LA SCN
NOT drinking the kool-aid
Look at the bright side ... she's probably still in the cult and you're not.
Amen, Brother!
And she probably wrote one of those vapid, underwhelming OT 8 success stories!
Look at the bright side ... she's probably still in the cult and you're not.
No, as The Anabaptist Jacques pointed out, he and I made an argument and gave our rationale. Alex and you just called us names.
And don't worry, you used your Scientology training to perfection. Never defend, always attack. When (as almost always) a Scientologist cannot make an argument on the merits, make a personal attack and/or change the subject.
Pass. Very well done.
That's quite true TAJ. I'm no Hubbard apologist but don't you think that all those instructions he left about "making money" were to do with actually making money by making Auditors who then made it to OT?They believed that Hubbard was right about the necessity of money (for him).
The Anabaptist Jacques
You talk very pretty, and considering that I am here as a person who has rejected Scientology, you are using these buttons to try and hurt me. Your arguments were based on personal perceptions, not scientific survey. I still think you are both pompous, and also mean spirited.
So, I leave you to it.
That's quite true TAJ. I'm no Hubbard apologist but don't you think that all those instructions he left about "making money" were to do with actually making money by making Auditors who then made it to OT?
There is a very interesting Policy Letter in the Original OEC Vol 7 where he berates SH staff for attempting to make money by any other means than delivering Training and Services. He must have forgotten about it and obviously DM and his ilk missed that one.
I used to hammer on this when I was in and would protest the no-exchange donations and constant attention on things other than making Auditors. The Tech/Admin ratio in the CofS is horrendously askew.
It's all a bit of a non-argument for me these days, I'm afraid.
I have certainly changed my mind about many things since I left the CofS.
I just wanted to toss out an idea I've been mulling for a long time before I go to dinner and maybe catch a movie. It has to do with the source of the earnings, wealth, income, savings, etc. of Scientologists. I'm referring to individual, public Scientologists who support the superstructure that is Scientology. Not FSMs. The people who earn, or have, "wog" money that is subsequently poured into the CO$ for auditing, training, ideal orgs, and to receive meaningless certificates and shiny medals.
My theory is that, when compared to the public at large, such earnings, wealth, income, savings, etc. is far less correlated to critical thinking skills and, well, intelligence (at least narrowly defined; i.e., not "emotional intelligence, but instead math / logic / scientific intelligence) than the public in general.
When you have as much money as some of the people who can be photographed at Flag getting those expensive certs, and donating shitloads to IAS you do not need critical thinking skills. Wealthy people usually do know enough about "math" to count their money.
Comparing them with the "public at large" - well, look at the public at large. I see a lot of them who are destitute in critical thinking skills. Quite a few people who are critical thinkers in general become nutty when they think about religion or "spirituality". So I don't believe the dumb ones giving their loot to the cult are any dumber than the public at large. They are the public at large, that is, until taken into custody by the cult
It seems a lot of people who spend a ton of money on Scientology, and particularly the "Grand Jubilee Puba Meritoriouses," have inherited wealth. Or are spending mommy and daddy's money. And I'm saying this is true to a greater extent than with a group that contributes comparable amounts to other "charitable" [LOL ] endeavors.
Yes.
As for those who earned their money, it seemed a lot had professions where, to be precise, and quite frankly insulting (but perhaps not inaccurate), they were: (1) overpaid; and (2) again, the earnings were not highly correlated with critical thinking skills or intelligence as I've defined it. In other words, for example:
People who profit from artistic talent (e.g., primarily actors, but also musicians, singers, artists, etc.)
Yes that's very insulting. The cult makes those ones visible for PR reasons.
People is sales.
Dentists are very disproportionately represented, as compared to doctors who are underrepresented.
Dentists are the highest paid profession in some places. They may have more freedom to come and go than doctors - so they are a good target for the cult.
Court Reporters. (As I recall an extremely disproportionate number in the COS.)
Are you saying their are a lot in scio? OSA prolly gets members to become reporters.
Other people who due to anomalies in the economic system that deviate from a pure, free market, "your income is directly linked to the value you add" system, and/or artificial monopolies, earn more than one would expect (or hope).
I guess what I'm trying to say, in the nicest possible way, is that compared with other churches and "charities" [LOL ] -- e.g., mainstream Christian Churches, Jewish Synagogues, museums, hospitals, universities, symphony orchestras, ballets, zoos, etc. -- the Church of Scientology disproportionately receives its income and contributions from the demographic that may be described as "disproportionately wealthy and relatively dumb," or "disproportionately wealthy given how, well, relatively dumb they are."
I think they are fucking dumb too. But that's just my prejudice and envy.
They got cash. Don't need to analyse stuff unless it affects their cash flow so may or may not be critical thinkers. T
They sure look dumb spending it on space-cootie hunting. But you only need to look at this board to see that people who drank the large glass of cool-aid are not dumb and are respected for their thinking skills, shown in their posts.
Would you or I have drank ALL the coolaid if you'd had the money? I would have. I could not go further cos I had no money.
And are you saying that the people in those other "conventional" religions are smarter than scios? I don't think so. Have they gotten over their terrible problem about same-sex marriages yet?
We already know that Scientologists are, on average, less educated than the public at large. (Or at least far, far less educated than a group that would have to make comparable financial contributions to another religion or "charity.")
Perhaps Scientologists are also, on average, just more stupid.
Where are your stats or references? You are calling people stupid apparently with quite a serious(thoughtful) intent. If so you should give some evidence otherwise you look very hypocritical.
Just a thought.
I just wanted to toss out an idea I've been mulling for a long time before I go to dinner and maybe catch a movie. It has to do with the source of the earnings, wealth, income, savings, etc. of Scientologists. I'm referring to individual, public Scientologists who support the superstructure that is Scientology. Not FSMs. The people who earn, or have, "wog" money that is subsequently poured into the CO$ for auditing, training, ideal orgs, and to receive meaningless certificates and shiny medals.
My theory is that, when compared to the public at large, such earnings, wealth, income, savings, etc. is far less correlated to critical thinking skills and, well, intelligence (at least narrowly defined; i.e., not "emotional intelligence, but instead math / logic / scientific intelligence) than the public in general.
When you have as much money as some of the people who can be photographed at Flag getting those expensive certs, and donating shitloads to IAS you do not need critical thinking skills. Wealthy people usually do know enough about "math" to count their money.
Comparing them with the "public at large" - well, look at the public at large. I see a lot of them who are destitute in critical thinking skills. Quite a few people who are critical thinkers in general become nutty when they think about religion or "spirituality". So I don't believe the dumb ones giving their loot to the cult are mot any dumber than the public at large. They are the public at large, that is, until taken into custody by the cult
It seems a lot of people who spend a ton of money on Scientology, and particularly the "Grand Jubilee Puba Meritoriouses," have inherited wealth. Or are spending mommy and daddy's money. And I'm saying this is true to a greater extent than with a group that contributes comparable amounts to other "charitable" [LOL ] endeavors.
Yes.
As for those who earned their money, it seemed a lot had professions where, to be precise, and quite frankly insulting (but perhaps not inaccurate), they were: (1) overpaid; and (2) again, the earnings were not highly correlated with critical thinking skills or intelligence as I've defined it. In other words, for example:
People who profit from artistic talent (e.g., primarily actors, but also musicians, singers, artists, etc.)
Yes that's very insulting. The cult makes those ones visible for PR reasons.
People is sales.
Dentists are very disproportionately represented, as compared to doctors who are underrepresented.
Dentists are the highest paid profession in some places. They may have more freedom to come and go than doctors - so they are a good target for the cult.
Court Reporters. (As I recall an extremely disproportionate number in the COS.)
Are you saying their are a lot in scio? OSA prolly gets members to become reporters.
Other people who due to anomalies in the economic system that deviate from a pure, free market, "your income is directly linked to the value you add" system, and/or artificial monopolies, earn more than one would expect (or hope).
I guess what I'm trying to say, in the nicest possible way, is that compared with other churches and "charities" [LOL ] -- e.g., mainstream Christian Churches, Jewish Synagogues, museums, hospitals, universities, symphony orchestras, ballets, zoos, etc. -- the Church of Scientology disproportionately receives its income and contributions from the demographic that may be described as "disproportionately wealthy and relatively dumb," or "disproportionately wealthy given how, well, relatively dumb they are."
I think they are fucking dumb too. But that's just my prejudice and envy.
They got cash. Don't need to analyse stuff unless it affects their cash flow so may or may not be critical thinkers. T
They sure look dumb spending it on space-cootie hunting. But you only need to look at this board to see that people who drank the large glass of cool-aid are not dumb and are respected for their thinking skills, shown in their posts.
Would you or I have drank ALL the coolaid if you'd had the money? I would have. I could not go further cos I had no money.
And are you saying that the people in those other "conventional" religions are smarter than scios? I don't think so. Have they gotten over their terrible problem about same-sex marriages yet?
We already know that Scientologists are, on average, less educated than the public at large. (Or at least far, far less educated than a group that would have to make comparable financial contributions to another religion or "charity.")
Perhaps Scientologists are also, on average, just more stupid.
Where are your stats or references? You are calling people stupid apparently with quite a serious(thoughtful) intent. If so you should give some evidence otherwise you look very hypocritical.
Just a thought.
Disclaimer. Yes I know, I am not beyond calling people "stupid" myself.
I think the context matters. The OP seems to be a serious statement on a theory that large groups of people including certain professions are somehow less intelligent than the "public at large" (whoever they are). My own profession is not related to any of those mentioned.
I agree!
Now, back on topic: The main "cheating" that occurs when someone does the so-called Auditing Route is quite obvious, the PC is cheated.
Hubbard has stated innumerable times that the person will NOT make it to OT without the Training. Registrars and C/Ss that allow people to go the Processing Route are violating very basic Hubbard instructions and thereby expose their own lack of belief in the actuality of the postulated "results" of scientology.
Either that or they think Hubbard was wrong about the necessity for training.
Very good point. The folk who receive only auditing may have a few impediments removed from their living of life, but it is the people who are trained who have the skills to really creating the life situation that they envision. To realize the fruits of the philosophy.
My personal opinion is that the church would be entirely different if the ot levels were only available to auditors with a certain number of well done hours and good results. It would change the character of the church and there would be so many auditors looking for pc's that it would inevitably spill out into "the world". Prices would have to fall, many more hours of lower level auditing would be delivered, orgs boom....
Wake up alex, your dreaming.....
Auditors ARE OT. What they do is OT.
I'll try to make it even more clear.The OP seems to be a serious statement on a theory that large groups of people including certain professions are somehow less intelligent than the "public at large" (whoever they are).
I wonder though, what was the income ratio on the ship when Ron was there. I suspect he made most of his money on the ship from auditing.
The Anabaptist Jacques
I believe the exact words in the original posts were:
"My theory is that, when compared to the public at large, such earnings, wealth, income, savings, etc. is far less correlated to critical thinking skills and, well, intelligence (at least narrowly defined; i.e., not "emotional intelligence, but instead math / logic / scientific intelligence) than the public in general."
I don't think this refers to "large groups of people" but to those who specifically earned substantial income from their professions, and that the earnings of those professions do not require significant critical thinking skills.
Some people have reacted (over-reacted in my opinion) to this statement as being pompous and calling people stupid.
But the point that is being missed here is that you add this statement about those professions to the fact that those people are also active in the cult, and that there is a preponderance of those particular professions in the cult.
Brick by brick, this supports the conclusion that these people are lacking in some critical thinking skills, or in technical terms, their elevators don't go all the way to the top.
I think the term critical thinking skills is loaded because it implies that these skills are fixed quantities and qualities or a fixed formula that a person has or does not have.
Rather, I think critical thinking skills are one of many mental tools a person draws on depending on the situation. Intuition is another.
A person may have critical thinking skills in some areas but not in others. A peson may be intuitive in some areas and not in other areas.
I think many people remain in Scientology even though intuitively they see that things are wrong.
And I think people can sometimes use their critical thinking skills to argue against their own intuition, or reversly, have their intuitive feelings override their critical thinking. The boundaries of critical thinking and intuition are not clearly defined.
As for myself, my critical thinking skills finally overuled my intuition, and that is what got me out of Scientology.
My gut feeling was that Scientology could save the world but my critical thinking reasoned otherwise.
Especially when I realized that what I thought was my intutition was actually just my repeating in my mind the indoctrination I received in Scientology.
But getting back to these stupid dentist (just kidding), I personally do not think it is because of critical thinking skills.
I think the problem is that what we are calling stupid or unintelligent is a low capacity to see and understand the variance of forces and factors that effect things.
I'm talking simply about plurality of ideas and views. You see this often on this board, too, when somone argues that there is only one cause for something, or lumps all the variety of factors in something like the subject of religion itself, and give it one meaning and one cause.
Scientology auditing, training, and culture adopts and fortifies a person's thinking this way.
So if a person is already prone to this monoideaism in their professional life, it is easy to rope them in and keep them in Scientology.
The Anabaptist Jacques
I just wanted to toss out an idea I've been mulling for a long time before I go to dinner and maybe catch a movie.
[snip]
Perhaps Scientologists are also, on average, just more stupid.
Just a thought.
OP has not cited any demographics to support his initial observations.
This is a discussion board, not a Ph.D. thesis.Your arguments were based on personal perceptions, not scientific survey.
considering that I am here as a person who has rejected Scientology, you are using these buttons to try and hurt me.
I have run a successful cleaning business for the last twenty years, just this last Thursday I worked 22 hrs straight came home and had 2hrs sleep then got up and worked another 11 hrs straight, worked all weekend now here I am posting a reply to this tread. Come and work with me for a week and you will want to take a year off. There are many on this board who will vouch for what I am saying.
In all of this I maintain in fucking good sense of humor, until I read such
My purpose was not to hurt Achi, or anyone else. I did not say anything about individuals.Don't take offense, I am just 5'6'' of fucking dynamite once my fuse gets lit