What's new

Just speak English, dammit!

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
We've talked a lot about "nomenclature" or cult verbiage or Scn lingo- whatever one would like to call it. So what to do when transitioning away from it? Are there equivalent phrases? I think there are. These are not exact but analogies never are. I still think they'd work, though.



Postulate-- Decision

Greatest Good for Greatest Number -- Doing the right thing

Overt-- Bad or immoral thing/act

Overt Motivator Sequence -- Karma

Pan Determinism -- Tolerance

Secondary (noun) ---Tragedy

Engram --- Accident/physical trauma

Restimatultion/restimulative-- X brings up painful memories

Out 2d ---Unfaithful

2d (as noun) -- significant other

Time/form/event (writing KRs) --- The three "w"s. Who, what, where

Out exchange --- Greedy or "she/he is a taker"

Confront (Verb)--- "Man up" "deal with it" "step up to the plate"

Entheta-- Unpleasantness or even "it's too negative"

DB-- bum/junkie/that guy is fucked up, etc.

OT-- Enlightened being, saint, bodhisattva

Exteriorize -- astral travel/OBE

SP-- sociopath

Tiger-- trouble maker

Doll bodies-- androids, robots

Robotic thinking-- rote thinking

third party-- harmful gossip, talking behind person's back

Drop the body-- die

Etc
 

Free to shine

Shiny & Free
Yes, good idea to get this subject going again.

IMO it is VITAL that word by word you examine scientology jargon and find it's English equivalent. It is argued that in some cases it can't be done, and I agree that with some words it can be difficult - but not impossible. It may take a paragraph to explain the twisted logic of a scientology word! "SP" is one such as behind that word is a whole series of concepts.

The language of scientology binds you to it's way of thinking. And then becomes a "thought stopper".

Yes, just speak English. :biggrin: It becomes easier and easier and can bring amazing realisations on how limited and prison like scientology thinking really is.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
Very true, hon. You know, my Mom (who was a former English teacher and who loved literature) used to really get pissed off when I spouted off Scn jargon. And I was pretty young then with all that enthusiasm and single mindedness that the very young staffers have. But I loved Mom and to keep the peace, I trained myself to use equivalent terms.

So one day I was on course after a long hiatus. (before I left the cult but much later than my stint on staff) I was talking to some students on break and I was just phrasing things normally, and I used a plain English term to describe one of those things Hubbard talks about a lot. And this other student thought I didn't know Scn ( I was retraining on Student Hat, so that I could get in GAT requirements so she didn't know what services I'd taken before) and she was earnestly explaining to me that there was a Scn term and Scn data for what I was discussing. I mean, I think my use of plain English made her think I was a n00b.

I was amused, actually. I tried to explain to her that I had gotten in the habit of not using so much Scn lingo when I could use an ordinary phrase but I don't think she totally related to that.
 

HoraciotheOT8

Patron with Honors
We've talked a lot about "nomenclature" or cult verbiage or Scn lingo- whatever one would like to call it. So what to do when transitioning away from it? Are there equivalent phrases? I think there are. These are not exact but analogies never are. I still think they'd work, though.



Postulate-- Decision

Greatest Good for Greatest Number -- Doing the right thing

Overt-- Bad or immoral thing/act

Overt Motivator Sequence -- Karma

Pan Determinism -- Tolerance

Secondary (noun) ---Tragedy

Engram --- Accident/physical trauma

Restimatultion/restimulative-- X brings up painful memories

Out 2d ---Unfaithful

2d (as noun) -- significant other

Time/form/event (writing KRs) --- The three "w"s. Who, what, where

Out exchange --- Greedy or "she/he is a taker"

Confront (Verb)--- "Man up" "deal with it" "step up to the plate"

Entheta-- Unpleasantness or even "it's too negative"

DB-- bum/junkie/that guy is fucked up, etc.

OT-- Enlightened being, saint, bodhisattva

Exteriorize -- astral travel/OBE

SP-- sociopath

Tiger-- trouble maker

Doll bodies-- androids, robots

Robotic thinking-- rote thinking

third party-- harmful gossip, talking behind person's back

Drop the body-- die

Etc


Perhaps 'nomenclature' is what makes the world go round? In 'terms' of both Good & evil. Right and wrong. Pleasure and pain. Truth and error. That is to say in terms of twins.

Your point is well taken nonetheless, and well spoken.

Horacio

ps: Individual authorship of anything in this world tends to be altogether overrated. And consequently overvalued. The underlying concept being that Consciousness Itself is universally greater than any individual human expression of it (at any given point in time). Hubbard set aside. For the moment. For Scientologists.

As every human being knows, and knows how to know, experience trumps speech.

Every time.

H
 
Last edited:
We've talked a lot about "nomenclature" or cult verbiage or Scn lingo- whatever one would like to call it. So what to do when transitioning away from it? Are there equivalent phrases? I think there are. These are not exact but analogies never are. I still think they'd work, though.



Postulate-- Decision

Greatest Good for Greatest Number -- Doing the right thing

Overt-- Bad or immoral thing/act

Overt Motivator Sequence -- Karma

Pan Determinism -- Tolerance

Secondary (noun) ---Tragedy

Engram --- Accident/physical trauma

Restimatultion/restimulative-- X brings up painful memories

Out 2d ---Unfaithful

2d (as noun) -- significant other

Time/form/event (writing KRs) --- The three "w"s. Who, what, where

Out exchange --- Greedy or "she/he is a taker"

Confront (Verb)--- "Man up" "deal with it" "step up to the plate"

Entheta-- Unpleasantness or even "it's too negative"

DB-- bum/junkie/that guy is fucked up, etc.

OT-- Enlightened being, saint, bodhisattva

Exteriorize -- astral travel/OBE

SP-- sociopath

Tiger-- trouble maker

Doll bodies-- androids, robots

Robotic thinking-- rote thinking

third party-- harmful gossip, talking behind person's back

Drop the body-- die

Etc

Pan determined does not mean tolerant. Tolerance is against scientology cult dogma.
Secondary does not mean tragedy.

BT might be able to be translated as "troll"?
 

Gib

Crusader
We've talked a lot about "nomenclature" or cult verbiage or Scn lingo- whatever one would like to call it. So what to do when transitioning away from it? Are there equivalent phrases? I think there are. These are not exact but analogies never are. I still think they'd work, though.



Postulate-- Decision

Greatest Good for Greatest Number -- Doing the right thing

Overt-- Bad or immoral thing/act

Overt Motivator Sequence -- Karma

Pan Determinism -- Tolerance

Secondary (noun) ---Tragedy

Engram --- Accident/physical trauma

Restimatultion/restimulative-- X brings up painful memories

Out 2d ---Unfaithful

2d (as noun) -- significant other

Time/form/event (writing KRs) --- The three "w"s. Who, what, where

Out exchange --- Greedy or "she/he is a taker"

Confront (Verb)--- "Man up" "deal with it" "step up to the plate"

Entheta-- Unpleasantness or even "it's too negative"

DB-- bum/junkie/that guy is fucked up, etc.

OT-- Enlightened being, saint, bodhisattva

Exteriorize -- astral travel/OBE

SP-- sociopath

Tiger-- trouble maker

Doll bodies-- androids, robots

Robotic thinking-- rote thinking

third party-- harmful gossip, talking behind person's back

Drop the body-- die

Etc

I understand your post here.

When I first started searching the internet for what's being said about Scientology on the internet, this was just the beginning of this year, Jan 2012, when I got the debbie cook facebook message.

Mind you, I was still in, in Jan 2012. I searched lots of websites and my eyes opened wide. It truely was :omg:

But, while starting to research on the internet, why I had to determine who was a PTS, or a squirrel, or who was a SP. By golly Claire, that was a lot to research and connecting of dots. By golly, it was hard, really hard. I know you know. And jeepers, when I read on the internet here on ESMB, and other sites, when somebody spoke the lingo, why I knew they were a scientologists at one one point in time and I could trust what their message was on the posting. Just like you do here, but I understand.

Get over it.

I wish to speak to the lingo to speak a to the lurkers.
 
What it means "in There" and what it really means, out here.



Postulate ---- Demand

Greatest Good for Greatest Number -- Self denial

Overt-- control chip

Overt Motivator Sequence ----proof that you are wrong

Pan Determinism -- Megalomania

Secondary (noun) --- Bait

Engram --- bogeyman

Restimatultion/restimulative-- low blood sugar

Out 2d ---independent thought/action

2d (as noun) -- Ron's competition

Time/form/event (writing KRs) --- Stazi procedural guide.

Out exchange --- Financial sovereignty

Confront (Verb)--- impose will

Entheta-- threat

DB--of no use due to lack of money or refusal to be controlled.

OT-- Maniac

Exteriorize -- go to woo-woo land

SP-- enemy who could win.

Tiger-- LRH loony story thingy

Doll bodies-- Deluded mind content

Robotic thinking-- free will

third party--uncomfortable truth

Drop the body-- die

Etc
 

programmer_guy

True Ex-Scientologist
overt motivator sequence - phony justification of the harmful act, AFTER the fact.
This is why the so-called "motivator" comes after the "overt".

People are rarely truthful about the REAL reason behind the "overt".
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
Oh, and here's the one I thought of the other day that I meant to start this out with:

I think the phrase a lot of people I know use "it is what it is" equates to the Scn phrase "isness".
 
Is that some type of secret code? Lol (between those that know, & those that don't?)

H

QUACK!!!

553752_409302429138085_1897391486_n.jpg
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
I actually sorta like some of the phrases Hubbard coined. But years ago, when my Mom was talking to me about it, I realized that if a personn gets so dependent on Scn-ese that they can't talk to non Scn'ists coherently, that it's not any sort of help to them.

Scn'sts are supposed to be adaptable. It's supposed to be about being cause and communication. But if one cannot tailor one's communications to the situations and people present, then one is not improved or helped by this discipline.

Almost all of us are exes here, right? Or other critics. We know there're problems with Scn. And we know people leaving may have somme changes of thinking and adaptation issues. Being able to phrase things and make oneself understood would be key, IMO.
 

LongTimeGone

Silver Meritorious Patron
Personally I think it's an overt to be putting this DevT on the comm lines of the terminals at ESMB.


LTG
 

programmer_guy

True Ex-Scientologist
Engram - a ridiculous notion that when a person is totally unconscious that their brain/spirit/or whatever is still recording the pain of the event and everything else that is going on around them. AND that the recorded content of these events are accessible to the conscious mind via Dianetic Auditing procedures. This has been proven to be wrong in the 1950s.
 

anonomog

Gold Meritorious Patron
[QqUOTE=Gib;748315]I understand your post here.

When I first started searching the internet for what's being said about Scientology on the internet, this was just the beginning of this year, Jan 2012, when I got the debbie cook facebook message.

Mind you, I was still in, in Jan 2012. I searched lots of websites and my eyes opened wide. It truely was :omg:

But, while starting to research on the internet, why I had to determine who was a PTS, or a squirrel, or who was a SP. By golly Claire, that was a lot to research and connecting of dots. By golly, it was hard, really hard. I know you know. And jeepers, when I read on the internet here on ESMB, and other sites, when somebody spoke the lingo, why I knew they were a scientologists at one one point in time and I could trust what their message was on the posting. Just like you do here, but I understand.



Get over it.



I wish to speak to the lingo to speak a to the lurkers.[/QUOTE]

You have a good point. Like a secret handshake. The writer is understood and the searcher knows he will be understood too. They are bonded by the common understanding and language.
Although it may promote a trust, it is not neccesarily trustworthy.

I am not suggesting that it is a wrong way out. Anything that gets a person to look is good.If the magic of seo brought a searcher here or other non cofs sites, then brilliant.

After four years I could write sci passably, it may take me a bit of time comparing my posts to other writing styles, but nobody would know if it took me two or twenty minutes to post.
What would trip me up would be the gut feel of other posters. Those who are looking beyond the language and actually assessing the content. How far could I take someone down a dodgy path?

Imo if someones gutfeel-bullshit-o-meter gets turned off because someone is speaking the lingo, or is a class x or OT y or had altitude in the cult's hierarchy then the person is still in the cult...without the regging.

The young boy's announcement at Marty's got me thinking again about sci speak. The announcement sounds all official and grown up, but when I auto translated it was just petty and childish and felt like giving him a slap around the ear for being a precocious brat and bullying adults. Yes, I understand what made him, but from the real world perspective using real words that is exactly how I read it. Regardless of his intention. If someone had told him to just speak english, I wonder if he would have published his announcement?

Whoa, I have rambled way passed my reply. Tl;dr speaking the lingo or enjoying the familiarity of isn't a problem imo. Not seeing what is truly being said because some words carry weight and authority is.
 
I actually sorta like some of the phrases Hubbard coined. But years ago, when my Mom was talking to me about it, I realized that if a personn gets so dependent on Scn-ese that they can't talk to non Scn'ists coherently, that it's not any sort of help to them.

Scn'sts are supposed to be adaptable. It's supposed to be about being cause and communication. But if one cannot tailor one's communications to the situations and people present, then one is not improved or helped by this discipline.

Almost all of us are exes here, right? Or other critics. We know there're problems with Scn. And we know people leaving may have somme changes of thinking and adaptation issues. Being able to phrase things and make oneself understood would be key, IMO.

scientologists are not supposed to be adaptable. Hubbshit was against adaptation and thought it was the way of the loser. He thought it was best to make the world do what you want it to do. I think he mentioned that in DMSMH.
 

freethinker

Sponsor
This is a point well taken. If you don't use the Scientology nomenclature in your posting, google just might ignore this place.

Someone who is just out, is going to use Scientology words to google with and will wind up here because we use them.

They are just words, if you can't be exposed to them without getting emotionally twisted up then perhaps you need more work on being done with Scientology because they are just words and don't have any magical powers of invocation.
I understand your post here.

When I first started searching the internet for what's being said about Scientology on the internet, this was just the beginning of this year, Jan 2012, when I got the debbie cook facebook message.

Mind you, I was still in, in Jan 2012. I searched lots of websites and my eyes opened wide. It truely was :omg:

But, while starting to research on the internet, why I had to determine who was a PTS, or a squirrel, or who was a SP. By golly Claire, that was a lot to research and connecting of dots. By golly, it was hard, really hard. I know you know. And jeepers, when I read on the internet here on ESMB, and other sites, when somebody spoke the lingo, why I knew they were a scientologists at one one point in time and I could trust what their message was on the posting. Just like you do here, but I understand.

Get over it.

I wish to speak to the lingo to speak a to the lurkers.
 

Student of Trinity

Silver Meritorious Patron
These Scientologese expressions are not necessarily strict synonyms for standard English expressions, but only analogs. They may only be interchangeable with standard English phrases in the sense that they fill the same roles in speech. Where a wog would use one expression, a Scientologist uses the other. But they do not all mean quite the same things.

For example, 'do the right thing' is a rather vague term. Everyone knows that there are many different theories of what makes something right or wrong. To speak of doing the right thing is non-committal about moral theory, and considers only the bottom line that is common to most moralities: some things are right, some are wrong. But the Scientology concept of the 'greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics' is a very specific moral theory — the totalitarian morality of Scientology.

Scientology morality is a sub-species of pragmatism, according to which actions are right or wrong according to their consequences, rather than to their inherent nature. Pragmatism isn't necessarily a bad morality, but no moral theory seems to be foolproof, and the well-known failure mode of pragmatism is excusing abominable means in the name of noble ends. Scientology deliberately turns this bug into a feature, by replacing the standard pragmatic formula of 'the greatest number of people' with 'the greatest number of dynamics'. Of the eight Scientology 'dynamics', only two — at most three — are real. The majority of the eight are abstractions controlled by Scientology. Scientology pretends that you can directly perceive what an action will entail for 'matter' or 'infinity', in the same way that you can guess its consequences for yourself or your spouse; but of course nobody really knows what it will mean for 'matter' or 'infinity' if I miss a mortgage payment. In practice only Scientology gets to say what 'the greatest good' may happen to be, for those five or six abstract 'dynamics'. So the Scientology version of pragmatism doesn't just have a weakness towards excusing real atrocities for the sake of imaginary goals. It's brazenly designed to do that all the time. That's its killer app.

So Scientology's 'greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics' is really different from 'the right thing'. This term may be one of the worst examples of Scientologese, but it's an example of a broader pattern in what the jargon does. Scientologese terms often seem to have quite significant differences from the analogous wog terms, differences that embody Scientology doctrine. When a Scientologist learns to substitute the Scientologese analogs for standard terms in every linguistic role, they learn to accept Scientology unconsciously. It's subliminal indoctrination.
 
Top