, they're still paying for them and I don't hear a single complaint. They are OT - They are Class XII auditors, They are at the top echelon's of SO management - if there were anything crap at that level, they are powerful in status and independance and money and abilities that they'd shout about it right? So my work seemed worth it. I knew I had a had a bit of a hard time in the last couple of years, and after a while I could see some of the damage done to me, but how many people having Scientology services today are aware of these things? How many SO members and staff members know that the suffering is widespread, that abuse is happening at Int that would be intollerable in a jail? How many people know that the OT VIII's think it's a load of hooey? How many know that the top auditors are treated like scum? It's like I brought up in my first paragraph - to understand you have to see , if it ishidden you cannot see it. If you are not exposed to different viewpoints you stay in the one you have. If they managed to see - how many would believe them? It is an idealogically isolated society - made so to the public by indoctrinating them against other views and for the SO and Staff? _ There IS NO outside contact - how would they find an exterior viewpoint to see it from? How man HUNDREDS OF YEARS did it take the Catholic Church to be found out in regard to its priests abusing little boys? Did you expect all those Catholics to suddenly go "I no longer believe in God - because of what those priests did?" Have they? Will they?
Now, personally I am working on sorting the issue of "can there be anything good come from a narccistic meglomaniac with evil intentions?" But your way of asking - it's so make-wrong that I expect you only look at the issue in a shallow way. This is a major personal issue, a journey of actual personal development, of choosing beliefs and looking at what is real for me and what is not. It can only be do.ne by the individual in the presence of manyother viewpoints and an open data field.
When I got out, I looked around at the people around me - I saw confused, people with little ability to set goals, focus, achieve, think, and no one I knew seemed to have any control of their emotions. I felt superior. Within a short while I was successful in the "wog world." I aced uni, doing 5 years in 4, I made money like it was second nature, I had a relationship that everyone envied and my partner couldn't believe. I was happy - all the time whereas most people seemed "not bad" or "depresessed'. Was this because of my Scientology experience? I certainly put it down to that at the time. After all I had been an SO member since I was 16 and an exec since I was 17. It didn't even occour to me until at least ten years later that maybe I was just a go getter anyhow, that I might have "turned out" even more happy if I hadn't had those years of enforced Scn paradigm.
How to sort that from the evil I found out about only after I had been out for decades? Woah, this is no cut and dried, black and white excersize here.
So, have another think about your questions, Pithy.
Let me know your thoughts.
You're about as naive and judgemental as they come, Pithy. To have dipped a toe in and think you know all about the ocean most of us swam in.
PS If this post sounds angry, well, I suspect you don't mind raising a bit of anger in those you communicate with. What's that about, Pithy?