the Tone Scale is Stupid. Moronically stupid.

[programmer_guy]

It's silly to claim that a Tone Scale is linear. That's just more SCN crap.

For example, I have seen someone crying in tears while speaking in anger. That's 2 emotions at the same time.

 

[Scion-Daughter]

I don't see why emotions need to be classified at all. It brings in labelling and judgement - based on the perceptions of the person doing the labelling - and reinforces the idea that some emotions are bad and some are good. All emotions are part of living and life and can teach us much about ourselves.

I agree with the idea that classifing emotions can lead to judgements without gaining perspective on why they may feeling certain emotions. It is not bad to recognize emotions and deal with them, if someone is angry then try to calm them, if they are afraid then comfort them etc. But the tone scale in my experiences label some emotional responses as undesirable and other reponses as more desirable. I feel this can lead some people to suppress natural emotional reactions or feel guilty about what they feel.
I don't think it is bad to try to have control over your emotions, but sometimes you just have to feel what you feel.

I feel that the tone scale doesn't make sense. Why have a "scale" people are going to feel a lot of things depending on what is going on. Why are some feelings up tone and some down tone. That is not to say that sometimes a response may be inappropriate or unhealthy, but the tone scale IMHO does not allow for differences in reactions between individuals.

But if some find it value using it...great. I only saw it used as a weapon so I might not have a good opinion of it.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

Agreed, and expressed well, Nick.

Ditto.

I've been 'semi-ordered' by one of my 'brothers' here, to stay away from 'tech' type threads for a bit, so I'll leave it that.

He must be frightened of the wisdom & insights you bring to those threads. Tell him to face his own fears & stop trying to prevent your communicating with friends.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Mark A. Baker]

It's silly to claim that a Tone Scale is linear. That's just more SCN crap.

It's more likely simply to reflect the limitations of Hubbard's education & his attempt to communicate his basic ideas as simply as possible to a broad popular audience.

The number one thing to keep in mind about the subject of scientology is that from early on the goal was to GET PEOPLE AUDITING. All "research", such as it was, was geared to achieving that objective and achieving it as simply and quickly as possible.

"Absolute Truth" was never an important criterion of the subject of scientology. The Co$ emphasis of the innate truth of "Ron" was a later addition and a distortion of the subject of scientology. It marked the decline in integrity and the gradual development into a cult of the organizations of dianetics & scientology.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Mark A. Baker]

But if some find it value using it...great. I only saw it used as a weapon so I might not have a good opinion of it.

It can be used as a weapon, anything can be. But that says a great deal more about the user than it does about the tool.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

Just a couple of points, from someone who's broadly sympathetic to the Tech even if I believe it's not the "whole story."

Sympathy and empathy (which is a higher toned variant) aren't the same thing. What sympathy "says" is that the person expressing sympathy couldn't cope if they had the problem you had, and which they're feeling sympathetic about.

It sounds good and it may be better than not caring at all, but it's not what someone struggling with a rough problem needs to hear. They want to know that it's possible to surmount the problem they're dealing with, no matter how bad they're feeling about it, and that there's a way forward.

Basically, sympathy is a variant of fear.

Learning about covert hostility was one of the best things I got out of training; sadly, my own CH at times as well as that of others. I think everyone should know about it.

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

Erm, at the risk of stirring up some sort of hornets nest here, I think the OP expresses an idea about the tone scale which I don't share about it.

I do not regard, say, anger as "better" than grief. The tone scale has an ordering of emotional responses which seem to have a degree of logic as compared with the individuals general ability to live and survive. But just because there may be some truth to that, it does not mean to say that anger is a better emotion to use in a situation where grief would be more appropriate.

Some folks have the idea that "becoming OT" or more enlightened or however one wants to express that notion that one should be able to, say, watch the events that unfolded on 9/11 from a state of serenity of beingness. If anyone has that idea then they are mistaken. One cannot become enlightened by becoming emotionally disconnected from one's surroundings. One can, however, be less the unknowing effect of them and thus able to "move on the tone scale" (as a Scientologist might put it) as needed.

Also, as a personal observation, it does not seem necessarily the case one always moves from a low level to a high level through every intervening step - so one does not necessarily more from grief to contentment via hate. If Hubbard's view about wavelengths and the tone scale are in any way an actual reflection of reality, then I see them more in the manner of quantum energy levels and one can jump from one level to another without necessarily ever being in any intermediate state.

I cannot defend the actual numbers or tell anyone whether the list is complete or overblown - merely that it seems to be a good general observation of how life responds to and deals with its environment from an emotioanal persepctive.

Nick

I agree. I think a person in good case shape would feel the same horror at, say, 9/11 as everyone else did - maybe even more so - but they'd move through it more quickly.

Anyone who just sat smiling serenely when seeing that unfold on their TV is either sadistic or half brain-dead.

 

[I told you I was trouble]

I don't see why emotions need to be classified at all. :confused2: It brings in labelling and judgement - based on the perceptions of the person doing the labelling - and reinforces the idea that some emotions are bad and some are good. All emotions are part of living and life and can teach us much about ourselves.

Whatever truth there is in the tone scale, it is used and abused to reinforce the "Bridge" as being the only answer. Once you are labelled as having a chronic tone below 2.0 - rightly or wrongly - you are pretty much fair game. Who hasn't heard the phrase "Oh that 1.1 shit!"?

Yes!!!

Sanity prevails.

 

[nexus100]

From the viewpoint of spiritual growth the tone scale is not only useless, it is deadly. Understanding comes from knowing the viewpoint of the other person. A tone scale perpetuates the idea that one understands the other person because one can observe and categorize emotion FROM ONE"S OWN REALITY. That is a sure fire way to breed ego since one isn't really understanding the other person's reality at all, one is making assumptions about it, staying comfortably inside one's smug little self. One is being God and that just does not work in this place. That was Hubbard's rather obvious downfall, wasn't it?

Let's remember that the tone scale like all Hubbard's stuff is invention. There is not one universal truth in the lot, nor do any of his ideas contain data anyone has to pay attention to or suffer consequences. It is a golden opportunity for one's spiritual gowth to take advantage of this fact by walking out of the whole rotten hovel, closing the door firmly behind. Afterward the cracks in the woodwork get obvious real fast.

 

[KnightVision]

From the viewpoint of spiritual growth the tone scale is not only useless, it is deadly. Understanding comes from knowing the viewpoint of the other person. A tone scale perpetuates the idea that one understands the other person because one can observe and categorize emotion FROM ONE"S OWN REALITY. That is a sure fire way to breed ego since one isn't really understanding the other person's reality at all, one is making assumptions about it, staying comfortably inside one's smug little self. One is being God and that just does not work in this place. That was Hubbard's rather obvious downfall, wasn't it?

Let's remember that the tone scale like all Hubbard's stuff is invention. There is not one universal truth in the lot, nor do any of his ideas contain data anyone has to pay attention to or suffer consequences. It is a golden opportunity for one's spiritual gowth to take advantage of this fact by walking out of the whole rotten hovel, closing the door firmly behind. Afterward the cracks in the woodwork get obvious real fast.

Rightly said. The reason for the judgement upon the emotional states only serves to induce and manipulate followers into 'getting more bridge' so as to maintain the gleeful trance created thru auditing. It's called 'serenity of beingness'; for a price. Still it's a temporal feeling... OH BUT WAIT! That's an outpoint... Get ye to the Reg!

 

[SchwimmelPuckel]

Just plowed through the thread to see if anybody mentioned..

What about the 'stable datum' that angry people are always lying?

How convenient.. For a scamming cult..

So, when some scientology registrar pisses you sufficiently off, and you get screaming mad.. And realizes that the whole cult is a con and you are being swindeled.

There you are.. Almost gagging from fury: "You basterd! - And your swindeling scam cult! All you care about is money! To hell with anything else, my livelyhood and family! - Good across dynamics.. My fat ass!! Hubbard is a fuck'n conman! This is all a baldfaced fuck'n SCAM and a bloody confidence trick! - I told you NO you dimwit! - MY decision! - I'm not banky you asshole! - I decide how to use my money!! - I told you that I couldn't afford it! - Counterintentions!? - Are you calling me a liar? An SP? - Evil!? - You want me to topple your damn desk in your lap!?"

Well, (if and so) were you lying?

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

From the viewpoint of spiritual growth the tone scale is not only useless, it is deadly. Understanding comes from knowing the viewpoint of the other person. A tone scale perpetuates the idea that one understands the other person because one can observe and categorize emotion FROM ONE"S OWN REALITY. That is a sure fire way to breed ego since one isn't really understanding the other person's reality at all, one is making assumptions about it, staying comfortably inside one's smug little self. One is being God and that just does not work in this place. That was Hubbard's rather obvious downfall, wasn't it?

Let's remember that the tone scale like all Hubbard's stuff is invention. There is not one universal truth in the lot, nor do any of his ideas contain data anyone has to pay attention to or suffer consequences. It is a golden opportunity for one's spiritual gowth to take advantage of this fact by walking out of the whole rotten hovel, closing the door firmly behind. Afterward the cracks in the woodwork get obvious real fast.

I don't agree that it's useless, no, though I think you make some fair points.

What you see when you observe another person's tone level is their relationship to psychic energy - their own and other people's - and the likely consequences on an energy level of interacting with them. Somebody in grief, for example, is hard work to be around (and people in apathy even more so because they think everything is useless), someone in anger is likely to attack you in some way, someone in fear is likely to run away from you or the environment, and so on.

It's not the *whole story about who and what the person is, that's certainly true. It might be a 2-dimensional representation of a multi-dimensional reality which we can't see the whole of (and why people can jump from one tone to another without going through all the intermediates).

* For example, some people who are very spiritual are prone to depression because they're very sensitive and easily affected by the negative aspects of their environment such as cruelty, insensitivity and ugliness.

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

Just plowed through the thread to see if anybody mentioned..

What about the 'stable datum' that angry people are always lying?

How convenient.. For a scamming cult..

So, when some scientology registrar pisses you sufficiently off, and you get screaming mad. And realizes that the whole cult is a con and you are being swindeled.

There you are.. Almost gagging from fury: "You basterd! - And your swindeling scam cult! All you care about is money! To hell with anything else, my livelyhood and family! - Good across dynamics.. My fat ass!! Hubbard is a fuck'n conman! This is all a baldfaced fuck'n SCAM and a bloody confidence trick! - I told you NO you dimwit! - MY decision! - I'm not banky you asshole! - I decide how to use my money!! - I told you that I couldn't afford it! - Counterintentions!? - Are you calling me a liar? An SP? - Evil!? - You want me to topple your damn desk in your lap!?"

Well, (if and so) were you lying?

Well, just to play Devil's Advocate here;

If you're seeing them as the "source" of what they're doing and saying rather than as someone who's at least as manipulated as you've been, even temporarily, then you're not seeing the whole truth.

I believe that if you see the whole truth about a situation you feel compassion for the people involved, and that compassion dissolves the anger.

To take an extreme example; did Jesus get angry with the people who were crucifying him? No, he said "Forgive them they know not what they do."

Having said that, we're all human and I'm no exception. I used to get angry with some of the crap I had to deal with in the Church so I can't really comment.

Not long after I left the CofS, I had a fantasy about my ethics officer (who was female) which would be more acceptable on a spanking website than on a family forum like this one.

 

[SchwimmelPuckel]

Yea, Cat.. There's that allright..

Hmm.. Your EO might've liked that! - Maybe you caught some of her 'flows' and secret wishes there?

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

LOL Hadn't thought of that.

Since she was having an affair with another staff member at the same time as she was married to someone else in LA, I'd have thought she had her hands full on the 2D front, but still....

She eventually got declared as out-ethics on those grounds.

In retrospect I can see the positives as well as the negatives; she really did want to help people, but most of the time all we saw of her was the anger and intolerance (swearing at anyone who hadn't sold enough DMSMH's etc.).

 

[Tiger Lily]

From the viewpoint of spiritual growth the tone scale is not only useless, it is deadly. Understanding comes from knowing the viewpoint of the other person. A tone scale perpetuates the idea that one understands the other person because one can observe and categorize emotion FROM ONE"S OWN REALITY. That is a sure fire way to breed ego since one isn't really understanding the other person's reality at all, one is making assumptions about it, staying comfortably inside one's smug little self. One is being God and that just does not work in this place. That was Hubbard's rather obvious downfall, wasn't it?

Nexus that was an awesome post!

Thanks TL

 

[Tiger Lily]

Just plowed through the thread to see if anybody mentioned..

What about the 'stable datum' that angry people are always lying?

How convenient.. For a scamming cult..

Schwimmy, I had that same thought. I was kept in line many times because I "knew' anything I felt when I was angry wasn't reliable or true. (Yes I was brainwashed, and had given over my self-determinism by then). And if I forgot and said something in anger, I was completely dismissed. Very invalidating.

To take an extreme example; did Jesus get angry with the people who were crucifying him? No, he said "Forgive them they know not what they do."

Just to play "devils' advocate" here. You are absolutely right about Jesus' reaction in that case. But Jesus WAS known to get angry. One example: When he went to the temple and they were selling things he said "You've turned my father's house into s den of thieves!" and proceeded to knock over the tables and destroy the place. He was very angry, but I wouldn't say he was lying.

The tone scale is an interesting tool and I think there are workable parts to it. I know that I've internalized and use some of that data all the time. I think the thing to watch out for is that there seem to be traps laid down through the tech, including the tone scale. Things are thrown in there, like the above "stable datum" about anger that throw off your perceptions and make you very rigid and judgmental. At least that was the result it had on me after I learned it; it was a brilliant control mechanism that kept me in Scientology a great deal longer than I would have been there otherwise.

-TL

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

From the viewpoint of spiritual growth the tone scale is not only useless, it is deadly. Understanding comes from knowing the viewpoint of the other person. A tone scale perpetuates the idea that one understands the other person because one can observe and categorize emotion FROM ONE"S OWN REALITY. That is a sure fire way to breed ego since one isn't really understanding the other person's reality at all, one is making assumptions about it, staying comfortably inside one's smug little self. One is being God and that just does not work in this place. That was Hubbard's rather obvious downfall, wasn't it?

Let's remember that the tone scale like all Hubbard's stuff is invention. There is not one universal truth in the lot, nor do any of his ideas contain data anyone has to pay attention to or suffer consequences. It is a golden opportunity for one's spiritual gowth to take advantage of this fact by walking out of the whole rotten hovel, closing the door firmly behind. Afterward the cracks in the woodwork get obvious real fast.

Excelllent!


The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[WrongPlaceRightTime]

yeah maybe it's just me but... Just because this idea has been written down doesn't mean it holds an iota of fact. Just because this idea was shared with conviction doesn't mean it's a fact. The most hilarious and frightening aspect of Scientology for me is the systematic approach of obliterating the validity of emotions. "that's just your reactive mind! acutally it's body theatens!!! but seriously, on the tone scale you're at 1.5" Give me a fuggin break!!! Having emotions is part of what makes us human. If only our human culture could recognize what emotions REALLY are and integrate that knowledge into our daily lives...

 

[EP - Ethics Particle]

Yep!

Nexus that was an awesome post!

Thanks TL

An awesome post on an awesome thread containing a fair few awesome posts!

Personally, I have learned a lot from this thread and appreciate the insights and viewpoints shared here.

EP