The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

[ILove2Lurk]

Re: maria reads Dianetics and joins Scientology

I'm not gonna argue with you . . .

I have a question but if it's too personal, please don't answer.

When you walk out into the pasture, do you step in all
the wrong places and get your boots dirty every time?

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

Re: maria reads Dianetics and joins Scientology

You manufactured a premise that I never stated. I simply stated that Hubbard and Scientology did not make up their own IQ tests forms but used widely distributed standard test forms. That is all that I said and then I clarified that for you but you continue reading more into what I said than I actually said.

I admit that I thought that the entire procedure was to take the timed test in a quiet room by yourself with a pencil, an eraser and some scrap paper and then submit the test for scoring. That is how all the tests which I ever took or ever gave others were conducted, both inside and outside of Scientology, and also how the various tests given on the internet, which I have taken for fun, were conducted..

I am not insisting that is all there is to IQ testing. It's quite possible that there is more to the subject and that you know more about the subject than I do. I gave my opinion based on my limited personal experience with the subject. I have no problem accepting your premise that there is more to the subject than what i thought and that the Scientology tests are not conducted with all the proper protocol. At this moment, I don't have enough interest to look up and study the subject and verify that you are correct.

The thing I find annoying is not that their may be more to valid IQ testing than my limited personal exposure to it led me to believe but that you read into the claim I made about the forms used by CoS, a premise which I never made.
Lakey

Oye vey Lakey, you just spent several hundred words explaining how and why you saw nothing wrong with Scns IQ Test Procedure. All I did was make a comment, you personalized it and then wrote small "Treatise" to "prove" my comment wrong using your testing experiences in Scn as the "Proof"...That's a Premise. If you have limited personal exposure to something then it behooves you to read up on it before you start writing hundreds of words trying to "disprove" a few sentences written by someone who just might be more learned on the subject than you. If you're not that interested in the subject then why did you spend hundreds of words expounding on it?

Anyway, sorry I Posted on your Thread again...I won't bother you further.

Face

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: maria reads Dianetics and joins Scientology

You are misinformed, Lakey.

The same test cannot be given again. That is the procedure used in universities.

This is because repeated testing results in familiarity with the questions and answers. After taking a test, people think about their answers and work out which ones they got right or wrong. So repeatedly using the same IQ test (or any other identical test used repeatedly, for that matter) nearly always results in a better score the second, third or whatever time one takes it.

I don't agree with the above paragraph. How would a person make a correction if he was never told the correct answer. Actually, if he worked out a new answer, it would be just as likely to change a correct answer to incorrect as it would to change an incorrect answer to be correct. This problem does pique my interest quite a bit. I just can't see any improvement at all retaking an IQ test a second or third time within a matter of days. If one waits years to retake the test, then, IMHO, it becomes totally ridiculous to expect that the scores will go up

I took classes at psychological statistical analysis. It's true.

I am not "misinformed", I reasoned out my conclusion using common sense. To me, your explanation does not make a lot of sense. After taking an IQ test of 50 to 100 questions, of various types having to do with words, numbers, algebra, geometrical forms, logic etc., I find it hard to remember any of the questions the moment I stop the test. I have a tremendously good memory for details but as soon as I finished a test, I completely forget what all the problems were.

Usually, a person does not know which problems he or she got right and which might be wrong. Usually, when I am told which ones I missed, most of the misses have been ones which I was certain were correct, not ones on which I was in doubt. I admit that two or three times in my life, I wrote down a problem on my scrap paper and tried to work on it some more after the test. I no longer have any memory of what those problems were and I don't believe that I ever solved any of them to my satisfaction after the test was over.

When you come back to Flag, 10 years later and they give you an IQ test, if it is the same test you took 10 years earlier, you would never know it. Nobody is going to remember what questions were asked on an IQ test ten years earlier.

In Hubbard's case, if he was trying to ascertain whether Auditing raised someone's IQ, it just seems to me that he must give the person the exact same test. Just think about it, if he gives another test and the person does better or worse, it could just be that for that particular person, the test questions were easier or harder. The test being given has to be a constant parameter. You have to have the idea in mind that if the person missed the question the first time, he will miss it again the second time. To me, the odds that someone would continue working on a problem in his mind after the test is concluded and figure out a new correct answer by doing that are miniscule.

On taking classes in college, I hold what is taught in Physics, Chemistry, Engineering, etc. to be valid. Even in these sciences, political correctness is just starting to take hold and subjects such as "climate change" are beginning to be skewed in favor of political correctness.

In any case, IMHO when it comes to life sciences and human sciences, these types of science are nowhere near as exacting as the Physical Sciences are. I guess that a large set of test cases would convince me in the IQ test field. If many tests were taken where students took an IQ test once and then retook it a second time and a third time, all within a week or two and the test scores did rise, it would be hard to refute your conclusions. However, if the tests were repeated 5 years later and 10 years later and the results showed the test scores rose, then I would not accept the findings. I would look for biases in the testing.

This topic, where the score would increase on successive testing without the person ever being told which items were incorrect the first time really catches my interest, much more so than the posts which Face wrote on the subject. I am definitely going to do a little research in this area and get a better handle on this topic.

Thank yoou Shiela for stirring up my interest!
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: maria reads Dianetics and joins Scientology

Oye vey Lakey, you just spent several hundred words explaining how and why you saw nothing wrong with Scns IQ Test Procedure. All I did was make a comment, you personalized it and then wrote small "Treatise" to "prove" my comment wrong using your testing experiences in Scn as the "Proof"...That's a Premise. If you have limited personal exposure to something then it behooves you to read up on it before you start writing hundreds of words trying to "disprove" a few sentences written by someone who just might be more learned on the subject than you. If you're not that interested in the subject then why did you spend hundreds of words expounding on it?

Anyway, sorry I Posted on your Thread again...I won't bother you further.

Face

Once again, you misquoted me. You say I used my experiences in SCN as my proof and that this is a premise. The fact that I cited many experiences outside of Scn are conviently ignored. I cited being tested at UCLA at age 20, I cited giving tests for years to people who wanted to work for me in my non Scn construction business and I cited the non Scn experiences of taking several IQ tests on the internet over the last few years which have nothing to do with Scn.

Oy vey, Face, you seem to cherry pick your data and and dictate premises for a person which you manufacture yourself. Post here or not as you see fit but if you do decide to leave, don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out!
Lakey

 

[MrNobody]

Re: maria reads Dianetics and joins Scientology

Once again, you misquoted me.
<snip>

Sorry, Lakey, but as far as I can see, Face quoted exactly what you said.

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: maria reads Dianetics and joins Scientology

Sorry, Lakey, but as far as I can see, Face quoted exactly what you said.

Mr. Nobody, you use the term, "as far as I can see" but perhaps you need to look more and see further.

He said based on my Scn experiences, I formed a premise. Actually, I quoted some Scn experiences, some non Scn experiences at my business, a total non Scn Experience at UCLA, and several totally non Scn experiences on the internet. If you don't see it now, you need to go to an optometrist and get fitted for a new pair of glasses.
Lakey

 

[MrNobody]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

I see you disagreed with my post. No worries, I don't care, it's none of my business. :wink2: So which one of your sentences exactly did Face alter/modify?

 

[JustSheila]

Re: maria reads Dianetics and joins Scientology

I am not "misinformed", I reasoned out my conclusion using common sense. To me, your explanation does not make a lot of sense. After taking an IQ test of 50 to 100 questions, of various types having to do with words, numbers, algebra, geometrical forms, logic etc., I find it hard to remember any of the questions the moment I stop the test. I have a tremendously good memory for details but as soon as I finished a test, I completely forget what all the problems were.

Usually, a person does not know which problems he or she got right and which might be wrong.
Lakey

But see, Lakey, that's the problem with having concepts of things that we "all know" as "common sense." Though MOST may actually be true, quite a few of the things we assume as common knowledge are simply untrue.

Only true research under particular conditions can bear out whether something we assume is actually true or not, or even mostly true.

You may or may not be completely aware of your mind's figuring out problems afterward, but even MICE improve their IQs when running the same tests again. Humans are certainly smarter than mice, and repeating tests on humans of the identical test results in higher scores. Except for you, of course. But I'm teasing you.

Some examples of common sense knowledge that has since been proven wrong:

It was common knowledge that cholera infection was spread through the air. Untrue. It was from drinking water.
It was common knowledge that the earth was flat and at the end of it, we fell off and there were horrible beasts.
It was common knowledge in Medieval Times that anyone found walking alone or thinking by himself must be insane.

It was common sense that illnesses came from bacteria so by eliminating bacteria, we eliminated illness. Then viruses were discovered.
Children eat healthier who are bottle fed was common sense. Now we know that's usually NOT true.
etc, etc.

 

[JustSheila]

Re: maria reads Dianetics and joins Scientology

In Hubbard's case, if he was trying to ascertain whether Auditing raised someone's IQ, it just seems to me that he must give the person the exact same test. Just think about it, if he gives another test and the person does better or worse, it could just be that for that particular person, the test questions were easier or harder.
Lakey

I see your point here, Lakey, but an IQ test is about testing a person's ability to figure things out, not so much a test of a person's knowledge.

So one would give a different test, but one that has been researched to have the same level of difficulty and values as the first test. That requires a great deal of people over a wide strata to refine a test that thoroughly.

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

I see you disagreed with my post. No worries, I don't care, it's none of my business. :wink2: So which one of your sentences exactly did Face alter/modify?

He cherry picked. Are you familiar with that term? I described dozens of experiences where I either took IQ tests or administered an IQ test to others. Of the dozens, only 3 tests were administered to me by Scientology. Face chose only to focus on those 3 experiences and ignored all the rest. Based on those 3 he constructed a premise for me which was not mine.

Look, Mr. Nobody, I've read many of your posts and know that you are not stupid so why are you acting stupid in this case? You are entitled to give your opinion. You did that and I reject it and don't think it aligns with reality. I could care less if you agree with me or not so our discussion on this topic is closed.
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: maria reads Dianetics and joins Scientology

I see your point here, Lakey, but an IQ test is about testing a person's ability to figure things out, not so much a test of a person's knowledge.

So one would give a different test, but one that has been researched to have the same level of difficulty and values as the first test. That requires a great deal of people over a wide strata to refine a test that thoroughly.

You make a good point Shiela. You know, when I majored in math at Cal State Fullerton, I was planning on being a high school math teacher. I took all the various education courses which I needed and even was a student teacher at Fullerton High for 5 months.. I did take the statistics course relating to statistics and the bell shaped curve, standard deviations and all of that.

It is a pleasure to receive a well intended and on point reply and challenge to something I wrote. I haven't studied the subject yet but I intend to do that either today or over the weekend. I did do a lot of thinking about it last night and I can see how things could be the way you suggest. The ability to figure things out is being tested and not a person's knowledge, that is a very good point and it makes a lot of sense.

POINT #1 - SHOULD THE SAME VERSION OF AN IQ TEST BE GIVEN EACH TIME OR SHOULD DIFFERENT VERSIONS BE USED

I guess that theoretically, if several IQ tests are scientifically constructed and adhere to the current state of the art of IQ testing, any person taking any of that batch of IQ tests should achieve virtually the same score, with perhaps a very small variation allowed for the the tests having different questions.

For example, if someone scored 130, the testers could safely state that his IQ lies between 127 and 133. Such small variations would even hold up if a person took the exact same test on consecutive days. An IQ score of 130 would translate into an IQ range of perhaps 127 to 133. Maybe the person, slept better the night before test #1 than he or she did the night of test #2, or maybe the person almost got into a car accident on his way to take the test. There are all sorts of variables of that nature that could effect problem solving ability for any given moment of time.

If what you are saying and what I wrote above are true, than taking separate tests should not have any actual effect on how one scores on an IQ test. I am ready to concede that point!

POINT#2 - IF THE SAME VERSION OF AN IQ TEST IS GIVEN REPEATEDLY, DO A PERSON'S TEST SCORES TEND TO IMPROVE?

Point #1 is now settled for me but there is still point #2 above which remains. I am having difficulty in agreeing with you on this point. To me this claim is not intuitively obvious if the test taker is not informed of the correct answers after the first test is over. I don't see how problem solving ability would automatically improve just through added familiarity with the test questions.

As I said in my earlier comment to you, If a test taker changes an answer on the second or third test, it is just as likely that he would change from correct to incorrect as it is for him to change from incorrect to correct.

Sure, the argument could be made that if a test taker remembers the problem, the second or third retest gives him additional time to spend on the problem. That brings up the question of whether the added time is a major benefit or not. The way I see it is that if the person remembers the problem well and remembers the difficulty which he had with it, he or she may be able to resume working on the problem from the point at which the incorrect answer was chosen. If the person does not remember the problem very well, he will have to start over from scratch and re familiarize himself with the problem and all of his extra time might be taken up doing that so that the extra time gives him no real advantage.

I'll get back to you on this after I do some study on this topic.
Lakey

 

[Maria Cuervo]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Oh, by the way Mer...The large majority of the content on the Apollo Thread has nothing to do with the Apollo or Scn. As the Thread went forward it became a "Chat Room" for current world events, media articles, many different topics and cavorting around...Most all interesting and fun stuff but nothing to do with Scn. The Apollo, Scn stuff is sandwiched in here and there sometimes sometimes is sprinkled in heavily from various contributors for 20-30 pages or so and then sparse for 50-60 pages or so. A number of the Old Timer contributors were BC Grads from the '70's and even the '60's at St. Hill, Flag Crew, Class 8's, etc and even a couple of Auditors from the '50's. But, the "wheat" is in a 2,000+ page pile of "chaff"--so to speak.

Face:)

Continuing the off-topicness, I have a question for the out of body super OTs: Do you get tired of not being able to touch yourself lying in the bed?

 

[JustSheila]

Re: maria reads Dianetics and joins Scientology

Sure, the argument could be made that if a test taker remembers the problem, the second or third retest gives him additional time to spend on the problem. That brings up the question of whether the added time is a major benefit or not. The way I see it is that if the person remembers the problem well and remembers the difficulty which he had with it, he or she may be able to resume working on the problem from the point at which the incorrect answer was chosen. If the person does not remember the problem very well, he will have to start over from scratch and re familiarize himself with the problem and all of his extra time will be taken up doing that so that the extra time gives him no real advantage.

I'll get back to you on this after I do some study on this topic.
Lakey

Thanks for your answer, Lakey.

Memory is a fascinating subject. So is intelligence. No IQ test is perfect, anyway, and they have all been criticized for having a Western civilization bias. Lots of things beyond memory can affect a test-taker. More focus. Better mental health. Faster mental faculties (which is why uni students might take certain drugs before a test.) But you're right - with an IQ test, it should only vary a few points up or down.

To access the sociological and psychological studies, you need to either pay a subscription or visit your local uni or library and ask for a temporary password to access theirs. The Internet only finds the most recent ones that made the news - there are sites for all the studies, and these are easy to search, too. There are literally tens of thousands of studies on different subjects, perhaps millions, and many of them have been repeated dozens of times. It's a real eye-opener when you get into the sites for the first time and I think you'd have a ball reading some of this stuff. Some of them are very, very cool. I'm sure you'll find plenty of things you can tell me that I don't know or took for granted as true.

 

[JustSheila]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Lakey, I found a really FASCINATING article on IQ and how it can change and what changes it. I sure didn't know this stuff - think you'll like this:

http://www.livescience.com/36143-iq-change-time.html

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Continuing the off-topicness, I have a questionso for the out of body super OTs: Do you get tired of not being able to touch yourself lying in the bed?

Er, um, I don't know what to make of this question. Here are my questions and comments.

#1 - What super OT's are you referring to? The last time I checked, the consensus on ESMB is pretty unanimous that CoS and/or Hubbard never produced even one super OT.
#2 - You are one of the few whom I have encountered who claim this particular OT ability. You seem to not consider it super because later on it turns on somatics for you.
#3 - The next question has to do with what you mean by touching yourself. Are you referring to the body in total or certain specific parts of the anatomy as in "you know where".

Comments: Hubbard may never have produced a Book #1 clear or a super OT but lots of people in and out of Scientology have a few or even a lot of clear like abilities and also some OT abilities as well. My special abilities tend to be of the Book 1 Clear variety.

I'm not one to brag, but I do possess some Book #l Clear type abilities in the area of memories. For example, for virtually every song or commercial advertisement jingle which I have heard in my life, I have remembered the lyrics and melody, without a conscious effort to do so. This extends to not only English songs but to German songs as well. At age 27 I traveled to Germany and met a singer in a German bar who talked English with no German accent. I asked her what part of the USA she came from and she revealed that she was German. I asked her why she had no accent and she said that by hearing all the American songs on the juke box at her bar, and singing along with them, she was able to talk English without a German accent..

I was studying German at that time and when I got home to the USA, I bought a dozen or so record albums of German songs, called "Lieder". Hearing these nearly daily over several years, I remembered all the lyrics from between 50 and 100 German songs and arias. These songs are not pop tunes but serious German songs such as Schubert's manyLieder and Beethoven's "Ode to Joy". Unfortunately, I don't speak German very much anymore but to this day, I still know all the lyrics and melodies for over 50 German classics, such as Schubert's song, "The Trout" and various opera arias.

Also, there is recall. Before Dianetics, I remembered a few incidents back to age 2 1/2 which is earlier than the average child but with Dianetics, I ran 4 incidents at 9 months of age. I didn't know how to talk yet but still I understood everything which was being said in the room, usually between my Mom and my Grandma. I verified all 4 incidents with my Mom and got her take on them. Strangely, she never acted surprised when I told her about those incidents. To me these incidents at 9 months of age were much more satisfying than running past life incidents because with these incidents, I could verify with my Mom that they all actually occurred. With past life incidents, one never knows for sure if they are real or are just dub ins from some book one read or a movie one saw.

So much for my ablities, getting back to your question, Mer, I can't give you any answer because I have never been able to leave my body with certainty. Oh one can do drills in an effort to create this effect but I've never been able to "go exterior" with certainty. It may read on a meter that one is exterior but to actually know that for certain, I've never attained that. As far as getting tired of not being able to touch onrrself, I am not going to comment on that. You have more really with the subject than me, so I'll put the same question to you, do you get tired of not being able to touch yourself while exterior?
Lakey

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Continuing the off-topicness, I have a question for the out of body super OTs: Do you get tired of not being able to touch yourself lying in the bed?

Yeah...Even the OT 8's and L's Comps here are royally PO'd about that.

Maybe Super Power handles that. :confused2:


Sorry Lakey, I couldn't resist.

 

[Commander Birdsong]

Re: maria reads Dianetics and joins Scientology

Mr. Nobody, you use the term, "as far as I can see" but perhaps you need to look more and see further.

He said based on my Scn experiences, I formed a premise. Actually, I quoted some Scn experiences, some non Scn experiences at my business, a total non Scn Experience at UCLA, and several totally non Scn experiences on the internet. If you don't see it now, you need to go to an optometrist and get fitted for a new pair of glasses.
Lakey

it's hard to communicate on this board lakey

i can't count the number of times someone has misduplicated my misduplication of someone else's misduplications...

 

[Commander Birdsong]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

I love that! It sounds perfect here.

(what world events? you mean something has happened???)

not much...

 

[ILove2Lurk]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Sorry Lakey, I couldn't resist.

Sorry, I couldn't resist either. :wink2:

​

View attachment 9551

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: maria reads Dianetics and joins Scientology

Thanks for your answer, Lakey.

Memory is a fascinating subject. So is intelligence. No IQ test is perfect, anyway, and they have all been criticized for having a Western civilization bias. Lots of things beyond memory can affect a test-taker. More focus. Better mental health. Faster mental faculties (which is why uni students might take certain drugs before a test.) But you're right - with an IQ test, it should only vary a few points up or down.

To access the sociological and psychological studies, you need to either pay a subscription or visit your local uni or library and ask for a temporary password to access theirs. The Internet only finds the most recent ones that made the news - there are sites for all the studies, and these are easy to search, too. There are literally tens of thousands of studies on different subjects, perhaps millions, and many of them have been repeated dozens of times. It's a real eye-opener when you get into the sites for the first time and I think you'd have a ball reading some of this stuff. Some of them are very, very cool. I'm sure you'll find plenty of things you can tell me that I don't know or took for granted as true.

Thanks, Shiela,
I've heard a bit about the cultural bias of Western civilization existing in our Western IQ test. When I first heard it, I kind of dismissed it as being politically correct drivel. The way I saw it, was that if one lives in the West and wants to be successful in life, he or she should take an IQ test which contains a Western bias. Ditto for other parts of the world, they should take IQ tests which reflect the biases of their respective cultures.

I can see differences existing between a white or Oriental persons with an intact family living in a well to do neighborhood and Black and Latino kids living in ghetto like areas with only one parent. What good does it do for many Black and Hispanic kids if they are good in the areas tested by Western IQ tests. What may count more for many of those kids may be how good they are at sports or how good they can dance and play popular music.

What should be tested for when counseling those student is surely not the standard IQ test questions but rather, various items which, if a person is good at them, those items will help him or her get out of the ghetto and get a stable and well paying job and enable him or her to created a stable family for themselves.

But then again, the IQ test does have to do with intelligence and there are several types of intelligence. The ability to solve problems does ally closely with determining intelligence, as you have already pointed out. I tend to separate intelligence into "book smarts" and "street smarts". Some test takers should be concentrating on street smarts so as to best succeed in life while others may want to concentrate on book smarts.

Anyway, I'll get back with you after I have read up some on the subject.
Lakey