Scientology is all bad

[Infinite]

No dox, if that's what you want. I have only my widespread acquaintance with early
Dn'ists.
Do you doubt that there were "big wins" (tm) with DN in the early days? If so, why do ya suppose that it spread across the Country so rapidly?

I confess that I don't know what you mean by a "differentiate the DMSMH "wins' along a causation/continuum". Could you dumb it down?

phenomanon

Its a trick question. There's no such data because Dianetics wins are unquantifiable. The point I was attempting to make is that the term "Dianetic wins" is meaningless and cannot serve as any sort of premise for rational argument as to the benefits of Dianetics/Scientology. We still haven't got past the fact that engrams were debunked in 1950, remember? Given that the basis of Dianetics cannot be proven to exist, any "win" must be due to something else and, most likely, is correlated to other factors rather than caused by Dianetics.

I imagine Dianetics spread across the US so rapidly because it became something of a fad among science fiction fans - a sort of "hula hoop" for the mind; fun for a while and when you're in the mood, probably helped a little with fitness but, otherwise, just a passing fancy.

 

[SweetnessandLight]

I think in the early days a lot of engineering types liked it, because they could relate to the thought of our minds as functioning machines, which could be cleared of errors.

 

[Panda Termint]

The do-called "NYU debunking" isn't too scientific, IMO. Debunk-fail.

 

[Infinite]

The do-called "NYU debunking" isn't too scientific, IMO. Debunk-fail.

Why are the NYU experiments not scientific?

 

[SweetnessandLight]

Banned is not a good description. The person who left, Vinaire, specifically requested that his account be deleted. Emma fulfilled his request.


Mark A. Baker

I thought Vinnie was back again...did I miss something? :confused2:

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

Hmmm ... OT Org in LA.

Gee, which org would that be, Mr. ex-S.O. guy?

TG1

It's right across the street from the American Clear Saints Org right there on L. Ron Hubbard Boulevard, just a short drive away from the Scientology Celebration Center on Franklin Highway.

I was in the Ocean Org too, for your information, and attended 3 mustards a day.

As you can see, from my familiarity with the Dianetics Bridge terminology, I am for real.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

The do-called "NYU debunking" isn't too scientific, IMO. Debunk-fail.

Perhaps.

But, what reason would you imagine that Scientologists have not, after 62 years, provided any support for Dianetics such as clinical studies, research, peer reviews or double blind tests?

Were they too busy clearing the planet?

 

[Panda Termint]

I actually think it has a lot to do with Hubbard fearing exposure of the inconsistencies and irrelevancies rampant in his paradigm. He seemed very afraid of the possibility of further ridicule. I think he had "a button on self-importance".

What do you think?

BTW: I'd be very interested in seeing the results of any such Clinical Trials. I always wondered why the CofS didn't just bite the bullet on that one and fund such a study. There are probably R Advices prohibiting it.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

I actually think it has a lot to do with Hubbardfearing exposure of the inconsistencies and irrelevancies rampant in his paradigm. He seemed very afraid of the possibility of further ridicule. I think he had "a button on self-importance".

What do you think?

Inconsistencies and irrelevancies rampant in his paradigm?

Actually I think that they didn't demonstrate the tech because it didn't work.

Just a wild guess.

 

[Panda Termint]

Possibly but there are, of course, many thousands who have experienced Dianetics who firmly believe otherwise. Do subjective opinions count for anything?

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

Possibly but there are, of course, many thousands who have experienced Dianetics who firmly believe otherwise. Do subjective opinions count for anything?

Good question.

But based on the aggregate of all recorded human history, subjective opinions count for many things including entire countries and empires electing sociopathic dictators who promptly initiated genocides murdering tens of millions of their own citizens.

People's subjective opinions don't have anything to do with my previous question about why such a miraculous technology like Scientology is so shy about demonstrating one miracle.

By the way, we are ruling out "I found a parking space" or "My space feels spacious" as a miracle.

 

[Panda Termint]

No arguments there.

I mentioned "subjective opinions" because that seems to be the main bone of contention about whether or not any apparent gains from the activity are actual.

(ie. not in reference to "why no clinical trials?", more in reference to what criteria might be judged and how such trials might determine the actuality of any improvement from the therapy.)

For that matter, how do scientists judge the effectiveness of any form of psychotherapy?

 

[Infinite]

. . . For that matter, how do scientists judge the effectiveness of any form of psychotherapy?

They test it . . . over and over again . . . in public . . . gathering evidence and data . . . and subject to open criticism . . . . and development . . . and learning . . . little things like that:http://scholar.google.co.nz/scholar...a=X&ei=xvwkUNmVNMaNiAf2x4HgBw&ved=0CEwQgQMwAA

Once L Ron Hubbard was exposed to just two examples of how science works, he rebranded his scam Scientology. Some, still to this day, call it a religion. Funny that.

 

[Demented LRH]

Hi To put it very simply, if I am understanding correctly, the GE is the Consciousness that monitors the bodily functions.. so that we don't have to tell the heart to beat or the blood to flow or the antibodies to come out or the adrenal glands to function.. etc.. We just tell the body to get up and make some coffee or wash the dishes...

PS: I believe EVERYTHING has a consciousness.. every atom, every cell, every plant, every animal.. the GE is the particular consciousness who oversees the other littler consciousnesses that make up the body.. or... that's how I interpret it anyway..

I have to rely on my memory now, so I cannot give you a direct reference. Hubbard wrote somewhere that a GE is a former thetan who degraded beyond repair, he even wrote that he tried to audit a GE once, but the poor thing was not responding. Then he wrote something about the theta line and evolutionary line that produced GE.
To me the evolutionary line and the theta line were indistinguishable from each other, even the word-clearing did not help to make a distinction.

The idea that everything has a consciousness is one of Hubbard ideas that he borrowed from sci-fi novels. I run into this idea in several sci-fi stories. I liked the stories, but I never took them seriously. The way I see it, there is no empirical data that would confirm this assertion.

 

[Demented LRH]

If you really haven't understood the concept of the GE (Genetic Entity) then a lot of the Hubbardian paradigm will be hard to follow.

I could tell you but then I'd have to [strike]kill[/strike]bill you.

Oh, OK. Try thinking of the GE as the Body's "Reactive Mind" as opposed to the Thetan's "Reactive Mind". It probably won't help but what the heck!

Are you sure that this is the reactive mind? Dilpicle defines it differently, if I understood him correctly, GE is a positive thing.
The problem with Hubbard definitions is that he contradicted himself on so many occassions that none of his theoretical crap should be taken seriously.

 

[Demented LRH]

Hmmm ... OT Org in LA.

Gee, which org would that be, Mr. ex-S.O. guy?

TG1

I do not remember the Org's correct name. Everyone used to call it OT Org because it was the place where OT1 through OT5 were produced.

 

[TG1]

I do not remember the Org's correct name. Everyone used to call it OT Org because it was the place where OT1 through OT5 were produced.

No, everyone did not use to call it OT Org.



TG1

 

[Demented LRH]

Possibly but there are, of course, many thousands who have experienced Dianetics who firmly believe otherwise. Do subjective opinions count for anything?

In the field of science subjective opinions do not count. If I say I'm feeling better, there must be some changes in my body chemistry to confirm that. Otherwise, the placebo effect cannot be ruled out.

 

[Smilla]

Are you sure that this is the reactive mind? Dilpicle defines it differently, if I understood him correctly, GE is a positive thing.
The problem with Hubbard definitions is that he contradicted himself on so many occassions that none of his theoretical crap should be taken seriously.

One of the many problems with Scientology is that to 'use' it you have to adopt *so many* ideas that are just arbitrary theories that Hubbard came up with and told people to believe.

That's Hubbardism.

The entire Scientology 'Bridge' is a trojan horse. Whilst it's stated purpose is to lead an individual to a state of total freedom, it is in reality a device for creating Hubbardites - people who have replaced their own thinking with that of L Ron Hubbard.

People pay for Scientology, but what they actually get for their money is conversion to Hubbardism.

Scientology - as advertised, does not exist. What is advertised are the states of Clear and OT as steps on the way to total freedom, yet there are none.

 

[Demented LRH]

No, everyone did not use to call it OT Org.



TG1

Going into this argument would be a childish thing to do, at least for me.