How's That Freedom Workin' for Ya? The Power of an "SP"

Gadfly

Crusader
As far as context, Christianity looks at different TYPES of love. Filial (brotherly) love, sexual love, the True Love of Christ (sometimes called agape), and I think there is a fourth one that I forgot.

Anyway, I bring that up because I think Crowley's love focuses on the lust / sexual to the exclusion of others. I don't think for a moment that his "love" should be compared to the Christian notion of love.

Just sayin'. I'm not trying to pound my bible or anything, but I want to provide context for that "love" that Crowley spoke of.

You are probably correct. At best, Crowley's "love" is "attraction" - like "gravity" or "affinity". It always "bothered" me that Hubbard's Tone Scale and concept of ARC had NOTHING to do with with almost ANY version of "love". Though, my main concerns were of love of the "higher" variety.

Hubbard's notions hinge on "agreement" (ARC, where "R" is reality, based SOLELY on "agreement"). A notion like "unconditional love" cares not at all about "agreement", and can be sent out or directed with a clean intention of "well-wishing", regardless what you "get back" ("exchange") or what the recipient agrees with or doesn't agree with.

The whole over-exaggerated importance of "exchange" always bothered me too. Sure, there should be a fair "exchange" in most relationships, but it excludes the notion of "freely sending out with unqualified compassion". Scientology is OBSESSED with "exchange". Especially when the "giving" is TO THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY!

Exchange by Dynamics involves looking at what you give and what you get back on and from each dynamic. Again, where can a notion like "unconditional love" or "selfless compassion" fit in? They can't. And, that is because the Scientology philosophy NEVER involves a notion of "selfless". It is all about "beefing up" the "self". Giving without getting something back is a crime in Scientology. It's viewed as "out-exchange". It's viewed as a form of "out-ethics". But, all "random acts of kindness" ARE "out-exchange" to the card-carrying Scientologist.

:scnsucks:
 
Last edited:

NoName

A Girl Has No Name
You are probably correct. At best, Crowley's "love" is "attraction" - like "gravity" or "affinity". It always "bothered" me that Hubbard's Tone Scale and concept of ARC had NOTHING to do with with almost ANY version of "love". Though, my main concerns were of love of the "higher" variety.

Hubbard's notions hinge on "agreement" (ARC, where "R" is reality, based SOLELY on "agreement"). A notion like "unconditional love" cares not at all about "agreement", and can be sent out or directed with a clean intention of "well-wishing", regardless what you "get back" ("exchange") or what the recipient agrees with or doesn't agree with.

The whole over-exaggerated importance of "exchange" always bothered me too. Sure, there should be a fair "exchange" in most relationships, but it excludes the notion of "freely sending out with unqualified compassion". Scientology is OBSESSED with "exchange". Especially when the "giving" is TO THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY!

Exchange by Dynamics involves looking at what you give and what you get back on and from each dynamic. Again, where can a notion like "unconditional love" or "selfless compassion" fit in? They can't. And, that is because the Scientology philosophy NEVER involves a notion of "selfless". It is all about "beefing up" the "self". Giving without getting something back is a crime in Scientology. It's viewed as "out-exchange". It's viewed as a form of "out-ethics". But, all "random acts of kindness" ARE "out-exchange" to the card-carrying Scientologist.

:scnsucks:

Wikipedia has a good article on the various definitions of love here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love

I left off the love of platonic friendship... Wikipedia further differentiates between erotic love and romantic love, but I don't remember ever getting into the distinction between the two. Possibly because I was a little kid when we talked about it in Sunday school.

Anywho, I would say that all forms of love (romantic, platonic friendship, familial, and God's) are theoretically possible without reciprocity. Familial love and God's love are generally viewed as unconditional. While friendship and romance usually end up dying without reciprocity, they are, at least temporarily, viable without it.

I guess that it makes it easy for the Co$ to break up families if all relationships are viewed as reciprocal and conditional. Now we know where it came from...

:scnsucks:
 

guanoloco

As-Wased
-snip-

Exchange by Dynamics involves looking at what you give and what you get back on and from each dynamic. Again, where can a notion like "unconditional love" or "selfless compassion" fit in? They can't. And, that is because the Scientology philosophy NEVER involves a notion of "selfless". It is all about "beefing up" the "self". Giving without getting something back is a crime in Scientology. It's viewed as "out-exchange". It's viewed as a form of "out-ethics". But, all "random acts of kindness" ARE "out-exchange" to the card-carrying Scientologist.

:scnsucks:

Thanks for this! I've hunted for the following quote on altruism just because of this post - what's to follow is freaking hilarious!

It's a Yahoo Answers thing where a person asks about altruism in Scientology and a Scientologists answers with a complete and obvious M-U of not knowing what altruism is!

How typical of Scientology - spend decades word clearing and looking up all sorts of definitions and never ever run across a term like altruism. "Me I'm a Scientologists for 24 years" - indeed!

To me, this speaks volumes. Enjoy!

From here:

Is if scientology is rooted in altruism why dont they give out their crap out for free?
charging money for supposed slavation doesn't seem like a selfless act to me.

4 years ago


mckludge2002 mckludge...
Best Answer - Chosen by Voters
It breaks down like this.

First of all it's not "ultruism". Anything you learn in Scientology is only true as long as you have observed for yourself that it is true. In other words Scientology is not a dogmatic religion. You can take and believe in what you want from what you learn.

Here's why they "charge" money for their services. Each church makes it's own money to support itself. Unlike conventional churches Scientology churches are open 7 days a week 365 days a year from a about 9am to 11pm DAILY. Think about the electric bills alone they have to pay. Not only that not all of the churches even own their own buildings and are on lease. So making mothly payments are a must. (Despite what you may have heard the government does not pay these for any church of any religion it's agains the constitution).

Then they have to pay for the materials they sell. These are not free for them. Paper, glue covers, ink shearing etc etc etc the list goes on, for what the publishers themselves need. If you figure this, we can buy about a 20 disc lecture set with a glossary, with transcripts in a beautifly asthetic cover for around 200 dollars. What does the average music CD cost?About 15 - 20, for the sake of math let's just go with 15. 15x20=300. WOW in scientology we just save a whole lot more than 100 dollars for that set of CDs!

So they do charge very reasonable prices for the materials. Diantics costs about 45 or 50 dollars. The new Harry Potter book (about the same amount of pages) is going for about 60 - 65 dollars. Point taken?

Then a percentage of the money goes to the International Association of Scientology (the management church that oversees the opperations of all churchs all of the world, which has it's own liasons in differant locations in the worlds, all of which do not make their own income as they are not service churchs)

THEN they pay their staff. Did you know the staff don't even get paid a whole lot? In the higher echelon churchs where their staff dedicate their whole lifes working for the church make about 50 dollars a week. They are clothed, fed and housed by the church they work for.

The ones in the lower echelon churches actually make a little more than they do as they only dedicate 5+ of their lives. These people are the ones that have to pay, rent morgage etc. But still have to work part time jobs just to make ends meet.

Also the churches provide money for

Narconon (drug rehab program http://www.narconon.org)
Criminon (criminal rehab http://criminon.org/)
Volunteer Ministers (disaster relief www.volunteerministers.org)
The Way to happinness Foundation http://thewaytohappiness.org/
Citizen Commision on Human Rights (cchr.org)

And many many more!

Anyway so as you can see there is a lot that the church has to pay for itself which is why these donations are necessary. Plus the donations are tax deductable so you wind up getting most of it back in the long run.

Hope that does it for you

Cheers!
Source(s):
Me I'm a Scientologist of 24 years


PS You might just see this pop up on the 100 Most Stupid Moments thread!
 

NoName

A Girl Has No Name
I read that and thought, "There is no fucking way I paid $60 for Harry Potter."

So I checked. I bought #7 the day it came out - I was one of those idiots at the store at 12:01 AM (because it pprently wasn't clear to me that Voldemort would die).

$35.

Fail #2 in that quoted post. Unless he bought Harry Potter at the org's markup.
 

guanoloco

As-Wased
I read that and thought, "There is no fucking way I paid $60 for Harry Potter."

So I checked. I bought #7 the day it came out - I was one of those idiots at the store at 12:01 AM (because it pprently wasn't clear to me that Voldemort would die).

$35.

Fail #2 in that quoted post. Unless he bought Harry Potter at the org's markup.

Good call!

How about Fail #3?

As in...Harry fucking Potter and $15 music CDs are sold FOR PROFIT!!!

The Co$ is supposed to be "non profit", as in "not for profit" - hello?

I am completely aware that a non profit needs to operate in the black but the comparison is a joke.



PS. There are many more Fails in the Scientologist's "answer" - can you name a couple?
 

SchwimmelPuckel

Genuine Meatball
<snip>.. because the Scientology philosophy NEVER involves a notion of "selfless". It is all about "beefing up" the "self". Giving without getting something back is a crime in Scientology. It's viewed as "out-exchange". It's viewed as a form of "out-ethics". But, all "random acts of kindness" ARE "out-exchange" to the card-carrying Scientologist.

:scnsucks:
Erhm! - Here I must remind you that we were all expected to hand over all money we could earn, loan and steal.. Without getting a damned thing for it! - Clear and OT, was it!!???

:duh:
 

Gadfly

Crusader
Erhm! - Here I must remind you that we were all expected to hand over all money we could earn, loan and steal.. Without getting a damned thing for it! - Clear and OT, was it!!???

:duh:

As with so much of Scientology there ARE the contradictions. Yeah, from an objective and honest view where it is clear and obvious that Scientology does not deliver either 1) the glorious states of Clear and OT, or 2) a world without war, crime, injustice and insanity, obviously the exchange is "grossly out". It is a ONE-WAY flow of money, time and energy TO Scientology.

But, also, to the person who feels and believes that 1) they HAVE achieved the actual gains or Clear and OT, or that Scientology provides the key to such states, and 2) that Scientology can, does and will create a world without war, crime, injustice and insanity, to THAT person, they see no contradiction and the exchange "is in". Sadly though, the contradictions stay away away only when one remains mired in the DELUSION of Hubbard's paradigm. :omg:
 

Gadfly

Crusader
mckludge2002 mckludge...
Best Answer - Chosen by Voters
It breaks down like this.

First of all it's not "ultruism". Anything you learn in Scientology is only true as long as you have observed for yourself that it is true. In other words Scientology is not a dogmatic religion. You can take and believe in what you want from what you learn.

It kills me when people make the above statement. Yes, in a perfect world, MAYBE, without oppression and control by manipulators, things can be determined as true "only true as long as you have observed for yourself that it is true".

Within the context of the FULL subject of Scientology, including ALL of Hubbard's writings on how to run an organization and expand Scientology, it IS very much a "dogmatic religion". One must conveniently forget or ignore things like "disagreement remedies" where you are coaxed and forced to accept ONLY ONE understanding.

The notion that "Anything you learn in Scientology is only true as long as you have observed for yourself that it is true", is just another of MANY statements made by Hubbard that are directly contradicted by REAL LIFE in Scientology. It is "fluff". It is part of the "bait". It is a nice sounding idea that does NOT play out in real life in Scientology. For instance, try having it NOT be true that Hubbard was a war hero or that Hubbard was a nuclear physicist. Tell others and talk about THAT in Scientology and see what happens TO YOU. There are thousands of such possible instances where there is NO WAY IN HELL that you can have any "truth" other than what the Church foists upon you.

In the Church of Scientology, based exactly on the way it is set up by applying Hubbard's orders and policies, you MUST "accept as true the party line". There is no other possible way. That is the whole purpose of study tech, word clearing, demos, twinning, drilling, endless repetition, and qual "correction". "Correction" exists to "fix" any person who fails to "understand" as you are "supposed to understand Hubbard".

And, if you continue to disagree with Hubbard and/or the Church, you then get things like disagreement remedies or Sec Checks. And, if you persist in that disagreement, you end up in ethics, and eventually the recipient of some ludicrous "justice action" where you may well end up declared and disconnected. For what? For refusing and failing to learn in Scientology, and accept as true, whether you have obsered it or not, the great many ideas, prejudices, and fixed ideas that the whole Scientology system is based upon.

It is just another HUGE contradiction in the theories and practices of Scientology. It is a great idea to live in a world where one can be free to "have things be true only when one has observed that for self". But that freedom and that world does not exist in the theoretical OR practical worlds of Scientology.

The entire Scientology indoctrination system, including training, repetition of KSW #1, study tech, qual, ethics, and justice work together to get any participant to ACCEPT and ADOPT a great many views. If one does not AGREE with these many ideas, one either does not last and fades away from Scientology, or one ends up "in trouble".

It is a cute "theory". It is "make believe" and a pretense that:

"Anything you learn in Scientology is only true as long as you have observed for yourself that it is true. In other words Scientology is not a dogmatic religion. You can take and believe in what you want from what you learn."

Yes, outside of the Church, far away from people like Mike and Marty, that MIGHT be true in some isolated area of the FZ. But, there is great pressure from the DATA ITSELF to enforce various ideas, and minimally, if you disagree and refuse to "have them be true for you too", you will go out of comm with the rest of the group. They won't "like you" (due to the ARC triangle).

Scientology is a brutally dogmatic practice pretending NOT to be dogmatic. :yes:
 

guanoloco

As-Wased
As with so much of Scientology there ARE the contradictions. Yeah, from an objective and honest view where it is clear and obvious that Scientology does not deliver either 1) the glorious states of Clear and OT, or 2) a world without war, crime, injustice and insanity, obviously the exchange is "grossly out". It is a ONE-WAY flow of money, time and energy TO Scientology.

-snipped-

Yeah!

Remember all that tripe about "it's exchange that keeps the bank off the thetan" and you can "manufacture criminals with out-exchange"? All of that implies that you must be very, very careful to maintain "in" exchange in order to not go spinny nuts or cave in and go crim - and yet the official policy letters of Scientology do everything to create a situation where the Co$ is completely out-exchange on all dynamics.

Now do you wonder that the place is a nutjob crim center?
 
It kills me when people make the above statement. Yes, in a perfect world, MAYBE, without oppression and control by manipulators, things can be determined as true "only true as long as you have observed for yourself that it is true"......
Hi Gadfly - have you thought about pasting your full comment on the wiki answers page where the original post came from? It really needs to be shared with the outer world. It is quite a post.

Mimsey.
 

guanoloco

As-Wased
That was a sarcastic "wonder why?"... not a never-been-in "wonder why".

But thanks! ;)

Gotcha, NoName, but then my answer was sarcastic, too. I knew exactly what your "wonder why" was getting at.

Now if I can just find my cherished copy of "Can We Ever Be Friends" I'll send it to you... :coolwink:
 

Gadfly

Crusader
Hi Gadfly - have you thought about pasting your full comment on the wiki answers page where the original post came from? It really needs to be shared with the outer world. It is quite a post.

Mimsey.

Hi Mims. I could only find a Yahoo answers page, I did a little checking, and it seems answers can only be posted for 4 days after the question is posted.

See:

If scientology is rooted in altruism why dont they give out their crap out for free?

If there is somewhere else to post an answer, let me know. Doing a quick search I couldn't find one.
 
Top