CAN WE TALK ABOUT PTS TECH?

[IMMORTAL]

Hi Immortal!

I studied Hubbard's Ethics "Tech" more than any other sub field within Scientology. I am glad I studied it, somehow I feel the better for it. Its not that all of it is 100% true because it isn't. Parts of it seem to give one stability. They seem to ground you and give you a reference point to deal with non optimum situations which arise in life. Oddly enough, one benefit of that stability is the ability to objectively analyze the Hubbard Ethics technology itself.

The first area I only paid lip service to but never fully agreed with was what Paul said back on Page 1 of this thread and that had to do with ALL illness and sickness being caused by PTSness. I don't believe that datum to be 100% true, not by a long shot. I am up in my years now and have a tendency for arterial blockage and have had 3 stents put in my arteries, 2 in 2003 and 1 in 2005. I do not believe that in any slightest way this is a function of PTSness, unless one considers living with a human body being PTS in and of itself, because these bodies are going to age no matter how ethical one is. Making the right life choices dietary, exercise and otherwise can slow the aging process enormously but at current levels of health technology can not stop aging. One who ages is not PTS as I see it.

Take the area which caught your attention and led to you starting this thread. There is no question that if one is doing great in Scientology and another person invalidates and criticizes his or her gains, the person who has been criticized will roller coaster. Such a person will vacillate, lose certainty in their gains, go down, then mentally reaffirm their gains, come up and then vacillate again. It has happened to me many times, I have seen it happen to others just as Hubbard's theory states and I have applied his theories to myself and others and have caused the roller coaster to stop. Sure this is anecdotal testing without double blinds, placebos and all that stuff and when you get 100% consistent results over a period of decades, you still must conclude on an empirical basis that there are some truths contained in PTS tech.

What you have done is think outside the box, and question the why and wherefore of the simply stated fact of roller coaster. You say, why would a person fully certain of truths roller coaster? This question opened up my eyes to an area that I had never before looked at or challenged. You then took it a step further and asked why your church would enforce handling or disconnection from one who caused rollercoaster or would label them suppressive. Per the stated doctrines of Scio, wouldn't such a person be entitled to have his own beliefs and not be labeled suppressive? Obviously, Hubbard was willing to bend his doctrines.

Instead of proofing his adherents up so as to handle invalidation of their gains, he choose to label the purveyor of the invalidation as a Suppressive Person and simply boot him out of the game. In other words, while there was enough truth in his tech to discover what caused roller coaster, which shows his tech had truth to that point, he then developed a handling inconsistent to the creeds of his own church so the handling which was developed had only enough truth to keep his parishioner from rollercoasting but was not true to the extent that it caused all sorts of terrible side effects to happen to various parties involved in the cycle such as disconnection between loving family members and ultimately fights, break ups, law suits, and you name it. Again by Hubbard's own KSW Tech, all attacks against Scn have to do 100% with proper tech not being delivered and yet the C of S, instead of directly applying this maxim, tries to smash its opponents through harassment and is incapable of looking at perhaps something they are doing which is creating improper tech and causing it to be delivered and then taking actions to correct that.

I believe the main fault in Hubbard's Ethics tech is that C of S has built into a it a Service Facsimile which states that the Church is never wrong and never creates a non optimum situation and their blind inability to look, recognize and handle their 3rd dynamic Service Facsimile has lead to a break down in the efficacy of Hubbard's PTS tech and in fact of all Hubbard Tech in general.
Lakey

Thank you for this. I really liked following the logic of it. I'm getting so much help on this board sorting out my questions.

I agree with you that there are parts of the PTS tech that are workable in helping the person handle their life. I've experienced it, I've appreciated knowing the SOS data and being able to spot various telling behaviours to decide how close I've wanted to get to a person.

Yes, we have bodies. They have a finite life expectancy. Duh The aspect of making a person choose either the church way or the highway is what I've seen be so destructive. The controlling factors of that. And I would call that paranoid from the experience I've see with it.

Thank you again for giving me this.

 

[IMMORTAL]

The question you put in blue is totally answered here on ESMB. On this one, I found the answers I sought on a thread by Vinnaire called "Oh!God!!" about 6 months ago. Vin had something to say on that matter as did one of the posters called Gadfly. I've adopted a consensus or amalgam on that topic which is basically that LRH was imbued with genius of a sort. His true genius was in being able to review enornous, copious, overwhelming, oceans of data and pick out the key and important truths from these vast amounts of data, then order them as to relative importance and package them into a whole which is interesting to and assimilable by the Western world. This is no insignificant feat. It does not appear possible to do this and yet LRH was able to take this concept very far. If it was not for various case factors plus the state of the culture on planet Earth, he may well have achieved the lofty goals he set out for himself.

The above was where the genius of the man lied. Someone told me that LRH said that the hardest thing about being at the top of a movement and being "Source" was that there was no higher agency there to put in his ethics and he had to do it himself. In the early days of his movement, it appears that he did a pretty good job of that but as time went on, he began to slip and in the end, that was his undoing, his inability to put ethics in on himself plus not being willing to allow anyone else to attempt to try and put it in for him. Surrounded by the finest auditors and administrators in all of Scientology, he never allowed himself to be administered his own tech by those whom he personally trained. He could not seem to confront being helped by human beings, even the ones he personally trained and that serious disability led to his downfall.

Keep studying and all your questions regarding what I underlined in blue will be answered relatively quickly.
Lakey

Interesting. And Thank You for that thread reference. I will look there.

Yes, I always felt it was amazing how he could do this. (What you said highlighed above in a different color.) That's what was so amazing about him. Very analytical. I found it easy to be in awe about that.

I really appreciate your direction.

 

[IMMORTAL]

Thanks for reading it. I didn't know it was riveting.

I haven't finished that story yet....I got side tracked....got run over by a Mac truck. :shock:

What piece of PTS tech should I use?

Oh, I'm sorry about the Mac truck bit. Hopefully, you'll be able to finish the story and I'll be able to read how it all turned out.

Thank you again.

 

[IMMORTAL]

Looking at it now, I believe that PTS tech was a key element in Scn that was used to control.

How did LRH get us to accept it though?

It's my belief that it contained a lot of truths, and that it did so to hook us into the untruths (the *extensions*), that did the nasty trick which was intended. "PTS type A-J", "Middle Class PTS".....aarrgghhh! Shit no!....I always tormented myself trying to make that *fit*. That stuff never rang true to me, but some of the other stuff did though, and it still does.

For me, within that "body of knowledge" of PTS tech, there were a lot of truths, or at least some truths which, upon discovery, gave me a "new life"......Some of that stuff was real, it got the penny dropping for me, it blew me away, it helped me change my life, and I'm still thankful for it.

Yep, maybe I could've found it somewhere else, and if I didn't get into Scn then I probably would have, but as it was, I found it within the body of tech on PTSness.

I think the name says it all, and it's pretty damn telling......"potential trouble source". There's no doubt in my mind why this tech was included in Scn, but as I've said, I believe that in amongst it, it contained what I would consider some universal truths.

Ha. Oh yes. PTS to the middle class. That seemed to be the last separation from most of the world to me. Them (the out-ethics, out-tech, out KSW bunch) and us (the Scientologists).

There are a lot of truths in the technology IMO. I like being aware and being able to predict, and I thought the direction in the tech was helpful. I didn't like the disconnection part of it and the ultimatums.

This discussion is really helping me separate some things out. Thank you.

 

[IMMORTAL]

I think we need to differentiate here regarding PTS/SP tech.

First, there are several parts to it:

1. Tone Scale and SOS stuff.
2. PTS tech itself
3. SP detection and labelling
4. Psychotics
5. DBs and so on
6. Administrative use of all this stuff.
7. The processing route of it, and it´s use. Such as S&D, but also the complete rundowns, PTS rdn. and SP rdn.

Another aspect is:

1. The use of this "tech" by the group/"church" for the control of others, both inside and outside.

2. The justification by the "church", "founder", through the use of this tech for cases that do not run well, or couldn´t be handled.

3. The consequences of using this tech in business life, labelling, stamping on employees, looking for who´s when mistakes are done, or people are sick, etc.

4. The consequences of using this tech in PRIVATE life, out of the "church".

Then it should be considered wether it is more HARMFUL, or BENEFICIAL, and put in a balance.
____________________

1. No doubt there is a before and after in the group, in terms of control, after the creation of this tech. In this regard, NO DOUBT, VERY HARMFUL. Disconnection policies are PART AND PARCEL, of PTS Tech, how can you guys forget that, and leave it just under the carpet????

2. No doubt, some cases simply don´t get handled on the processes that should be. The "founder"´s solution is PTS/Tech, we just go and look for a PTS Type that fits, and THAT´s IT! Easy handling. It creates IRRESPONSIBILITY, both technically, and as administrators. Whenever "we" find an unsolvable case (Lisa McPherson example), let´s just say the person was just PTS. That way we are redeemed of any CAUSE, it was all the hidden SP. What is "funny" about this approach, is that is used customarily as it is beneficial for the group, the great public, or SO, or staff member who worked his ass out for decades, turns out in the very last minute to be a PTS, or an SP, how convenient.... How come it was never detected before? How come this person was productive or donated his ass out first for the benefit of the group? "Back then he was not PTS, but now he became more." All kinds of explanations can be given. This IRRESPONSIBILITY in human relations is PART AND PARCEL of PTS Tech.

VERDICT: VERY HARMFUL AGAIN.

3. The use of PTS Tech in the realm of WISE, and so on, is also another hard chunk to bite on. Sometimes it is dealt with even non-Scientologists, that get adapted to this, need to do some ups and downs, disconnect a bit from the wife. Recomendations are given regarding their private life in their business life. This harms business environment and relations. Similar to point 2, it creates IRRESPONSIBILITY in business relationships, and it creates a barrier. Just ask people who have worked in a WISE company, what happens when they get sick, or make a mistake, or when their stats are not up. Are people not labelled? Spotted on the tone scale all day long? Also that is a "funny" one, many initially uptone guys, turn out to be 1.1.s, "they were just covering it all so well up, ya know, it´s all part of the 1.1. traits"....

VERDICT: HARMFUL to VERY HARMFUL

4. In personal life, one can start to look for who´s behind friends who make mistakes, or become ill, the data are clear, all illness and all mistakes stem from ptsness, ergo, there is an SP at work. Rare is the case, where one things in PTS type II terms. What is harmful about this frame of mind, is that mistakes are part of natural learning, as somebody stated here, without mistakes the learning process cannot happen. Also phsyical illness is sometimes needed to have a break from a stressful environment or situation, something is manifesting, a protest, but not necessarily an SP connection.

In the end labellilng friends, and putting them into tone scale boxes, or pts boxes, even psychotic boxes, makes them to THINGS, to a thing, you have no need of respect, no need of compassion, no need of communication. Best speech on this is David Mayo´s Talk on Disillusionment, expressing what happens when you label people and make them to things.

VERDICT: Some use, but overclouded by possible harm.

Of course data of disconnection make sense. But not because Hubbard said so. It´s common sense! To add value to a "tech" that is WAY MORE HARMFUL.

My conclusion:

Just throw the whole package to the garbage, you can get the same impressions on people by mere intuition. INTUITION when worked upon is a far more accurate than this crap imprecise "tech".

People are not in a Tone Scale box. They don´t have the exact 21 characteristics. Besides it´s very evaluating and invalidating to the individual, and just makes happy "enthusiasts" running MASKS,.... It creates DISHONEST emotions.

What you believe is useful of this tech, is YOUR INBORN INTUITION. That you aligned with that "tech" and gave all the power AWAY to the "tech" and it´s "founder". Work on your intuition, and validate THAT, not the significance of this completely untested data.

Besides, look how many people all over the world have been made into SPs and PTSs. Normal, plain productive people, that have been labelled and turned into utter enemies.

PTS/SP Tech bears with it, the seed of it´s own self-fullfilling prophecy.

"The world is dangerous. There is truly bad people, that want to destroy us and the tech." And so it very well may be.

Thank you! I love the way you made the differentiations clear and organized the data in this logical way. It was easy for me to follow and I got a lot out of it.

Yes, there are these various parts of the PTS tech.
1. Agreed. Disconnection. I think this is where this started for me. The disconnection part and why would that be so. Yes, destructive. However, just like you say, if you perceive a person is going to be destructive to you, you'll disconnect anyway. I think it's when someone else tells you to do it and it's not a reality to you that it's bad. It's enforced at that point under duress.

2. I've witnessed the examples you give and it does leave one with a bad taste. It's inconsistent and just doesn't add up.

3. I'll never forget when a Scn I knew had to have an operation and didn't want anyone to come and visit her in the hospital because she was such a downstat. Huh? When she needed friends, this is the way she felt?? BS!

4. Hm. I'll check out the David Mayo speech you reference. The labeling is IMO another way to distance onself.

Right about the paranoia related to this. Makes people prone to witch hunts which is always scary. And somebody's going to get their head on a pike, right or wrong.

 

[paul.spiritualquest]

I hear what your saying, but.....

I was very concerned about being connected to critics here on ESMB, so I routed myself to HCO to speak with a fully hatted Sea Org Ethics Specialist (pictured below).

Although he is new on post, he was extremely knowledgeable on Ron's tech.

I asked him if it was OKAY for me to be in com with critics on ESMB.

He told me that "arbitraries are canceled" on disconnecting from SP's. I could not believe my ears! What a theta blowdown! My space got bigger and-- calm, much like the glassy ocean depicted in the Sea Org promo.

The guy was such a little theta potata I picked him up by the arms and gave him an airplane ride and he squealed with delight. Many of the other new SO recruits left their post and came over to also ask for airplane rides so I had to stop so as to not create other-intentionedness to clearing the planet.

Anyways, he said that he would be more than happy to BRIEF all my SP friends and all I have to do is give him their names and addresses. So, let me know all your friends' contact info who are critics, anon or declared--so they can get the great news directly!

You get funnier and funnier with time. I think we should do a whole youtube series, scripted by you.

 

[thetanic]

Here's the first part of the Mayo talk:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCtPa8UEA6Q

Part 2:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGeR1yT2gkA

Part 3:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lT8TKo_s69o

Part 4:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-G8y5v2wCk

 

[paul.spiritualquest]

Thank you! I love the way you made the differentiations clear and organized the data in this logical way. It was easy for me to follow and I got a lot out of it.

Yes, there are these various parts of the PTS tech.
1. Agreed. Disconnection. I think this is where this started for me. The disconnection part and why would that be so. Yes, destructive. However, just like you say, if you perceive a person is going to be destructive to you, you'll disconnect anyway. I think it's when someone else tells you to do it and it's not a reality to you that it's bad. It's enforced at that point under duress.

2. I've witnessed the examples you give and it does leave one with a bad taste. It's inconsistent and just doesn't add up.

3. I'll never forget when a Scn I knew had to have an operation and didn't want anyone to come and visit her in the hospital because she was such a downstat. Huh? When she needed friends, this is the way she felt?? BS!

4. Hm. I'll check out the David Mayo speech you reference. The labeling is IMO another way to distance onself.

Right about the paranoia related to this. Makes people prone to witch hunts which is always scary. And somebody's going to get their head on a pike, right or wrong.

Yes, the Mayo video is one of the first things I saw when on the way out, and brought me a long way, it´s in youtube. The later story of Mayo is sad, and how he was harassed by OSA.

I definitely felt better, since I put the PTS tech back in a corner room in my mind, or threw majority of it, out the window, and is not in my front mental lobby. Not that I polish it up often. I´m just experimenting people AS they are, and not by a pre-made or post-made cliche, and this feels so much better.

 

[thetanic]

I hadn't heard this Mayo talk before, so thank you for mentioning it.

 

[Terril park]

Read this article by John McMaster on the story of S&D. It talks about the real tech that he developed for S&D, that Hubbard junked part of. This also seems valid to me.

http://www.lightlink.com/archive/fgordon/storysd.scr

Paul

Apparently this was incorporated into the flag only
" New Vitality Rundown"

 

[JBTrendy]

THE STORY OF S & D by John McMaster

The "S & D" process is an important scientological procedure which
addresses an individual's particular vulnerability to another's
malicious or supposedly malicious intentions. It is indicated when a
participant repeatedly loses the acknowledged gains they have already
had from processing, or behaves in a highly unreliable manner. ("S &
D," stands for "search and discovery")

This is the story of the development of that procedure, with some
profound insights, by John McMaster, and is reprinted from The Heretic,
Issue X. (See "Bon Voyage to John McMaster" in the Free Spirit 90.) -
Hank Levin:

***

I would like to discuss the development of S & D for the
implications it had in the subsequent development of scientology
technology. Had it not been designed the way it was, things might have
gone a little differently.

Late summer, 1965. The mesage read: "Ron wants you to bring six of
your best review auditors to his office at quarter past five today, and
would you get it all organized?" When we were all there, he said that
he'd gotten us there for a specific reason, and the reason was to evolve
a particular process which he wanted to call "Search and Discovery."

Now, in the processing that we were doing then, which was mainly
the power processes and power plus, we were getting some cases moving
magnificently fast, others sort of medium, and some cases moving very
slowly.

He said that there must be some factor that was sort of impinging
on these cases that were moving slowly, and this process was to be
called Search and Discovery simply because it was to search for that
which was impinging on the slow gain case and the no case gain, to
search for that and then discover it.

And he wanted us to evolve a technology whereby this could be done
effectively.

We got together and decided that it would be a good idea to have a
listing process to start off with on the search side of it, and then we
would discover an item.

We decided the listing question would be sonething along the lines
of "Who or what is causing difficulty?"

We made a list and then we'd get whatever the item was, and then
put the item into a Represent ("Who or what would item represent?"), and
then list away. If the item on the first list had been a person, one
blew the charge off that person by getting the Represent out of it.

And on this "Who or what would item represent?" the PC invariably
found a "What" in relation to his own behaviour or his own conditions of
existence that got restimulated by the actions of the other person and
caused what appeared to be the symptoms of a "Potential Trouble Source,"
as it was later called.

It was something that the person had in his own makeup, his own
behaviour pattern, his own mental mass, that had a sort of magnetism for
the behaviour of a certain person.

The other person did something, and this particular thing, in the
whole pattern of the PC, would cause an upset and prevent the PC from
looking as clearly as he or she might look, from wanting to win, from
doing whatever one was expecting the person to do.

So we ran this listing process and the represent process, and we
got what we got, and took the results to Hubbard. And as I said,
invariably it was a "What". And you can't declare a "What" that exists
in the magnetic field of the PC to be a suppressive person.

There was a tremendous improvement in the PCs because they found
out that in actual fact, when they were so-called "being the effect" or
"being suppressed" by someone else, it was because of themselves and
something that they had that had compelled them to become the effect of
the other person's behaviour.

But there was another thing some of them found out. Some people
found out that in their behaviour patterns they did things and behaved
in such a way that they compelled the other person to commit suppressive
acts towards them.

For instance, here's me. And, not during the auditing session but
in my everyday life, I am doing something with a regularity that compels
another, who also has something in his magnetic field that my behaviour
restimulates, to be suppressive towards me, and I am in actual fact
causing it.

So there were two aspects that people began to find in this
auditing:

1) they had something in their own space that got restimulated by
another person's behaviour, and when they found that and blew it, they
no longer were the effect of that person's behaviour; and

2) they were unknowingly doing something that was compelling the
other person to act suppressively towards them.

And everyone run on this process, with the listing and the
represent, had far more case gain than is gotten from running up to the
ethics officer and disconnecting from a so called suppressive person.

We were really thrilled, because these people, immediately after
having had this kind of S & D process run on them, moved magnificently
on the power processes.

We took the results to Hubbard, and he kind of hemmed and hawed and
told us it was a little bit long-winded and we could do it faster
another way. Eventually he changed the thing down to: "Who is
suppressing you?", and it had to be a person. And when that person was
spotted, the PC had to go to the ethics officer with the folder.

The ethics officer then had to find out whether the person would
"handle or disconnect", and in most cases the ethics officer decided of
his or her volition that the person was incapable of handling and
compelled the person to disconnect.

Now if you look at the history of scientology from that point
onward, late summer-autumn of 1965, what was happening?

Suppressive people were becoming a reality and the ethics officer
was becoming an absolute necessity in any organization in order to
safeguard your technololgy.

Well, nothing can safeguard technology better than perfect
auditing. If you take the process and audit it perfectly, your
technology is established.

Having this via of darting around the corner to the ethics officer
just gives the auditor an out. If he can't quite manage the PC or he
can't quite manage the process, or he can!t quite manage putting the two
together, he always knows he can say "Well it's OK; if I can't quite
manage this then it'll become an ethics matter."

When a person was not moving as quickly as the person ought to be
moving, they then had to have this S & D process, and then automatically
it went onto ethics lines.

So then standard technology was very much involved with ethics; you
couldn't have standard technology without an ethics officer to handle
these particular situations. So the suppressive person became a reality
and the ethics officer became an absolute necessity in order to have the
tech working and standard.

So now the PC disconnects from this "Who" the ethics offlcer
regards as a suppressive person, and yet still intact is the "What" that
predisposed the suppression in the first place. So the PC is still
vulnerable to suppression.

He disconnects, has a bit of relief, and maybe until the end of
that auditing intensive the PC is free from the impact of the other.
But within the makeup of the person, that which predisposes the PC to
being suppressed is untouched.

And the overt act of disconnecting from another, blaming another
for one's own inadequacy, and the fact that one has this predisposition
towards suppression, compounds the felony.

The felony of whatever one has done that makes one vulnerable or
predisposed is still there, and that is compounded by the disconnection,
which creates a heavy ARC break perhaps not only with the person being
disconnected from, but with all the people to whom that person is
connected.

So now you have the compounded felony. That thing which had come
into restimulation in the auditing that should have been run out right
there and then, is now being covered over aby another overt act, the act
of disvconnection. And what does that do? It causes the prolongation
of that condition which predisposed the PC to suppression in the first
place.

S & Ds, such as they are run now, do not give permanent relief or
release from anything. What they do is prolong the agony of potential
suppression. So far from setting a person freer, they are in actual
fact burying,and therefore prolonging the condition that predisposes and
precipitates the suppression.

This "standard technology" is in actual fact ruining the whole
potential of our aims and goals and purposes, because it is pressing out
of sight that which we were fortunate enough to have surface, that thing
that is predisposing the PC to feeling suppressed.

It is a very healthy sign when someone you are auditing suddenly
has problems. So they say they're not making gains. So what? This
indicates to you that something is in restimulation that prevents them
from making gains and achieving their goals. This means you've got
something right there and then, right at the surface, ready to be
handled.

So you can do an S & D, but I suggest that you do it the way we did
it originally, before it was changed to a "Who?" You might get this
thing which has come into restimuation on the first listing, in which
case it's gone. If you have to put it into a Represent list, well,
you'll get a whole lot there.

Now, I didn't do this at the time, but it seems to me that you
could then put in a third question if you do a represent out to another
item and you still haven't blown everything.

You could say, "Now, how do you use so-and-so to make yourself
vulnerable to suppression?", or a question of that nature. Then you
have removed the predisposition to the suppression because that which
was in the magnetic field of the PC that enabled the suppression to
happen will never be there again, unless the PC puts it back. But it
won't be the same one; it'll be another one.

So I hope this sheds a little light on the way and S & D could be
run that could give gain for all time, rather than this temporary relief
by committing an overt act on a fellow being on this planet at the same
time as one is. It's not always such; sometimes one disconnects from
people out of another time.

However, this is just a vast Q & A with reality. The reality is
that somewhere in one's makeup is this predisposition to be suppressed,
and when it is precipitatedd one behaves like a potential trouble
source. So, get out what's in restimulation and remove completely and
forever the chances of being suppressed in that particular way.

That is how we started out on Search and Discovery, and how I feel
it could be done even now. It's not too late, for Heaven's sake! And
we could get in, and do the job properly.

***

 

[olska]

I've posted about this several times before. (Sigh).

Instead of using the abbreviation "PTS" , if you write out the whole phrase Potential Trouble Source every time it is used, in every possible permutation of its use, you will quickly see how ridiculous it is.

And it helps to know the regular English language meaning of the words

potential
trouble
and source

"Potential Trouble Source" is a construct that serves ORGANIZED SCIENTOLOGY and Hubbard's agenda for that organization.

It was not designed to serve the needs of or to benefit the individual.

Since the efficiency and forward progress of an organization or group depends for its success upon the efficiency and cooperation of individuals who are attached to that group, actions that increase the efficiency and cooperation of the individuals involved may serve the group. Sometimes. If not too many resources are used in the process.

Note this primary dictum in all the "PTS" policy and tech:

"PTS" people are NOT allowed on scientology service lines. They must FIRST "handle" their "Potential Trouble Source ness" before they are allowed to receive auditing, to be on course, or to continue on staff.

"Scientology" as an organized group couldn't have given less of a shit about people who were "Potential Trouble Sources" (angry, sick, dying, roller-coastering, threatening, or whatever) who weren't actively trying to "do scientology."

If "PTS" tech were TRULY effective in handling illness or in any other way helping people live better lives, then an entire very lucrative industry could have been made of "handling" such "PTSness."

But that's not what was done. Instead, the "types A to J" were defined in order to KEEP PEOPLE AWAY who would have brought "trouble" down on Hubbard's operation; and "types I, II, and III" and the "PTS Detection, Routing, and Handling" course were designed to "fix" cash cows already on lines, or get OFF the lines those were more "trouble" than they were worth.

Simple economics.
...

That said, in human society some people influence others in toxic ways, and in order to protect themselves some people may find it necessary to define appropriate and clear-cut boundaries or even to cut off contact with certain other people.

"Scientology" didn't invent or discover those facts, and doesn't have any "magic" solutions, or even any major insights into those kinds of problems.

"Scientology tech" on the subject of toxic influences was designed to protect Hubbard's operations and get troublesome individuals out of the way.

 

[DCAnon]

I find it so surprising knowing the attitude of Scientology towards illness and disaster as a "PTS" or "SP" caused situation that they have things like the volunteer ministers. They can fully believe they're helping people during tragedy like 9/11, the Virginia tech shootings, and Haiti and yet, they refuse to help their own friends and family because they don't want to "catch" whatever PTSness is floating around.

How can it be alright to stick yourself into a stranger's tragedy and turn your back on (and BLAME!) those you love when they're suffering. I guess I just don't understand how a member of the Church of Scientology can compartmentalize and rationalize that choice.

 

[JBTrendy]

S&D tech rehabilitated

Thanks to Dulloldfart for having given us here a link to THE STORY OF S & D by John McMaster.

I decided to publish it in full on this thread as soon as I red it because I think it is of inconsidirable importance. Obviously there's a lot of terrible consequences that followed the miss use of this tech by LRH and whole the PTS/SP shit that followed that didn't handle properly things for any of us and had been the cause of so much abuses.

On the other hand if such an S&D tech had been properly applied and put into use I'm sure we would have gained so much from it as individuals and as a group.

My Lord have mercy on LRH and all of us who suffer so much from this major crime.

 

[Blue Spirit]

YES, I Agree

LRH was imbued with genius of a sort. His true genius was in being able to review enornous, copious, overwhelming, oceans of data and pick out the key and important truths from these vast amounts of data, then order them as to relative importance and package them into a whole which is interesting to and assimilable by the Western world. This is no insignificant feat. It does not appear possible to do this and yet LRH was able to take this concept very far. If it was not for various case factors plus the state of the culture on planet Earth, he may well have achieved the lofty goals he set out for himself.

The above was where the genius of the man lied. Someone told me that LRH said that the hardest thing about being at the top of a movement and being "Source" was that there was no higher agency there to put in his ethics and he had to do it himself. In the early days of his movement, it appears that he did a pretty good job of that but as time went on, he began to slip and in the end, that was his undoing, his inability to put ethics in on himself plus not being willing to allow anyone else to attempt to try and put it in for him. Surrounded by the finest auditors and administrators in all of Scientology, he never allowed himself to be administered his own tech by those whom he personally trained. He could not seem to confront being helped by human beings, even the ones he personally trained and that serious disability led to his downfall.

Keep studying and all your questions regarding what I underlined in blue will be answered relatively quickly.
Lakey

I came to the same conclusions from my research Lakey.

 

[IMMORTAL]

Here's the first part of the Mayo talk:

Thank you VERY MUCH for those Mayo links. That was very helpful and thought provoking.

 

[IMMORTAL]

Yes, the Mayo video is one of the first things I saw when on the way out, and brought me a long way, it´s in youtube. The later story of Mayo is sad, and how he was harassed by OSA.

I definitely felt better, since I put the PTS tech back in a corner room in my mind, or threw majority of it, out the window, and is not in my front mental lobby. Not that I polish it up often. I´m just experimenting people AS they are, and not by a pre-made or post-made cliche, and this feels so much better.

Well, I'm very happy you have found a way to deal with this. I watched the Mayo videos. I have not seen the later Mayo story. I've been sheltered and all that you know.

 

[IMMORTAL]

I've posted about this several times before. (Sigh).

Instead of using the abbreviation "PTS" , if you write out the whole phrase Potential Trouble Source every time it is used, in every possible permutation of its use, you will quickly see how ridiculous it is.

And it helps to know the regular English language meaning of the words

potential
trouble
and source

"Potential Trouble Source" is a construct that serves ORGANIZED SCIENTOLOGY and Hubbard's agenda for that organization.

It was not designed to serve the needs of or to benefit the individual.

Since the efficiency and forward progress of an organization or group depends for its success upon the efficiency and cooperation of individuals who are attached to that group, actions that increase the efficiency and cooperation of the individuals involved may serve the group. Sometimes. If not too many resources are used in the process.

Note this primary dictum in all the "PTS" policy and tech:

"PTS" people are NOT allowed on scientology service lines. They must FIRST "handle" their "Potential Trouble Source ness" before they are allowed to receive auditing, to be on course, or to continue on staff.

"Scientology" as an organized group couldn't have given less of a shit about people who were "Potential Trouble Sources" (angry, sick, dying, roller-coastering, threatening, or whatever) who weren't actively trying to "do scientology."

If "PTS" tech were TRULY effective in handling illness or in any other way helping people live better lives, then an entire very lucrative industry could have been made of "handling" such "PTSness."

But that's not what was done. Instead, the "types A to J" were defined in order to KEEP PEOPLE AWAY who would have brought "trouble" down on Hubbard's operation; and "types I, II, and III" and the "PTS Detection, Routing, and Handling" course were designed to "fix" cash cows already on lines, or get OFF the lines those were more "trouble" than they were worth.

Simple economics.
...

That said, in human society some people influence others in toxic ways, and in order to protect themselves some people may find it necessary to define appropriate and clear-cut boundaries or even to cut off contact with certain other people.

"Scientology" didn't invent or discover those facts, and doesn't have any "magic" solutions, or even any major insights into those kinds of problems.

"Scientology tech" on the subject of toxic influences was designed to protect Hubbard's operations and get troublesome individuals out of the way.

Thank you for responding yet another time to this. It helps newbies like me get a quicker handle. The words potential trouble source are one of the things that started me thinking about this. It has really always been a question in my mind and it never really fit the concept that it was for my good, my gain. I am in agreement with what you have written.

 

[IMMORTAL]

Apparently this was incorporated into the flag only
" New Vitality Rundown"

Really??!! That's interesting....

 

[IMMORTAL]

I find it so surprising knowing the attitude of Scientology towards illness and disaster as a "PTS" or "SP" caused situation that they have things like the volunteer ministers. They can fully believe they're helping people during tragedy like 9/11, the Virginia tech shootings, and Haiti and yet, they refuse to help their own friends and family because they don't want to "catch" whatever PTSness is floating around.

How can it be alright to stick yourself into a stranger's tragedy and turn your back on (and BLAME!) those you love when they're suffering. I guess I just don't understand how a member of the Church of Scientology can compartmentalize and rationalize that choice.

Hm. That's a good point there. My first impression is that the VMs are showing others how the tech works to attract people to the tech that works. Once the people are "in" they now have to abide by the rules of the game or they are kicked out and not then helped. Now, there is something wrong with them.

Yeah.....doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Other than maybe something I'm going to hate to say here because it applies to me apparently and many others like me, until such time as they put their foot down and stopped buying it. What if they just have to find the "right" kind of people who are going to take the bait, hook, line, sinker and fishing pole.