Scientology is all bad

[Mark A. Baker]

The auditor is not actually listening to, or communicating with, the *customer* in any authentic or meaningful way. It's actually a very stilted and inauthentic simulation of communication, as ordered by Hubbard. Superficially, it looks a bit like communication, but it's a charade. ...

That is dependent wholly on the auditor. Effective auditor's pay attention to their pcs. Auditor's who are excessively focused on the mechanics of conducting a session to the disadvantage of the pc, as is too often taught by the church, tend not to be effective.

I was 'lucky'. I have, for the most part, had very good auditors. Although I have seen for myself, from a few isolated experiences of my own and learned of the bad sessions of too many others, that mechanical auditor's are all too frequent. I chock it up to pernicious SO influence, as that group over-emphasize robotic adherence to hubbard. The best auditor's, in my experience, do not.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Claire Swazey]

Oh. I see what you mean. I was talking about receiving comfort, assistance, and insights. Nothing to do with Auditing. Ooops!

I was talking about receiving auditing. I said that I derived some measure of comfort, assistance and insights from it. I realize people don't all agree, and that there's other stuff out there and I'm not saying it's the best. I'm saying (AGAIN) that it's what I did THEN.

When my parents died for example and every day I felt like my heart was about to come through my chest. And I did get some auditing from an FZ auditor and it helped. It just did. I'm not saying that something else couldn't have assisted. But it's what I did then and I felt as I described above and that's just the way it is.

So I'm not about to have anyone crap all over that. Sorry.

 

[Smilla]

Uniquemand:

You completely failed to grasp the core of what I said, but that's OK.

 

[Claire Swazey]

I am not sure to whom that was directed.

 

[Smilla]

I am not sure to whom that was directed.

Not you, my love.

 

[Claire Swazey]

Very cool. Because it's a fact that I do sometimes misunderstand stuff.

So I wanted to make sure that I hadn't done it again.

 

[uniquemand]

Uniquemand:

You completely failed to grasp the core of what I said, but that's OK.

I apologize if I missed your message.

 

[Infinite]

JQP, just for the record -- I don't think Infinite is an ex-Scientologist. He's a never-was-in guy and hasn't been audited before.

(If I'm wrong, Infinite, please correct me.)

TG1

I, Infinite BLiP (AKA: various), hereby confess to being a WOG. Not only that, I am also involved in the activities of a terrorist/hacker organisatilon known as Anonymous. Further, I am known to be connected to many Facebook "unfriendlees". In short, I am a scoundrel and a rapscallion bent on extracted LOLs where and when I can while I continue gathering information about Scientology for the sole purpose of better understanding how I might end its abuses. If I have, at any time, appeared to be a Scientologist, I humbly apologise. Please don't let it happen again.

This is true.

 

[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.

I see what you meant.
I agree with what you are saying, with one weak caveat. I think it swept the Country , as you say, due to SF fans. In addition to that, it was an experiment with the mind that any 2 people could play with from the book. Of course it was a fad. And it hit the Western market at just the right time.

Several such factors contributed to it's success. Nonetheless, those of us who were rilly rill f...ed up, had "wins"(tm). These came from being a part of a group of like-minded people ( same as today), from spotting something that explained why we were screwed up, and from the desire to be helped.

Hypnosis played a large part in the getting of "win" (tm) by ppl who actually came in contact with Hubbard , attended his lectures etc.

So, you're right.

I am no longer under the spell of Dn/Scn. but I am toadly trained up on all sides of their Bridge, so if I can answer tech, ethics, or admin Q's, I am happy to do so.
Tks for the clarification, and the interest in my post.

phenomanon

 

[phenomanon]

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.

O yes.
Very good observation.

phenomanon

 

[Jquepublic]

Several Auditors I have spoken to feel genuine shame at their participation in what they believed to be a helpful process. Little did they realise that just as they were implanting, so too had they been implanted. By hypnotising people into hypnotising others into feeling good about telling all their secrets, L Ron Hubbard wrote a whole chapter in annals of 20th Century Criminal History. At the heart of his enterprise were altruistic people wanting to help others.

And they did, too. Immensely. One story - somewhere here - mentions a person's tearful gratitude when a random Sea Ogre took pity on a party of RPF wretches and smuggled out regular parcels of food until he too was caught actually helping. Then, beyond the real horrors, out there on the periphery of Scientology, where mostly the public linger, there are also tremendous acts of goodness and charity and understanding and acceptance . . . all that good stuff. But none of it occurs in an Auditing session. The good stuff that happens in Scientology occurs when people ignore the tech and look after each other.

Back in the Aufiting Session, however, the reverie-induced "WINS" were manufactured into "SUCCESS STORIES" to leverage the sale of more "WINS". Cash, please.

I can only imagine the transition in understanding when the necessary time, distance, and reflection comes into play. Scientology has been described as an ocean of assertions without basis. When the individual Scientologist starts to ask questions it may well be that they are feeling, somehow, cut adrift in the choppy waters of an ocean. Lost at sea, sorta. Some drift into the tranquil warm waters off the coast of "Familiarity" and bask there forever, dancing through splendid green meadows collecting Unicorn shit. By far, most seem to just drop off the face of the Eath - hopefully never to think or read another Scientology word for as long as they shall live. Fortunately, some lucky souls land upon the rocky shores of ESMB and get to go through the Wall of Fire and get on with helping. Really helping.

The only shame I feel is in knowing that I inadvertently provided RTC with video taped confessions of numerous individuals that can be used against them at any point in time. Actually, I don't even feel shame about it, I feel indignant rage. It was because of the trust placed in me that some very compromising pieces of data were gathered. I hate that I was party to something so disgusting.

FWIW, I don't know where people claim that hypnosis takes place in Scientology but it was not at the levels to which I was trained or processed. I was never hypnotized as a preclear nor did I ever hypnotize my preclears. I will never agree with the notion that a question like "recall a time when you were happy" might have caused irrepairable damage to anyone's psyche. There is some introspection and introversion that occurs when you're on the receiving end of processing, but I have experienced that same state of mind when engaged in a soul-searching conversation with a friend, or when absorbed in a painting. It's a natural side effect of self-examination to feel extroverted and more at ease in your own skin once you string a thing or two together. Hubbard laid claim to it as HIS result, the result of HIS tech. Since Scientologists have limited if any background in psychology or psychotherapy (because an extensive history makes you unqualified to receive auditing) it was an easy sell. Of course, it was also a big fat lie. But that really did take me a good chunk of time to figure out.

In the end, there's ultimately truth in what you say - it resulted in more "cash please" for the preclears. That never once crossed my mind when I was auditing or CSing though. Ironically, it took being ripped off my post and thrown into an all-hands regging to cover a lawsuit to shove it in my face.

I left shortly after.

 

[Veda]

-snip-


FWIW, I don't know where people claim that hypnosis takes place in Scientology but it was not at the levels to which I was trained or processed. I was never hypnotized as a preclear

-snip-

Perhaps it would be a good idea to provide your definition for the words, ""hypnosis" and "hypnotized."

Have you noticed that auditing, in Scientology, begins with "ask the person," and then switches to "tell the person"?

 

[Jquepublic]

I, Infinite BLiP (AKA: various), hereby confess to being a WOG. Not only that, I am also involved in the activities of a terrorist/hacker organisatilon known as Anonymous. Further, I am known to be connected to many Facebook "unfriendlees". In short, I am a scoundrel and a rapscallion bent on extracted LOLs where and when I can while I continue gathering information about Scientology for the sole purpose of better understanding how I might end its abuses. If I have, at any time, appeared to be a Scientologist, I humbly apologise. Please don't let it happen again.

This is true.

No worries, Infinite - I already knew you were a never in! I assumed you were speaking based on info you gathered rather than from personal experience.

 

[Jquepublic]

One suggestion:

Perhaps it would be a good idea to provide your definition for the words, ""hypnosis," and "hypnotized."

I'm at work so will have to go with the wikipedia page to answer you - granted I gave it only a quick glance, but this is what I consider hypnosis

And nope, I was a last life timer. Honestly, I bypassed Dianetics altogether. I already knew I was mocking it up.

Just noticed your edit. I have noticed if you mean as a person progresses up the chart that it switches from ask to tell. I've ranted about it, in fact, and consider that to be the point at which it stops being beneficial and starts being something dangerous. No offense to those who enjoyed their OT levels, I just can't get past the fact that it's Hubbard's case you're expected to run from Clear on up.

 

[SweetnessandLight]

Wow, anyone who says that had some pretty shitty auditors. I felt, and feel, that I managed to help the people I took in session despite the fact that we were in a cult running processes dreamed up (at least in part) by a madman.

I don't think what works in auditing has much to do with the processes themselves. It's the relationship between the auditor and pc that gives results. Anytime you have one person caring for another, listening non-judgmentally and accepting and STILL CARING for that person, you are going to see improvement. That nobody needs to be holding cans or reading a meter to have that happen just doesn't seem to dawn on you until after a bit of time, distance and reflection!

Right on J Q! This is the basis for ALL good counseling. A "good auditor" (and I do believe that some of you were very good auditors) does not need a meter to read a person they are helping, or a list of questions to follow, etc. We all respond to authentic care, love, interest, etc. from someone that we trust or look up to.

 

[Demented LRH]

Auditing seems such a hassle. Having to learn all those new words and what they mean and how the floating tone scale needle arm thing measures thoughts . . . sounds sorta crazy. We wogs find its much simpler to receive comfort, assistance, and insights when just chatting to friends. Especially if none of the friends makes us hook up to a lie detector and then writes down everything important we say. That's kinda a buzzkill.

Yeah, that floating needle is a piece of work! No one was able to explain to me what actually the e-meter measures. Does it measure the engrams? No, because mental states cannot be measured. Does it measure postulates? I would not know that because I was not making postulates. I did not like Hubbard's definition of postulates because in physics postulate is another name for a law of nature.

 

[Demented LRH]

The only shame I feel is in knowing that I inadvertently provided RTC with video taped confessions of numerous individuals that can be used against them at any point in time. Actually, I don't even feel shame about it, I feel indignant rage. It was because of the trust placed in me that some very compromising pieces of data were gathered. I hate that I was party to something so disgusting.

FWIW, I don't know where people claim that hypnosis takes place in Scientology but it was not at the levels to which I was trained or processed. I was never hypnotized as a preclear nor did I ever hypnotize my preclears. I will never agree with the notion that a question like "recall a time when you were happy" might have caused irrepairable damage to anyone's psyche. There is some introspection and introversion that occurs when you're on the receiving end of processing, but I have experienced that same state of mind when engaged in a soul-searching conversation with a friend, or when absorbed in a painting. It's a natural side effect of self-examination to feel extroverted and more at ease in your own skin once you string a thing or two together. Hubbard laid claim to it as HIS result, the result of HIS tech. Since Scientologists have limited if any background in psychology or psychotherapy (because an extensive history makes you unqualified to receive auditing) it was an easy sell. Of course, it was also a big fat lie. But that really did take me a good chunk of time to figure out.

In the end, there's ultimately truth in what you say - it resulted in more "cash please" for the preclears. That never once crossed my mind when I was auditing or CSing though. Ironically, it took being ripped off my post and thrown into an all-hands regging to cover a lawsuit to shove it in my face.

I left shortly after.

This is so true, I was saying the same thing all along. Those who believe that Hubbard was a source of Dianetics should take college courses in psychology to see how wrong they are.

 

[Demented LRH]

A group of Australian scientists came to conclusion that the Dianetics procedure is a form of hypnosis. I posted a link to their study at OCMB, but I do not remember the title of the thread. As soon as I find the link, I will post it here.
==================

There is a good reason why Hubbard could not be a scientist -- in layman terms he was crazy as a bedbug. The founder wrote so many crazy things that his mental health is in question. I derived a great pleasure from collecting the crazy statements that Hubbard made. My collection is very large, a part of it is presented in the thread Hubbard Era Loco y Estupido (Hubbard was Crazy and Stupid).

Here is a link to the tread:

http://ocmb.xenu.net/ocmb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=86946&p=473733&hilit=Hubbard+Era#p473733

 

[Jquepublic]

A group of Australian scientists came to conclusion that the Dianetics procedure is a form of hypnosis. I posted a link to their study at OCMB, but I do not remember the title of the thread. As soon as I find the link, I will post it here.
==================

There is a good reason why Hubbard could not be a scientist -- in layman terms he was crazy as a bedbug. The founder wrote so many crazy things that his mental health is in question. I derived a great pleasure from collecting the crazy statements that Hubbard made. My collection is very large, a part of it is presented in the thread Hubbard Era Loco y Estupido (Hubbard was Crazy and Stupid).

Here is a link to the tread:

http://ocmb.xenu.net/ocmb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=86946&p=473733&hilit=Hubbard+Era#p473733

Are you thinking of The Anderson Report?

 

[Gib]

A group of Australian scientists came to conclusion that the Dianetics procedure is a form of hypnosis. I posted a link to their study at OCMB, but I do not remember the title of the thread. As soon as I find the link, I will post it here.
==================

There is a good reason why Hubbard could not be a scientist -- in layman terms he was crazy as a bedbug. The founder wrote so many crazy things that his mental health is in question. I derived a great pleasure from collecting the crazy statements that Hubbard made. My collection is very large, a part of it is presented in the thread Hubbard Era Loco y Estupido (Hubbard was Crazy and Stupid).

Here is a link to the tread:

http://ocmb.xenu.net/ocmb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=86946&p=473733&hilit=Hubbard+Era#p473733

From your post link, here I quote-----

""A totally democratic organization has a bad name in Dianetics and Scientology despite all this talk of agreement. I has been found by actual experiment (LA 1950) that groups of people called on to select a leader from among them by nomination and vote routinely select only those who would kill them. They select the talkers of big deeds and ignore the doers. They seem to select unerringly the men of average skill. That is never good enough in a leader and the people suffer from his lack of understanding. If you ever have occasion to elect a leader for your group, don't be "democratic" about it."
HCO PL 2 Nov 1970, "The Theory of Scientology Organizations" "

"They select the talkers of big deeds and ignore the doers. " ----only problem with LRH stating this is nobody could select anybody. He is stating exactly what he is doing in scientology, which is he is talking of big deeds.

And this one--"If you ever have occasion to elect a leader for your group, don't be "democratic" about it." Well DM certainly did this, he elected himself and got rid of people who found out.