What's new

The LIE of Hubbard's Whole Track Recall in Scientology

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
"WHOLE TRACK" is a subset of a psychiatric technique called abreactive therapy. Abreactive means Abnormal Reaction Therapy. It consists of having the subject cook up an incident - from imagination - having the person imagine and create an incident and then experience emotional reaction to the incident.

William Sargant and others noted this oddity that soldiers gained relief from battle neurosis by re-experiencing either real traumas that happened -OR-, amazingly, imagined traumas that would explain their neurosis.

The CRIMINALITY of Hubbard is evidenced by his having the unmitigated gall to tell people that those imagined incidents were REAL. while he had a physical copy of William Sargant's "Battle for the Mind" on his bookshelf (note)



They are not real. If they were real, then the last chapter of "Test of Whole Track Recall" would not have been so silly to read . Not only did our COMMODORE find NOTHING from his own supposed whole track...after weeks of literally digging for gold that he had IMAGINED that was hidden while he was supposedly incarnate as Cecil Rhodes..... I do not know of a single $cientologist who has.

Note:Abreactive therapy was abandoned by the psychology community because it took too long to train people on how to do it, and far better ways were developed..

Note: In esoteric literature there is only a now, there is no past or future, both are apparencies of this universe.. which has a thing called time. The most important thing is what you do or decide now. See the supposedly super secret book of magic mentioned by Ron Dewolfe in 1/10th of 1pct of Scientology, titled Abra-Melin Magick. (see page three of that thread where I posted the reference BY Hubbard in part2) The book is on Scribd.

Note: Re bookshelf. I have a list of books that were iin Hubbard's office at FCDC. Included on that list is Dr. Sargant's book. So Hubbard KNEW he was altering the real source, altering the work of a man who was the #1 authority for psychiatry in UK, Dr William Sargant. Perhaps THIS is why Hubbard demonized psychiatry.. so no recovering scientologist would dare read his book. I did, I believe you should too.
 
Last edited:

Leon

Gold Meritorious Patron
And yet his methods were so very similar to Hubbard's ini many ways. I'm very surprised you don't condemn him in the same way you do Hubbard.

Taken off the web: [Red highlights and underlining by me]

We don’t hear very much about William Sargant now, but in his day, he was the most eminent figure in British psychiatry, a large man with a leonine profile and convictions as strong as his character; somebody you obeyed and never argued with. David Owen, one time British foreign secretary, worked under Sargant at St Thomas’ in the 1960s and recalled him as “a dominating personality with the therapeutic courage of a lion” and as “the sort of person of whom legends are made”. But others, who preferred to remain anonymous, described him as “autocratic, a danger and a disaster” He was a man who could excite strong opinions.

Although he was part of the listening profession, Sargant wasn’t a great listener. Describing himself as “a physician in psychological medicine”, he abhorred psychotherapy and dedicated his life to leading the biological revolution in psychiatry, promoting such treatments as psychosurgery, deep sleep treatment, electroconvulsive therapy, insulin shock therapy and the development of mind altering drugs. He had the courage of his convictions, but his reliance on dogma rather than evidence have made him a controversial figure. His book, Battle for the mind, a physiology of conversion and brainwashing, written with the help of Robert Graves, emphasises the apparent need for evangelists and politicians who would change people’s minds to excite them first.

William Walters Sargant was born in 1907 into a ‘larger than life’ Methodist family in North London. Five of his uncles were Methodist preachers, one brother was a bishop; another, Thomas Sargant, a human rights campaigner.

He got a place at St John’s College, Cambridge and became President of The Cambridge University Medical Society. He did his clinical training at St Mary’s, where he excelled in the Hospitals Rugby Competition. Too impulsive and sure of himself to be a great academic, his one foray into medical research, a paper on the use of large amounts of iron to treat pernicious anaemia was criticised and this may have led to his mental and physical breakdown and his subsequent shift to psychiatry, where the absence of validated treatments gave him free rein to develop his convictions.

It was at the Maudsley under Edward Mapother that Sargant became convinced that ‘the future of psychiatric treatment lay in the discovery of simple physiological treatments which could be as widely applied as in general medicine‘. During the war, Sargant worked at the Sutton Emergency Medical Service but was frustrated when London County Council medical advisors tried to curb his experimentation with new treatments but, as he said “we generally got our own way in the end”.

While at Sutton, Sargant treated veterans with battle trauma by abreaction, deliberately getting them to relive their experience on the premise that it would eventually wear away. He described a man who was shot at by German pilots as he swam out to the boats at Dunkirk, experienced all over again the terror of drowning but then walked away from the session without a care in the world. Sargant never really validated or controlled his studies or even analysed the results of his treatments. He was no scientist; he just did what he considered right.

In 1948 he was appointed director of the department of psychological medicine at St Thomas’s Hospital, London, and remained there until the 1980s. There he developed his procedures for ‘brainwashing’ . He created a 22 bed sleep ward on the top floor of the adjacent Royal Waterloo Hospital,, in which he would keep his traumatised patients in a continuous state of heavy sedation for periods of up to three months and subject them to insulin coma therapy and frequent electroconvulsive treatment. This brainwashing, he claimed, re-patterned the brain, wiping it clean of the traumatic experience so that when they woke up they couldn’t remember what had happened .

Sargant also advocated increasing the frequency of ECT sessions for those he describes as “resistant, obsessional patients” in order to produce “therapeutic confusion” and so remove their power of refusal. “All sorts of treatment can be given while the patient is kept sleeping, including a variety of drugs and ECT [which] together generally induce considerable memory loss for the period under narcosis. We may be seeing here a new exciting beginning in psychiatry and the possibility of a treatment era such as followed the introduction of anaesthesia in surgery”.

No informed consent was requested for what was an experimental procedure. No systematic study ever validated Sargant’s cerebral lavage, but there are patients still alive who claim never to have recovered their pre-traumatic memory and become profoundly incapacitated as a result. Sargant, himself, ascribed such failures to the patient’s lack of a “good previous personality” and discharged them to the wards of long stay mental hospitals. These patients have never been compensated. All patient records at St Thomas’s and the related health authorities relating to Sargant’s activities were destroyed.

But there was worse. When Harry Bailey, an Australian psychiatrist enthusiastically adopted Sargant’s methods with enthusiasm, 26 of his patients died. Sargant also admitted some fatalities. The fact that more had not succumbed was almost certainly due to the quality of care by the St Thomas’s ‘Nightingale’ nurses, who monitored the patients sleep every 15 minutes and woke them up every six hours for feeding and toileting.

Sargant’s ward was closed soon after his death in the 1980s; his books removed from the libraries, his influence suppressed, his opinions castigated.

One of my teachers, a surgeon, used to tell us that there were three types of doctor; the good, the bad and the downright dangerous. Sargant was the latter. Evangelism and conviction are dangerous qualities in medicine and Sargant has been roundly condemned as ‘someone of extreme views who was cruel and irresponsible and refused to listen to advice’; some suggested that he was motivated by repressed anger rather than a desire to help people. In medicine, tyranny is dressed in a white coat.

But Sargant was a man of his time. Revolutions would not occur without the extremist, the outspoken, the dogmatic and the domineering. So those who would praise modern developments in the pharmacological treatments of schizophrenia, dementia and depression, have a debt of gratitude to Sargant the prophet, who had to be condemned for his extremism.

For medicine is a profession that requires us to listen, make careful observations and assess any new definitive treatments by the most scrupulous scientific methods. Doctors have to be seen as caring and careful. I once knew a doctor who had the unfortunate surname of Reckless; he should have changed it.

But, in Sargant’s defence (which is a bit like the defence of indefensible) the effects of new psychiatric treatments are not easy to assess. There are no measureable end points like inflammation, blood pressure, blood sugar levels. There’s just patient testimony. ‘Yes, I’m feeling much better, thank you.’ Good results may be more due to the care and attention of the doctors and nurses than any effect of the treatment. It all depends how you ask the question and what statistical methods are applied. Powerful advocates and suggestible patients can still produce ‘effective’ treatments. Perhaps that’s the nature of the mind; it’s confidence and faith that heals the traumatised psyche – and there are many routes to that. In a therapeutic wilderness, the most important thing is to be mindful to select treatments that do not have the potential to damage.

Take antidepressants (or don’t take them), the most commonly prescribed drugs in the western canon. Are they effective, or do they just dull the sensibilities, sanitise the anguish and despair, and keep people in depression by suppressing the motivation for change?

Even Sargant acknowledged, albeit in typical grandiose manner, how psychiatric treatments may strip away the personality and motivation.

“What would have happened if such treatments had been available for the last five hundred years?… John Wesley who had years of depressive torment before accepting the idea of salvation by faith rather than good works, might have avoided this, and simply gone back to help his father as curate of Epworth following treatment. Wilberforce, too, might have gone back to being a man about town, and avoided his long fight to abolish slavery and his addiction to laudanum. Loyola and St Francis might also have continued with their military careers. Perhaps, even earlier, Jesus Christ might simply have returned to his carpentry following the use of modern treatments.”

A recent systematic review could not establish any efficacy for the newer antidepressants, the latest generation of Sargant’s mind altering drugs, though they all have significant adverse effects. So why are billions still taking them? What does it say about society and those who run it?

Sargant, the maverick, the charismatic loner, the one who dared but was considered out of step and downright dangerous, was as described in his autobiography, ‘A Quiet Mind’, a heavy smoker, suffered with tuberculosis and struggled with depression for most of his life. It was his karma, (the collective guilt of a family of preachers?), and he lived up to it by putting his patients and his own reputation in considerable danger. Was this some death wish, some demon of self destruction? Winston Churchill, another depressive, comes to mind; so wonderful but so dangerous – relishing the excitement of risk, rushing up to the roof of 10 Downing Street during the blitz to watch the fireworks, but suffering agonies during peacetime inactivity. No wonder Clemmie found him difficult.

David Owen who admired Sargant’s courage and spirit, has recently written a slim volume on hubris, in which Sargant doesn’t even get a mention. Ah!
 

Jachs

Gold Meritorious Patron
Abreactive means Abnormal Reaction Therapy.

Isnt it Re experience again?

abreaction
[ab′rē·ak′shən]
Etymology: L, ab, from, re, again, agere, to act

There is a psychiatry journal with an article on Abreaction therapy sessions, but its subscription only.

could you have cross related to ABNORMAL DIANETICS ?

Got to love the shout full caps Hubbard used to impinge.

That branch of Dianetics "the science" which treats the aberrated mind, that we no longer talk about, background "data"

Morphed into the intro-spinning rundown, to really crack you down the middle.
 

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
And yet his methods were so very similar to Hubbard's ini many ways. I'm very surprised you don't condemn him in the same way you do Hubbard.

Fallacious argument is one of the techniques hubbard used to make people into scientologists to being with. His favorite technique is ad-hominem. The Fallacious tactic you are using is more like a diversion, as i was pointing out a source that Hubbard USED... to create the FRAUDS of Dianetics and scientology

You are not even replying to the point of the post but twisting it into an attack as OSA directs their people to do. The phrase used in their training materials is "Always double curve the attack back upon the attacker" If you would like to work this out id be willing to chat on the fone with you. Though i admit i merely want to find out if you exist at all outside of posts on the net. Otherwise based on your past replies we could finish this in the grudge match section, where i will use the discussion as an excuse to dig up all the OSA training materials I have and quote the techniques for all to learn from by your replies.
 
Last edited:

Jachs

Gold Meritorious Patron
Whole track , Hubbard certainly knew how to total,

time track becoming w h o l e track.

4 quadrillion years all is one.. Suspending w h o l e time in one ...

what gets me is his flippancy talking about millions billions trillions and then his utter [his scary impinger] seriousness stamp down over working a quarter of a century..
 

apocalyptic

Patron with Honors
By Lerma:

WHOLE TRACK" is a subset of a psychiatric technique called abreactive therapy. Abreactive means Abnormal Reaction Therapy. It consists of having the subject cook up an incident - from imagination - having the person imagine and create an incident and then experience emotional reaction to the incident...

The CRIMINALITY of Hubbard is evidenced by his having the unmitigated gall to tell people that those imagined incidents were REAL. while he had a physical copy of William Sargant's "Battle for the Mind" on his bookshelf

By Leon (in/as a direct response):

....We don’t hear very much about William Sargant now...

.....Sargant treated ... Sargant also advocated

... Sargant, himself, Sargant’s methods ....Sargant also admitted ... Sargant’s ward ...

David Owen who admired Sargant’s courage and spirit, has recently written a slim volume on hubris, in which Sargant doesn’t even get a mention. Ah!

Incredible response by Leon.

Being in Vegas we are laying odds of 10 million to one that Leon is a scientologist. The merciless redirection of the subject is our first clue. The moronic barrage of verbosity to sustain the merciless redirection of the subject, is our second.

U.S. Dollars only.

Apocalyptic
 

Pierrot

Patron with Honors
Note: Re bookshelf. I have a list of books that were iin Hubbard's office at FCDC. Included on that list is Dr. Sargant's book. So Hubbard KNEW he was altering the real source, altering the work of a man who was the #1 authority for psychiatry in UK, Dr William Sargant. Perhaps THIS is why Hubbard demonized psychiatry.. so no recovering scientologist would dare read his book. I did, I believe you should too.

could you provide this full list or, if you already posted it somewhere (and thus I missed it), provide a link? thank you.
 

apocalyptic

Patron with Honors
Thanks Arnie. That validates what I always thought the whole track was. BS.

As a possibility, it seems to us, the 'whole track' concept itself is understandable (and sustainable) but not in terms of Hubbards mental machinery. To wit, sometimes it is not useful to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Spiritually speaking. Whilst acknowledging, sometimes, it is.

Hubbard did not merely humanly steal idea's of spiritual-psychological merit, he perverted them to his own ends. Which greatly explains the circumstances of his physical death.

As a practical matter the 'idea' that at any given 'point' of consciousness , the 'I am' is subject to physical birth and physical death, at any given time, is utterly spiritually absurd. Enter then, Hubs time-track.

Which 'time-track data' (lol) was rons way of extracting the blood of the souls of those souls that fell for his time track line. For money. And for power. (as short lived as both would turn out to be, for ron).

Notwithstanding the fact that eternity trumps all time. And is in fact, the container of it.

Unconditioned Love 101.

Apocalyptic

wake up.

(and smell the roses)

or don't.
 
Last edited:

Lure Rob & Hyde

Patron with Honors
Well Mr Leon, I read your piece and here is what crossed my mind on what you wrote.

"somebody you obeyed and never argued with"

This was the Blubbard himself since he coined the word "backflash" and the goofy ethics conditions in the attempt to have only happy robots in his cult (This was personaly witnessed by myself.)

You also wrote "promoting such treatments as psychosurgery, deep sleep treatment, electroconvulsive therapy, insulin shock therapy and the development of mind altering drugs. He had the courage of his convictions, but his reliance on dogma rather than evidence have made him a controversial figure."

The Hubbard hiself engaged in food & sleep deprivation of his staff and induced hypnotic states in them damaging their will and minds as a result.
As far as reliance on dogma who do you think your are kidding in regards to Elron's enforcement of his will with duress, threats of the eternity of Hell if his wishes were not followed .
Then to add more dogma the KSW shit he concocted to rule by fear of being ostracized and seprated from friends,family and spouses with economic stress if that did happen.

Now that's dogma at its best!! Yep a pure lard meatball dogma from the big Elron porker himself!!!

You also wrote "Sargant never really validated or controlled his studies or even analysed the results of his treatments. He was no scientist; he just did what he considered right. "

Boy this is the fatboy Blubbard right down to the tee when his research on Dianetics was called for and all that was gotten from him were his scribbles , chicken scratches on notes that were ridiculous rerearch eveidence to say the least.
He did what he considered would be the best con to perpetrate at given times like the "body thetans" gimmick.

Last but not least in your statement

"'he developed his procedures for ‘brainwashing’ . He created a 22 bed sleep ward on the top floor of the adjacent Royal Waterloo Hospital,, in which he would keep his traumatised patients in a continuous state of heavy sedation for periods of up to three months and subject them to insulin coma therapy and frequent electroconvulsive treatment. This brainwashing, he claimed, re-patterned the brain, wiping it clean of the traumatic experience so that when they woke up they couldn’t remember what had happened .
"
What the fuck do you think Elron Fatso's RPF was for ????
Answer =All of the above you mindless automaton!
Here Listen to my fingers SNAP !SNAP! SNAP!
YOU ARE NO LONGER UNDER THE SPELL AND COMMAND Of LRH or any of his goons GOT THAT !!

Now go about your own life and existence as you were before you were entranced by LRH.(you can let go of the tiny kagaroo in your hand too!)



And yet his methods were so very similar to Hubbard's ini many ways. I'm very surprised you don't condemn him in the same way you do Hubbard.

Taken off the web: [Red highlights and underlining by me]

We don’t hear very much about William Sargant now, but in his day, he was the most eminent figure in British psychiatry, a large man with a leonine profile and convictions as strong as his character; somebody you obeyed and never argued with. David Owen, one time British foreign secretary, worked under Sargant at St Thomas’ in the 1960s and recalled him as “a dominating personality with the therapeutic courage of a lion” and as “the sort of person of whom legends are made”. But others, who preferred to remain anonymous, described him as “autocratic, a danger and a disaster” He was a man who could excite strong opinions.

Although he was part of the listening profession, Sargant wasn’t a great listener. Describing himself as “a physician in psychological medicine”, he abhorred psychotherapy and dedicated his life to leading the biological revolution in psychiatry, promoting such treatments as psychosurgery, deep sleep treatment, electroconvulsive therapy, insulin shock therapy and the development of mind altering drugs. He had the courage of his convictions, but his reliance on dogma rather than evidence have made him a controversial figure. His book, Battle for the mind, a physiology of conversion and brainwashing, written with the help of Robert Graves, emphasises the apparent need for evangelists and politicians who would change people’s minds to excite them first.

William Walters Sargant was born in 1907 into a ‘larger than life’ Methodist family in North London. Five of his uncles were Methodist preachers, one brother was a bishop; another, Thomas Sargant, a human rights campaigner.

He got a place at St John’s College, Cambridge and became President of The Cambridge University Medical Society. He did his clinical training at St Mary’s, where he excelled in the Hospitals Rugby Competition. Too impulsive and sure of himself to be a great academic, his one foray into medical research, a paper on the use of large amounts of iron to treat pernicious anaemia was criticised and this may have led to his mental and physical breakdown and his subsequent shift to psychiatry, where the absence of validated treatments gave him free rein to develop his convictions.

It was at the Maudsley under Edward Mapother that Sargant became convinced that ‘the future of psychiatric treatment lay in the discovery of simple physiological treatments which could be as widely applied as in general medicine‘. During the war, Sargant worked at the Sutton Emergency Medical Service but was frustrated when London County Council medical advisors tried to curb his experimentation with new treatments but, as he said “we generally got our own way in the end”.

While at Sutton, Sargant treated veterans with battle trauma by abreaction, deliberately getting them to relive their experience on the premise that it would eventually wear away. He described a man who was shot at by German pilots as he swam out to the boats at Dunkirk, experienced all over again the terror of drowning but then walked away from the session without a care in the world. Sargant never really validated or controlled his studies or even analysed the results of his treatments. He was no scientist; he just did what he considered right.

In 1948 he was appointed director of the department of psychological medicine at St Thomas’s Hospital, London, and remained there until the 1980s. There he developed his procedures for ‘brainwashing’ . He created a 22 bed sleep ward on the top floor of the adjacent Royal Waterloo Hospital,, in which he would keep his traumatised patients in a continuous state of heavy sedation for periods of up to three months and subject them to insulin coma therapy and frequent electroconvulsive treatment. This brainwashing, he claimed, re-patterned the brain, wiping it clean of the traumatic experience so that when they woke up they couldn’t remember what had happened .

Sargant also advocated increasing the frequency of ECT sessions for those he describes as “resistant, obsessional patients” in order to produce “therapeutic confusion” and so remove their power of refusal. “All sorts of treatment can be given while the patient is kept sleeping, including a variety of drugs and ECT [which] together generally induce considerable memory loss for the period under narcosis. We may be seeing here a new exciting beginning in psychiatry and the possibility of a treatment era such as followed the introduction of anaesthesia in surgery”.

No informed consent was requested for what was an experimental procedure. No systematic study ever validated Sargant’s cerebral lavage, but there are patients still alive who claim never to have recovered their pre-traumatic memory and become profoundly incapacitated as a result. Sargant, himself, ascribed such failures to the patient’s lack of a “good previous personality” and discharged them to the wards of long stay mental hospitals. These patients have never been compensated. All patient records at St Thomas’s and the related health authorities relating to Sargant’s activities were destroyed.

But there was worse. When Harry Bailey, an Australian psychiatrist enthusiastically adopted Sargant’s methods with enthusiasm, 26 of his patients died. Sargant also admitted some fatalities. The fact that more had not succumbed was almost certainly due to the quality of care by the St Thomas’s ‘Nightingale’ nurses, who monitored the patients sleep every 15 minutes and woke them up every six hours for feeding and toileting.

Sargant’s ward was closed soon after his death in the 1980s; his books removed from the libraries, his influence suppressed, his opinions castigated.

One of my teachers, a surgeon, used to tell us that there were three types of doctor; the good, the bad and the downright dangerous. Sargant was the latter. Evangelism and conviction are dangerous qualities in medicine and Sargant has been roundly condemned as ‘someone of extreme views who was cruel and irresponsible and refused to listen to advice’; some suggested that he was motivated by repressed anger rather than a desire to help people. In medicine, tyranny is dressed in a white coat.

But Sargant was a man of his time. Revolutions would not occur without the extremist, the outspoken, the dogmatic and the domineering. So those who would praise modern developments in the pharmacological treatments of schizophrenia, dementia and depression, have a debt of gratitude to Sargant the prophet, who had to be condemned for his extremism.

For medicine is a profession that requires us to listen, make careful observations and assess any new definitive treatments by the most scrupulous scientific methods. Doctors have to be seen as caring and careful. I once knew a doctor who had the unfortunate surname of Reckless; he should have changed it.

But, in Sargant’s defence (which is a bit like the defence of indefensible) the effects of new psychiatric treatments are not easy to assess. There are no measureable end points like inflammation, blood pressure, blood sugar levels. There’s just patient testimony. ‘Yes, I’m feeling much better, thank you.’ Good results may be more due to the care and attention of the doctors and nurses than any effect of the treatment. It all depends how you ask the question and what statistical methods are applied. Powerful advocates and suggestible patients can still produce ‘effective’ treatments. Perhaps that’s the nature of the mind; it’s confidence and faith that heals the traumatised psyche – and there are many routes to that. In a therapeutic wilderness, the most important thing is to be mindful to select treatments that do not have the potential to damage.

Take antidepressants (or don’t take them), the most commonly prescribed drugs in the western canon. Are they effective, or do they just dull the sensibilities, sanitise the anguish and despair, and keep people in depression by suppressing the motivation for change?

Even Sargant acknowledged, albeit in typical grandiose manner, how psychiatric treatments may strip away the personality and motivation.

“What would have happened if such treatments had been available for the last five hundred years?… John Wesley who had years of depressive torment before accepting the idea of salvation by faith rather than good works, might have avoided this, and simply gone back to help his father as curate of Epworth following treatment. Wilberforce, too, might have gone back to being a man about town, and avoided his long fight to abolish slavery and his addiction to laudanum. Loyola and St Francis might also have continued with their military careers. Perhaps, even earlier, Jesus Christ might simply have returned to his carpentry following the use of modern treatments.”

A recent systematic review could not establish any efficacy for the newer antidepressants, the latest generation of Sargant’s mind altering drugs, though they all have significant adverse effects. So why are billions still taking them? What does it say about society and those who run it?

Sargant, the maverick, the charismatic loner, the one who dared but was considered out of step and downright dangerous, was as described in his autobiography, ‘A Quiet Mind’, a heavy smoker, suffered with tuberculosis and struggled with depression for most of his life. It was his karma, (the collective guilt of a family of preachers?), and he lived up to it by putting his patients and his own reputation in considerable danger. Was this some death wish, some demon of self destruction? Winston Churchill, another depressive, comes to mind; so wonderful but so dangerous – relishing the excitement of risk, rushing up to the roof of 10 Downing Street during the blitz to watch the fireworks, but suffering agonies during peacetime inactivity. No wonder Clemmie found him difficult.

David Owen who admired Sargant’s courage and spirit, has recently written a slim volume on hubris, in which Sargant doesn’t even get a mention. Ah!
 
Last edited:

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
By Lerma:



By Leon (in/as a direct response):



Incredible response by Leon.

Being in Vegas we are laying odds of 10 million to one that Leon is a scientologist. The merciless redirection of the subject is our first clue. The moronic barrage of verbosity to sustain the merciless redirection of the subject, is our second.

U.S. Dollars only.

Apocalyptic

Thank you apocalyptic.

This is also a technique used by $cientology during the Judicial Theatrical called Litigation..with the IMPLICATION (a filing with 6" of paper for example - or the room filled with books in the $cientology bookstore) that there 'must be something to it in all that... there must be something there.

and thank you Leon for the opportunity to bring a few more to grasp this.

arnie lerma
 

uniquemand

Unbeliever
There might be a fundamental reality from which we construct the stories we tell ourselves and others, but if so, it is probably very different from the stories we tell ourselves and others.
 

RogerB

Crusader
Arnie, as usual, is on the ball and explicit.

His title of the thread is exact:
The LIE of Hubbard's Whole Track Recall in Scientology

This does not say that the notion of Whole Track recall is a lie: but is specific that Arnie is referring to the LIE of Hubbard's Whole track recall in Scn.

Nice one, Maestro!

R
 

secretiveoldfag

Silver Meritorious Patron
I'm curious about the books on the shelf. I guess they included one of Freud's early works (which Freud himself later rejected but our college drop-out didn't know that) and a substantial book called Compendium of World Religions.
 

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
I'm curious about the books on the shelf. I guess they included one of Freud's early works (which Freud himself later rejected but our college drop-out didn't know that) and a substantial book called Compendium of World Religions.

The two most interesting ones I found well actually three... One by Dr Rolf Alexander, titled "Creative Realism, the New Method of Winning" which is a self-hypnosis, self betterment book but Hubbard did not use much out of this as it seemed pretty cool, it explains magic and hypnosis together,...and a strange book by Wilhelm Reich.

My favorite, was by the bed, but I cannot find it at the moment, It was a book by leader of The Rosecrucian movement, , Hubbard in his book account policies directed us to place Scientology ads wherever we found Rosecrucian adverts...I think I know why...

After reading half of the Rosecrucian book, I became a fan, the materials in it struck me as being the closest to the truth of all matters existential. No wonder "Ron" tried to weaken it...
 

Anonycat

Crusader
"WHOLE TRACK" is a subset of a psychiatric technique called abreactive therapy. Abreactive means Abnormal Reaction Therapy. It consists of having the subject cook up an incident - from imagination - having the person imagine and create an incident and then experience emotional reaction to the incident.
snip

I have thought about the scientology system (gradients) and how often you are asked to "create" something with your imagination - and imagine it as real. This repetitive exercise, coupled with encouragement to achieve super spoon-bender skills, is really just part of getting scientology and all the hogwash that Hubbard created to seem real. If done properly, you will believe the traffic light changed at your awesome OT will!

Maybe spoon-bending isn't a good analogy, since scientology avoids documented results. You can convince yourself that you're OT, but no one gets to bend a spoon. You'd have to fall back on your imagination for that. Maybe create a universe that only you see, and then bend a whole planet, or the universe itself! It's all pretend, so make it true for you. Cash or credit card?
 

ClearedSP

Patron with Honors
It was at the Maudsley under Edward Mapother that Sargant became convinced that ‘the future of psychiatric treatment lay in the discovery of simple physiological treatments which could be as widely applied as in general medicine‘.

Does Tom Cruise, AKA Tom Mapother, know THAT about psychiatry, I wonder?
 

pineapple

Silver Meritorious Patron
The two most interesting ones I found well actually three... One by Dr Rolf Alexander, titled "Creative Realism, the New Method of Winning" which is a self-hypnosis, self betterment book but Hubbard did not use much out of this as it seemed pretty cool, it explains magic and hypnosis together,...and a strange book by Wilhelm Reich.
<snip>...
Hm, what was the Reich book? I read "Character Analysis" and "The Function of the Orgasm" years ago. I read FOTO toward the end of my stint in scn. (I had a wog job as a security guard at night, and in the early morning hours it got really quiet, so I would read.) Reading about these "other practices" and realizing that it wasn't all the horrible suppresive stuff scn made it out to be helped push me toward getting out.

I've sometimes wondered if Hubbard had read any of Reich. Reich's "orgone energy" seemed a little like Hubbard's "theta" to me.

EDIT: Reichians (or scientologists) may want to correct me on that one. :)
 

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
Hm, what was the Reich book? I read "Character Analysis" and "The Function of the Orgasm" years ago. I read FOTO toward the end of my stint in scn. (I had a wog job as a security guard at night, and in the early morning hours it got really quiet, so I would read.) Reading about these "other practices" and realizing that it wasn't all the horrible suppresive stuff scn made it out to be helped push me toward getting out.

I've sometimes wondered if Hubbard had read any of Reich. Reich's "orgone energy" seemed a little like Hubbard's "theta" to me.

EDIT: Reichians (or scientologists) may want to correct me on that one. :)

Titled "People in Trouble, the emotional plague of mankind" (c) 1953" describes the spread of various ideas (including his ideas) in pre-war Germany

This was a fascinating read: Sir James George Frazer "The Golden Bough" (c) 1950 "A study in Magic and Religion"

traces various social constructs of the 20th century back through history

The Ministry of Visitation By Sisemore (c) 1954 - where he got the idea to visit people in Hospitals etc...

Ahh here it is, I really liked this one,

MANSIONS OF THE SOUL by H Spencer Lewis Ph.D <rosecrucian Nothing in it has anything to do with scientology, this is the book we should have bought instead of DIAnetics. There in one illustration I have to find and post...
 
Top