What's new

Logical Mind Shutdown

Anakin Skywalker

Patron with Honors
The following is an excerpt from an article by Steve Pavlino:

Have you ever wondered why religious teachings are invariably mysterious, confusing, and internally incongruous? This is no accident by the way — it’s quite intentional.

By putting forth confusing and internally conflicting information, your logical mind is overwhelmed. You try in vain to integrate such contradictory beliefs, but it can’t be done. The net effect is that your logical mind disengages because it can’t find a pattern of core truth beneath all the nonsense, so without the help of your logical mind, you devolve to a more primitive mode of thinking. Getting you to distrust your own cerebral cortex actually makes you dumber and easier to manipulate and control. Those who try to mentally process such glaring contradictions as coherent truth invariably suffer for it
.”


Some of the mysterious, confusing and internally incongruous ideas I have come across in scientology are:

•In KSW1, where Hubbard says something like “we won't speculate on how I came to rise above the bank,”

•When Hubbard said that he used contact assist tech to find out the OT III data, and then doesn't tell you what he means by this,

•What could the OT III incident possibly be, if it was so powerful as to virtually wipe out an entire population, as well as that of 75 other planets?

•If OT III is such a major incident, why does it not come up on NED?

•In the book Understanding the e-meter, Hubbard says that when standing on a scale whilst running an incident, the scale reading goes up, but he never gives one evidence of this or makes one do the practical drill so you can observe it for yourself,

•What's with all this GPM, 3G Crisscross, Reliable Item stuff?

•The auditing process “From where could you communicate to a (beingness)?” WTF is that supposed to mean?

•How is starting, stopping and changing objects during Objectives meant to make one feel better, and have sudden realizations about the nature of the universe?

•How is observing a book and then a bottle meant to make one feel better, and have sudden realizations about the nature of life?

•How were the conditions formulas derived from watching plants grow?

•How the hell could mathematics possibly be based on the concept of ARC?

•What is Clear? I mean it gets rather confusing, what with their being MEST Clears, Dianetics Clears (which alludes to the fact that their may be scientology Clears), Clears who are not actually Clear etc.

•If this is a spiritual practice, how come are so many of the Sea Org executives so entheta and rude? Why don't they greet people? And why does a “religion” have a military unit anyway?

•“OTs” supposedly having all the power in the world, but in reality seeming to be just the same or worse off than the rest of us,

•Having “the only workable admin tech in the world,” yet at the same time every scientology organization is broke: Class V orgs, Narcanons, Crimanons etc., and they are all running on admin tech,

•What about policies where Hubbard says that scientology will have conquered the Earth in the next few years, when such were written decades ago and scientology is still struggling to survive,

•If my org has “highest ever” stats, and is experiencing “unprecedented expansion,” how come I still see the same old people at reg events, and the number of people on services is still at the same level as usual?

•The book to give new scientologists is DMSMH. Or is it Problems of Work? Or is it really “Public Book number 1”? And what the hell is “Public Book number 1” anyway?

•The best service for new scientologists is the HAS co-audit. Or is it the STCC? Or is it really 5 hours of Book 1 auditing?

•How is Super Power actually going to make clearing of the planet a reality? Nobody ever explained this to me.

•Where did this figure of 10 000 OTs being able to reverse the dwindling spiral come from? Shouldn't this change as the earth's population increases?

•What the hell is “Target 2”?

•How can one appoint kids who have never been involved in business, never been exposed to the real world, or never even had sex, as “ethics officers” to tell one what is right or wrong about the ways of the world?

•How can a Sea Org member who has never done drugs evaluate for one that what he took was not, in fact, LSD?

•If the Purif, Objectives, DRD and OT IV handle drugs, why can't people who took LSD after doing these things join the Sea Org?

•The EP of the Happiness Rundown is something like knowing that things will never get worse, so what about when things do get worse thereafter?

•L. Ron Hubbard, “the world's greatest humanitarian,” recommending such barbaric treatment as isolating all those he think are 1.1 from the rest of humanity, separating people from their spouses and family, labeling ex-Sea Org members as “degraded beings,” and instituting “freeloader” bills on staff members who give selflessly of themselves, working extreme hours, for pay far, far lower than minimum wage; and other such acts.

One day, when I have done absolutely everything to be done in scientology, will I finally understand what Hubbard was saying?!


Are there any others I left out?
 
The following is an excerpt from an article by Steve Pavlino:

Have you ever wondered why religious teachings are invariably mysterious, confusing, and internally incongruous? This is no accident by the way — it’s quite intentional. ...


Ever study quantum mechanics? Not the theory, the actual behavior of measurable phenomena.

Some things are apparently beyond the capability of the human mind to grasp through a strictly rational process. :whistling:

All thought is subjective thought. Many genuine subjective experiences are not reducible to 'objective analysis'.


Mark A. Baker
 

Smilla

Ordinary Human
Ever study quantum mechanics? Not the theory, the actual behavior of measurable phenomena.

Some things are apparently beyond the capability of the human mind to grasp through a strictly rational process. :whistling:

All thought is subjective thought. Many genuine subjective experiences are not reducible to 'objective analysis'.


Mark A. Baker

mmm... I misunderstood the OP. Reply deleted.
 
Last edited:

Sindy

Crusader
The following is an excerpt from an article by Steve Pavlino:

Have you ever wondered why religious teachings are invariably mysterious, confusing, and internally incongruous? This is no accident by the way — it’s quite intentional.

By putting forth confusing and internally conflicting information, your logical mind is overwhelmed. You try in vain to integrate such contradictory beliefs, but it can’t be done. The net effect is that your logical mind disengages because it can’t find a pattern of core truth beneath all the nonsense, so without the help of your logical mind, you devolve to a more primitive mode of thinking. Getting you to distrust your own cerebral cortex actually makes you dumber and easier to manipulate and control. Those who try to mentally process such glaring contradictions as coherent truth invariably suffer for it
.”


Some of the mysterious, confusing and internally incongruous ideas I have come across in scientology are:

•In KSW1, where Hubbard says something like “we won't speculate on how I came to rise above the bank,”

•When Hubbard said that he used contact assist tech to find out the OT III data, and then doesn't tell you what he means by this,

•What could the OT III incident possibly be, if it was so powerful as to virtually wipe out an entire population, as well as that of 75 other planets?

•If OT III is such a major incident, why does it not come up on NED?

•In the book Understanding the e-meter, Hubbard says that when standing on a scale whilst running an incident, the scale reading goes up, but he never gives one evidence of this or makes one do the practical drill so you can observe it for yourself,

•What's with all this GPM, 3G Crisscross, Reliable Item stuff?

•The auditing process “From where could you communicate to a (beingness)?” WTF is that supposed to mean?

•How is starting, stopping and changing objects during Objectives meant to make one feel better, and have sudden realizations about the nature of the universe?

•How is observing a book and then a bottle meant to make one feel better, and have sudden realizations about the nature of life?

•How were the conditions formulas derived from watching plants grow?

•How the hell could mathematics possibly be based on the concept of ARC?

•What is Clear? I mean it gets rather confusing, what with their being MEST Clears, Dianetics Clears (which alludes to the fact that their may be scientology Clears), Clears who are not actually Clear etc.

•If this is a spiritual practice, how come are so many of the Sea Org executives so entheta and rude? Why don't they greet people? And why does a “religion” have a military unit anyway?

•“OTs” supposedly having all the power in the world, but in reality seeming to be just the same or worse off than the rest of us,

•Having “the only workable admin tech in the world,” yet at the same time every scientology organization is broke: Class V orgs, Narcanons, Crimanons etc., and they are all running on admin tech,

•What about policies where Hubbard says that scientology will have conquered the Earth in the next few years, when such were written decades ago and scientology is still struggling to survive,

•If my org has “highest ever” stats, and is experiencing “unprecedented expansion,” how come I still see the same old people at reg events, and the number of people on services is still at the same level as usual?

•The book to give new scientologists is DMSMH. Or is it Problems of Work? Or is it really “Public Book number 1”? And what the hell is “Public Book number 1” anyway?

•The best service for new scientologists is the HAS co-audit. Or is it the STCC? Or is it really 5 hours of Book 1 auditing?

•How is Super Power actually going to make clearing of the planet a reality? Nobody ever explained this to me.

•Where did this figure of 10 000 OTs being able to reverse the dwindling spiral come from? Shouldn't this change as the earth's population increases?

•What the hell is “Target 2”?

•How can one appoint kids who have never been involved in business, never been exposed to the real world, or never even had sex, as “ethics officers” to tell one what is right or wrong about the ways of the world?

•How can a Sea Org member who has never done drugs evaluate for one that what he took was not, in fact, LSD?

•If the Purif, Objectives, DRD and OT IV handle drugs, why can't people who took LSD after doing these things join the Sea Org?

•The EP of the Happiness Rundown is something like knowing that things will never get worse, so what about when things do get worse thereafter?

•L. Ron Hubbard, “the world's greatest humanitarian,” recommending such barbaric treatment as isolating all those he think are 1.1 from the rest of humanity, separating people from their spouses and family, labeling ex-Sea Org members as “degraded beings,” and instituting “freeloader” bills on staff members who give selflessly of themselves, working extreme hours, for pay far, far lower than minimum wage; and other such acts.

One day, when I have done absolutely everything to be done in scientology, will I finally understand what Hubbard was saying?!


Are there any others I left out?

:goodposting::thumbsup:

Oh, I'm sure there are lots more. I think this is an excellent post and an excellent first exercise in critical thinking, to ask all of these questions.

One that you asked, " Where did this figure of 10 000 OTs being able to reverse the dwindling spiral come from? Shouldn't this change as the earth's population increases?" always got me too.

My question was more along these lines, " If this planet is in such dire straits (the future will make the past look like a holiday and all that) and 10,000 auditing on Solo Nots is the answer that will turn it all around then why wasn't it figured out how to make the Bridge cheaper, push EVERYONE through as fast as possible, gather all the staff from every continent, etc. and get them all auditing on Solo Nots ASAP.

No, it's all about the money. That, right there, should tell you that the C of S could care less about any dwindling spiral or the state of mankind.

I will come back to this one. There's lots to look at here. Good post.
 

Lexing Jenkins

Patron with Honors
•In the book Understanding the e-meter, Hubbard says that when standing on a scale whilst running an incident, the scale reading goes up, but he never gives one evidence of this or makes one do the practical drill so you can observe it for yourself.

This one had me hooked for a long time. The whole idea of "pulling in mass (n.)" is what makes you trust the e-meter. During a meter drill on "Which fruit do you like the most?"... you are asked about something nice, liking a fruit :). And somehow this makes you pull in mass that the glorified ohm-meter (e-meter) can measure the resistance of. I never understood how "grapes" could make me pull in mass. Or how "as is-ing" something can magically destroy mass... :duh: Whenever I questioned this concept the reaction was always the same. "Clear your MUs."
 
•In the book Understanding the e-meter, Hubbard says that when standing on a scale whilst running an incident, the scale reading goes up, but he never gives one evidence of this or makes one do the practical drill so you can observe it for yourself.

This one had me hooked for a long time. The whole idea of "pulling in mass (n.)" is what makes you trust the e-meter. During a meter drill on "Which fruit do you like the most?"... you are asked about something nice, liking a fruit :). And somehow this makes you pull in mass that the glorified ohm-meter (e-meter) can measure the resistance of. I never understood how "grapes" could make me pull in mass. Or how "as is-ing" something can magically destroy mass... :duh: Whenever I questioned this concept the reaction was always the same. "Clear your MUs."

The people telling you to clear mu's (hubbard included) had mu's. :yes:

FWIW, the idea of 'mental mass' is a subjective sensation relating to the mind. The emeter as a primitive gsr type device can respond to the bodies reaction to such mental phenomena, although the precise connection between subjective mental sensations and physiological responses remains unclear.

However, 'mental mass' definitely does not equate to the concept of 'mass' as it is used in physics. The sense of weight or heaviness associated with 'mental mass' may in some way bear a likeness of feeling to that associated with physical mass. That in no doubt accounts for the use of the term as a simile. The sensation of mental heaviness is certainly a common occurrence, as for instance one may experience prior to falling asleep.

Nonetheless, it is a mistake to understand the use of the simile as denoting an exact relationship between mental phenomena and physical.

Such is the result of using terms of language referencing physical phenomena also in reference to inherently subjective experience. Context must be used to distinguish.


Mark A. Baker
 

Sindy

Crusader
The people telling you to clear mu's (hubbard included) had mu's. :yes:

FWIW, the idea of 'mental mass' is a subjective sensation relating to the mind. The emeter as a primitive gsr type device can respond to the bodies reaction to such mental phenomena, although the precise connection between subjective mental sensations and physiological responses remains unclear.

However, 'mental mass' definitely does not equate to the concept of 'mass' as it is used in physics. The sense of weight or heaviness associated with 'mental mass' may in some way bear a likeness of feeling to that associated with physical mass. That in no doubt accounts for the use of the term as a simile. The sensation of mental heaviness is certainly a common occurrence, as for instance one may experience prior to falling asleep.

Nonetheless, it is a mistake to understand the use of the simile as denoting an exact relationship between mental phenomena and physical.

Such is the result of using terms of language referencing physical phenomena also in reference to inherently subjective experience. Context must be used to distinguish.


Mark A. Baker

Just checking, did you get the part where Hubbard said that the scale (that which weighs physical mass in the form of physical weight) goes up and down?
 
Ever study quantum mechanics? Not the theory, the actual behavior of measurable phenomena.

Some things are apparently beyond the capability of the human mind to grasp through a strictly rational process. :whistling:

All thought is subjective thought. Many genuine subjective experiences are not reducible to 'objective analysis'.


Mark A. Baker


Re: your 2nd sentence. The OP is not about what cannot be grasped by the human mind. It is about what cannot be grasped, but is claimed to have been grasped by a person who then plays the "you cannot grasp this", card.

And/or it is about that which can be grasped but is presented in a way which does not exemplify clarify or explain, but merely (deliberately) creates confusion.

Your whole post seems itself to create "shutdown". On the first question about quantum physics..... do we have to go and do that right now? Oh, yeah, and we have to remember to specialise in "the actual behaviour of....." Could you recommend a university please?

Is the last sentence of your post relevant to the OP? Are we all supposed to stop attempting to think rationally now? No, just about "many genuine subjective experiences". Oh, but you didn't say that we should stop thinking about them, just that they are not "reducible" (interesting word choice there) to ,,,,,,blah blah blah.:yawn:
 
Last edited:

Smilla

Ordinary Human
Just checking, did you get the part where Hubbard said that the scale (that which weighs physical mass in the form of physical weight) goes up and down?

My sense of certainty has increased and I feel light and airy. Knowing that Hubbard said that, I can be certain that it isn't true. Thanks Ron.
 

apocalyptic

Patron with Honors
...Some things are apparently beyond the capability of the human mind to grasp through a strictly rational process. :whistling:

All thought is subjective thought. Many genuine subjective experiences are not reducible to 'objective analysis'. Mark A. Baker

So Mark, are we accurate in interpreting your above commentary as saying the 27 points made in the opening post are not reducible to objective analysis?

ALL 27? (that's rich).

For example: #1: In KSW1, where Hubbard says something like “we won't speculate on how I came to rise above the bank,”

The Baker Clarification: Many genuine subjective experiences are not reducible to 'objective analysis'.

Or #5: In the book Understanding the e-meter, Hubbard says that when standing on a scale whilst running an incident, the scale reading goes up, but he never gives one evidence of this or makes one do the practical drill so you can observe it for yourself,

The Baker Clarification: Many genuine subjective experiences are not reducible to 'objective analysis'.

How bout #11: How the hell could mathematics possibly be based on the concept of ARC?

The Baker Clarification: Many genuine subjective experiences are not reducible to 'objective analysis'.

ok, here's #13: If this is a spiritual practice, how come are so many of the Sea Org executives so entheta and rude? Why don't they greet people? And why does a “religion” have a military unit anyway?

The Baker Clarification: Many genuine subjective experiences are not reducible to 'objective analysis'.

'Come on man', you are an intellectual genius (in some circles) Mark. Help us out here.

Here's an easy one for you to explain.

# 27:L. Ron Hubbard, “the world's greatest humanitarian,” recommending such barbaric treatment as isolating all those he think are 1.1 from the rest of humanity, separating people from their spouses and family, labeling ex-Sea Org members as “degraded beings,” and instituting “freeloader” bills on staff members who give selflessly of themselves, working extreme hours, for pay far, far lower than minimum wage; and other such acts.

Is 'that' really covered in your clarification: Many genuine subjective experiences are not reducible to 'objective analysis' claim? Or, are those things 'not real scientology'?

Apocalyptic
 
... Oh, yeah, and we have to remember to specialise in "the actual behaviour of....." Could you recommend a university please?

Theories come and go, the behavior of physical phenomena is the important part. In qm 'unreasonable behavior' is the result of the measurable phenomena. It is not a product of the theory which seeks to explain it.

Try these, they aim to provide simple non-technical explanations:

http://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Enigma-Physics-Encounters-Consciousness/dp/019517559X

http://www.amazon.com/QED-Strange-Theory-Light-Matter/dp/0691024170

http://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Physics-Dummies-Steven-Holzner/dp/0470381884



... Are we all supposed to stop attempting to think rationally now?

Not at all. For myself application of reason & logic is a primary occupation & pleasure. I certainly recommend there use to others. However, such are things are tools of understanding and as such they have definite limits to their useful application. Moreover, those limits extend both to application within the physical realm (e.g. qm) and even more so to that of subjective phenomena. The latter encompass both mental & spiritual phenomena as well as those aspects of religion which touch upon them. It's an area where reason can only shed at best a partial light.


Mark A. Baker
 
So Mark, are we accurate in interpreting your above commentary as saying the 27 points made in the opening post are not reducible to objective analysis? ...

No. I did not address the 27 points. My remarks addressed the assumption which was stated at the start of the article. That assumption is flawed. That reflects on the subsequent analysis, but it doesn't necessarily contradict the individual propositions. It merely undermines the arguments made in support of them.

Your conclusion with regard my post is also flawed due to excessive reliance on your own assumptions. Hence so is the remainder of your post.


Mark A. Baker
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
No. I did not address the 27 points. My remarks addressed the assumption which was stated at the start of the article. That assumption is flawed. That reflects on the subsequent analysis, but it doesn't necessarily contradict the individual propositions. It merely undermines the arguments made in support of them.

Your conclusion with regard my post is also flawed due to excessive reliance on your own assumptions. Hence so is the remainder of your post.
Mark A. Baker


How does one explain Baker's posts such as this one?

See OP for perfect description...

“Have you ever wondered why religious teachings are invariably mysterious, confusing, and internally incongruous? This is no accident by the way — it’s quite intentional."
 

Petey C

Silver Meritorious Patron
...

Some of the mysterious, confusing and internally incongruous ideas I have come across in scientology are:

•If this is a spiritual practice, how come are so many of the Sea Org executives so entheta and rude? Why don't they greet people? And why does a “religion” have a military unit anyway?

Are there any others I left out?

They're all fantastic questions and should be put on the new XSCN RD. It's free to all comers!

Another question: why is Scientology, which claims to be the only hope for mankind and the most ethical group on the planet, so ready to cheat, subvert, lie, harrass, brutalise and harangue, even when they get caught with their pants down? Why can ordinary Scientologists not see the inherent contradiction between the talk and the walk?
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
• How is Super Power actually going to make clearing of the planet a reality? Nobody ever explained this to me.


lolol

I love that one!

EXPLANATION: So....we build a big building in Clearwater and some people eventually will go inside that building. When they come out of that building, planetary clearing becomes a reality. Not before they come out, however. But after they come out, they will clear the planet. I don't know how to make it any simpler! For God's sake, don't make it complicated, alright?
 

Megalomaniac

Silver Meritorious Patron
10 Reasons You Should Never Attend A Workshop At An Airport Hotel

The following is an excerpt from an article by Steve Pavlino:

StevePavlina.com/Personal Development For Smart People/10 Reasons You Should Never Have A Religion

“Have you ever wondered why religious teachings are invariably mysterious, confusing, and internally incongruous?

Wonder no more, smart people. Steve's got the answer right here.

This is no accident by the way — it’s quite intentional.

By putting forth confusing and internally conflicting information,
your logical mind is overwhelmed. You try in vain to integrate such contradictory beliefs, but it can’t be done. The net effect is that your logical mind disengages because it can’t find a pattern of core truth beneath all the nonsense, so without the help of your logical mind, you devolve to a more primitive mode of thinking. Getting you to distrust your own cerebral cortex actually makes you dumber and easier to manipulate and control. Those who try to mentally process such glaring contradictions as coherent truth invariably suffer for it.

Anakin, your point is well made. And Steve's explanation actually made sense to me. But Steve, with his standard 100% lack of any specific research data, was giving me a deja vu "am I reading Dianetics?" feeling. :unsure: And then, my logical mind disengaged. Or maybe it was my reactive mind, or a misunderstood word. :confused2: And I devolved, and needed some smilies to help me think. :yes:
 
Last edited:

MrNobody

Who needs merits?
lolol

I love that one!

EXPLANATION: So....we build a big building in Clearwater and some people eventually will go inside that building. When they come out of that building, planetary clearing becomes a reality. Not before they come out, however. But after they come out, they will clear the planet. I don't know how to make it any simpler! For God's sake, don't make it complicated, alright?

"Build it and they will come" or so they say. Oops, that's what HE said. He didn't specify who will come though, AFAIK.

So now that the building exists, who will come? And when? And why?
 
Top