well, I've experienced all three points highlighted in red.
Do I feel PTS from somebody criticizing scientology or the tech, or me having been a scientologist. Answer is NO. ( I assume you mean going PTS means loss of "case gain").
What is the point of your post?
I could say "show me a mother fucking "clear" as Jason Beghe said.
But I know you know the scientology bridge is hyped up nonsense per your past postings here, I researched them. So what are you trying to communicate?
And what exactly do mean by "case gain"?
What "case", or do you mean the "case" created by LRH's scientology and evaluation & what to think of our so called "case"?
Or maybe you mean "case" to be an improvement of some abilities?
>well, I've experienced all three points highlighted in red.
Good for you.
>But I know you know the scientology bridge is
hyped up
Definitely, but not the nonsense part.
>I could say "show me a mother fucking "clear" as Jason Beghe said.
I don't think the Book One Clear definition has yet been achieved in as much as the first dynamic Clear didn't meet expectations / promises.
>What is the point of your post?
I think that article really hits the nail on the head. There are some (pseudo-)skeptics who could never be convinced. Whatever evidence for anything they didn't agree with would be met with increasing degrees of antagonism and insults. It is a lesson in true skepticism. I feel many could benefit from the consideration that their own world view could cloud their judgement. Seeing through a lens that forbids particular possibilities means not seeing clearly.
>And what exactly do mean by "case gain"?
Well in many respects that is a personal thing. Typically people get benefit from different processes. Process A on one person can have dramatic and life changing effects whereas for another person that process may have no big effect. The hype is that it is presented that everyone should have the same benefit as that one person who got excellent results. An untruth (lie).
I would bet that anyone who spent a lot of time and money in Scientology had some benefit, including Jason Beghe. What happens is that you notice the change when it happens, and then it is the new normal, and you can tend to forget that. Then the improvements perhaps get less frequent and the unrelenting sales pitches and regging perhaps become intolerable and one leaves. That doesn't mean that nothing happened originally to get you started and keep you going. It means the later
misery allowed us to forget.
>What "case", or do you mean the "case" created by LRH's scientology
I don't for a minute believe LRH "made up" our cases. There are millions of people on this planet, if not hundreds of millions, who are doing things to improve their state of being, whether that be by transcendental meditation, counselling using empathy with a horse, Paul's robot, martial arts ... The list is endless. I have noticed that often when somebody gets deeply into some subject they can try to make that subject take them to a higher state of awareness. I bet you could even develop knitting as a subject, and have genuine case gain from that (like an objectives process). And that is a laudable goal.
I just think those of us who were "in" for a long time shouldn't deny to ourselves any benefits we did attain just because the organisation itself is, well not to put to fine a point on it, suppressive!
>( I assume you mean going PTS means loss of "case gain").
Denying (to oneself even) that one ever had
any gain is not entirely unrelated, is it?
It's like that comedy sketch ...
"What did the Romans ever do for us?"
"
Oh you mean apart from the roads, the aqueducts, under-floor heating, baths ..."
"Yes, yes, apart from those."
