Re: Key to Life secret EP and the real purpose Scientology wants you to do this cours
I wonder if the idea of having the texts resemble books for preschoolers was inspired by 1950s Red Chinese Communist thought-reform re-education, where a person - even if he was a university professor - was regarded as an an ignorant child "in the Revolution," in need of being re-educated "from the ground up" with similar (but much cruder) "kiddie books."
I saw the prototype 'KTL' materials years ago (simple black and white cartoon drawings on 'foolscap'-sized paper), and the 'KTL' Supervisor's Course. (Hubbard had a very low opinion of those in need doing the course, which seemed to include everyone - except himself.)
My first impression (as I remember it) was that I had already studied grammar, and also such things as the meanings of "little words," and that I wasn't interested in being told that I was functionally illiterate ("sub literate"?) and chronically out-of-valence, in need of being de-"PTS"-ed to Scientology by doing clay demos.
No doubt, looking up words, etc. helped some people, and - for some Sea Org - it might have been regarded as a pleasant time out from the drudgery, but I wasn't interested.
The follow up course seemed even less appealing to me, and was probably "over-kill."
There was just too much "help a little/control a lot" mind-manipulation occurring in Scientology. It had gone beyond saturation levels, and some people were jumping ship.
For Hubbard's mind-manipulation cult to succeed, the proper ratio of "solvent" (abreaction/catharsis, cognitions, "wins,"
) to "glue" (indoctrination/"brainwashing") had to be maintained.
This was probably achieved in the early/mid 1970s when Hubbard had his mental-healing-coated (and infused) totalist-model personality-cult up and running at full clip.
________
Sometime later, I learned that this course was confidential and placing great emphasis on these kiddie books being studied in their proper sequence. I still find it hard to believe that it was "confidential." Was it?, or did I hear wrong?
"Confidentiality" - proclaimed in publicly displayed, official looking, notices and signs - is yet another gimmick used to make others more malleable and suggestible.
And they're still doing it:
I don't find it unbelievable that someone might improve his word comprehension skills through this course as, at one time I found doing the Student Hat to be useful for the same reason, particularly when looking up the definitions of little words, such as "of," etc. It was useful, but not "life changing," and I didn't consider that I was "capable of comprehension (of words) for the first time," etc., or that I had become someone other than whom I had been as a result, nor did I ever - just to mention it - want to become a "different person."
Yet, the "Success Stories" from this course, which I read in the promo sent out by Scientology, presented a stream of accounts of those who "can now comprehend for the first time," and account after account of people becoming 'a completely different person," etc.
I also noticed that many of the folks writing these "success stories" were already Clear, or OT 3, or OT 7, sometimes Class V, or Class VI, or even Class VIII. All had done the Student Hat, some had done Method I Word Clearing, etc. A fair number were college graduates, or beyond, including a couple of PhDs.
And to top it off, at the end of the two course program, they read Hubbard's 'The Factors'.(Hubbard's re-write of Crowley's 'Naples Arrangement' - itself a restatement of an earlier Kabbalistic/mystical statement). 'The Factors' ends with the words, "humbly tendered as a gift to Man," to seal the deal, and show them how profound has been their voyage from Non-Scientology-non-enlightened confused preschooler to genuine IN-Scientology-grown-up person.
My impression, then - and I was then no longer in $cientology - is that this was the usual Scientology mix of something that (at least appears to) (may) be of benefit to a person (and God help you if, while, IN Scientology, you suggest that it isn't, or that it's not very important.)
The KTL almost seemed like a "soft" RPF (or serving a similar function, "break 'em down, build 'em back up") , but for everyone, not just Sea Org members. (Am not invalidating anyone's gains here, just looking at the glue side of the solvent/glue formula.)
Of course, this was only my impression of the KTL/LOC from a distance.