Loyalists of The Tech

Mick Wenlock

Admin Emeritus (retired)
There is a Chopin Prelude (in E minor) that most pianists learn early on, as it is not technically difficult, and is fun to play. I was listening to the radio the other day and heard a pianon concerto, where the opening notes of the melody were exactly the same (but in a different rhythm) as the Chopin Prelude.....I later found out that it was written by a contemporary of Chopin, that Chopin was intimately familiar with this composer's work, and the piano concerto pre-dated the prelude. Should I think any less of Chopin?

do you happen to recall what the the other piece was and by whom?
 

everfree

Patron Meritorious
People need to stop this stupid and misguided need to have anything be CONSISTENT. Reality is often not consistent, and people who feel this need for "things to be all good" or "all bad", need to examine and learn to just what degree your own thinking mind is failing to serve you well and accurately. Consistency is an IDEA, and ONLY an idea, and those of you who feel the need to force this idea onto reality need to wake up and notice just what it is that you are doing.

As I said earlier, just as Michael Jackson was brilliant in certain ways, he was also a wreck in other ways. Geez, even Adolph Hitler came up with the idea of the "people's car" - the now widespread Volkswagon. Absolutes don't exist anywhere. Nothing is equally good or bad in all regards.

Look at EACH SPECIFIC, if you are capable of that (and most aren't), and judge accordingly, without ANY association with or to related yet non-germane specifics.
...

Dislike what is bad, and what is harmful to people. There is much. It is NOT minor. It is what it is.

But, don't dislike, and even like and admire, what is good and valuable. There is much. It is NOT minor. It is what it is.

But, for those with little or no ability to differentiate, this will remain quite impossible.

I don't feel like admiring any good that might be in Scn because in the end Hubbard didn't value that good himself except as bait to entrap and enslave.

Yay, there's a tone scale! Too bad it's used to enforce actions, enforce emotional reactions, and marginalize those who don't act as Hubbard decreed to be "sane" or "valuable".

Hurray for the ARC triangle. Now we know we can use communication of a brutal sort to bring about a severe reality adjustment.

Yay "greatest good for the greatest number of the eight dynamics" - giving all your money and effort to the church as a slave is always the greatest good, no matter the destruction caused to the individuals involved.

I think I can differentiate quite well enough to be able to tell what ~could~ be used beneficially and what is straight out and out enslavement. But, why?

When I first got out, it was mostly because I had seen enough of CofS top to bottom to know that it was exploitive, abusive and corrupt beyond compare to anything else I had encountered in my life.

I had to make my mind up about the "tech" too. Should I continue exploring it outside CofS, whether independently or as a free zoner? After giving it much thought I came to my conclusion. I tried to picture myself going in session, and in session I would have to be asking myself - did L Ron Hubbard develop this particular process in his continued quest to enslave his followers, meaning me?

Who could possibly make gain like that?

And in the end, it doesn't go anywhere. Hubbard himself died alone and probably crazy, his wife having been in jail, one son a suicide if not murdered, another son hated him, a daughter from an early marriage disowned... There are no perfect memories, no magical OT powers, no one has broken the cycle of birth and death if it even exists, no one has reached total freedom or native state if that exists.

If you want to spend your time sifting out "the good" in Scn be my guest, but don't be too surprised if others don't share your enthusiasm for all that awesome goodness. No offense intended.
 

Moonchild

Patron with Honors
I don't think any one should think any less of Chopin. If people liked his work before they knew that an earlier composer wrote a similar melody, why should they now not like it if they found out an earlier similar melody was written by another which Chopin had probably heard.

It was very common in classical music and probably in jazz as well for one great composer to write "theme and variations" on the work of another great composer. In jazz and classical, one performing artist might extemporaneously create and perform variations on a theme of another great artist. Usually these types of works are tributes from one composer or performer to another.
Lkwdblds

Quite so;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5y7nJL1hpUU

Vaughan Williams' variations on a theme from Thomas Tallis; the original tune was called 'Why fumeth in Fight?'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jdso4VZok1E

Barry Manilow...'Could it be Magic'.

:)
 

AnonyMary

Formerly Fooled - Finally Free
Perhaps others do not share this opinion?

Another thought - perhaps "ultimate destruction and power for evil" is the true end of such creations - to me, this does not mean that someone couldn't temporarily use the creation for a worthwhile purpose somewhere along the line.

An example would be in weaponry. Some weapons are undeniably created for evil reasons. This doesn't preclude a "good guy" from acquiring and using the weapon to a positive purpose (say to shoot some "bad guys" who attack), even if the weapon eventually destroys all humanity or leads to total power for the creators.

Can Scientology be used that way? Well, I have met drug addicts who were a mess before doing Narconon and now are very nice, decent people. Are they OT? Can they move mountains by sheer will? No. Is Narconon a front for recruiting new members for Scientology? Yes. Are these people's lives better? I say yes.

Ok, Gollum.
 

Div6

Crusader
Sound vibration is not as old as this universe. It only is possible on planets which have a gaseous atmosphere. Apparently, this is fairly rare in this universe. The first planet which had a gaseous atmosphere which was breathable by life and developed intelligent life forms undoubtedly had to occur quite a long period from when the universe was initially formed. Maybe if you wrote that music is as old as man's history that would be good.
Lkwdblds
Good point. It communicates better.


Middle "C" is 440 cps, not A but this point is not important.
Lkwdblds

???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A440


In your music analogy you are saying many creative types implemented the many advancements of music and of course this is true, when you bridge to the Physical Universe analogy you say we ALL potentially created it. I think I get the gist of what you mean but perhaps you could clarify how the music comments lead to the analogy regarding the Physical Universe.

What confuses me is that in the music analogy, many creative types, already dwelling within the Physical Universe created improvements to music but in the Physical Universe you use ALL and not just creative types plus in the musical example, the creative types are living here but in the Physical Universe analogy, since the we are talking of its creation, we were ALL outside the physical universe before we created it. Maybe I am splitting hairs or don't fully understand your point but a clarification would be nice.

Lkwdblds

I was trying to keep this narrow to stay on topic to the original thread re: tracing things back to "first cause", and not go off into metaphysical discussions re: the origin of the universe, and the relation of Life to it thereof.

I used creative types in the music example, and probably should also in the other, it can just be that some life units fall away from creating and just obsessively agree, dis-agree or cease creating all together. Sorry for any confusion.
 

Alanzo

Bardo Tulpa
There is a Chopin Prelude (in E minor) that most pianists learn early on, as it is not technically difficult, and is fun to play. I was listening to the radio the other day and heard a pianon concerto, where the opening notes of the melody were exactly the same (but in a different rhythm) as the Chopin Prelude.....I later found out that it was written by a contemporary of Chopin, that Chopin was intimately familiar with this composer's work, and the piano concerto pre-dated the prelude. Should I think any less of Chopin?

Did Chopin make his musicians sign billion year, no pay, indentured servitude contracts to play that song for him?

Did Chopin ruthlessly sue anyone else who played it without paying him royalties?

Did Chopin charge his listeners 100s of thousands of dollars to listen to his music, driving them into bankruptcy?

Did Chopin Fair Game other contemporary composers, and listeners who did not remain totally loyal to only him?

This use of Chopin and Beethoven and others as an analogy for the purpose justifying continued allegiance to a con man is FALSE.

Hubbard was not a musical composer.

He was a CULT LEADER who tried everything he could imagine over more than 3 decades to enslave his followers and take everything from them that they had of value in life.

A completely different thing.

Stop it.
 

bts2free

Patron with Honors
Did Chopin make his musicians sign billion year, no pay, indentured servitude contracts to play that song for him?

Did Chopin ruthlessly sue anyone else who played it without paying him royalties?

Did Chopin charge his listeners 100s of thousands of dollars to listen to his music, driving them into bankruptcy?

Did Chopin Fair Game other contemporary composers, and listeners who did not remain totally loyal to only him?

This use of Chopin and Beethoven and others as an analogy for the purpose justifying continued allegiance to a con man is FALSE.

Hubbard was not a musical composer.

He was a CULT LEADER who tried everything he could imagine over more than 3 decades to enslave his followers and take everything from them that they had of value in life.

A completely different thing.

Stop it.

Alanzo, You took the words right out of my mouth! :thumbsup:
 

lkwdblds

Crusader
I thought it was probably Hummel.


Its good to find someone who knows about Hummel, Johan Nepomuk Hummel 1778-1837. I figured that it was probably a Hummel piece which Chopin heard.

Hummel was a child prodigy like Mozart and his father brought him to Mozart in Vienna and asked if Mozart would give him lessons. Mozart was so impressed with Hummel that he took him into his house and had him live there and train with him fo free for 2 years. Hummel was initially extremely successful and carried the banner of Mozart's delicate style of music after Mozart died. For a brief period, Hummel was considered one of the finest, if not the finest, musician in Europe. When Beethoven came along, he eclipsed Hummel. Hummel was a proponent of the Vienese classical school of Mozart and Beethoven eventually developed a more powerful and bombastic Romantic style of music which totally eclipsed Hummel. Nevertheless, the two men were friendly rivals and remained friendly even after Beethoven eclipsed Hummel. Chopin was an admirer of Hummel.

For anyone who is interested, Winton Marselas plays solo in the Hummel trumpet concerto on youtube. That piece is a fine example of how good Hummel's music can be especially the 3rd movement. Great enough to be a great master in almost any other musical period, Hummel became squeezed out of musical immortality living through the period where first Beethoven and then Chopin reached their heights. He was more than very talented but not great enough to compete with those two. I guess people like him are refered to as "near greats."...............Lkwdblds
 

lkwdblds

Crusader
Good post but ...

Did Chopin make his musicians sign billion year, no pay, indentured servitude contracts to play that song for him?

Did Chopin ruthlessly sue anyone else who played it without paying him royalties?

Did Chopin charge his listeners 100s of thousands of dollars to listen to his music, driving them into bankruptcy?

Did Chopin Fair Game other contemporary composers, and listeners who did not remain totally loyal to only him?

This use of Chopin and Beethoven and others as an analogy for the purpose justifying continued allegiance to a con man is FALSE.

Hubbard was not a musical composer.

He was a CULT LEADER who tried everything he could imagine over more than 3 decades to enslave his followers and take everything from them that they had of value in life.

A completely different thing.

Stop it.

Alanzo, I think your post is well written and the conclusions are valid. My only disagreement is that the Chopin example was only bringing up the concept that just because another composer developed something similar to a Chopin piece, before Chopin's time, that, in and of itself was not sufficient to cause one not to listen to and appreciate Chopin.

As far as Hubbard goes, the analogy would be that just because some earlier investigators found pieces of Hubbard's tech before he did, that, in and of itself, would not be sufficient to ignore any validity in Hubbard's work.

The other items which you list in your quoted post are another matter. They do provide grounds for someone to drop allegiance to Hubbard's work. A lot of people have chosen to ignore Hubbard's work because of the things which you state above and other destructive things he engaged in. Some others still have allegiance for the parts of Hubbard's tech which they feel are workable, despite all the items which you cite, and they have the right to make that choice.
Lkwdblds
 

Div6

Crusader
Did Chopin make his musicians sign billion year, no pay, indentured servitude contracts to play that song for him?

Did Chopin ruthlessly sue anyone else who played it without paying him royalties?

Did Chopin charge his listeners 100s of thousands of dollars to listen to his music, driving them into bankruptcy?

Did Chopin Fair Game other contemporary composers, and listeners who did not remain totally loyal to only him?

This use of Chopin and Beethoven and others as an analogy for the purpose justifying continued allegiance to a con man is FALSE.

Hubbard was not a musical composer.

He was a CULT LEADER who tried everything he could imagine over more than 3 decades to enslave his followers and take everything from them that they had of value in life.

A completely different thing.

Stop it.

I'd like to indicate your BPC on this.

I am not justifying continued allegiance to anyone, Chopin, Beethoven, Hubbard or even you.

I was just commenting on the futility of tracing things back to "prime mover".

Why you added all of this other stuff in I don't know.
 

uniquemand

Unbeliever
I have no "allegiance" to any piece or whole tech. I simply have an interest, and apply pieces that I know work when there is a situation which they would apply to. I don't care whether or not Hubbard was the original author, I only care about the use of the method and it's effectiveness.
 

lkwdblds

Crusader
Well state position!

I don't feel like admiring any good that might be in Scn because in the end Hubbard didn't value that good himself except as bait to entrap and enslave.

Yay, there's a tone scale! Too bad it's used to enforce actions, enforce emotional reactions, and marginalize those who don't act as Hubbard decreed to be "sane" or "valuable".

Hurray for the ARC triangle. Now we know we can use communication of a brutal sort to bring about a severe reality adjustment.

I use the ARC triangle and the tone scale in sales and social situations and find them helpful.

Yay "greatest good for the greatest number of the eight dynamics" - giving all your money and effort to the church as a slave is always the greatest good, no matter the destruction caused to the individuals involved.

Once a person is out of C of S, this can be used to good effect.

I think I can differentiate quite well enough to be able to tell what ~could~ be used beneficially and what is straight out and out enslavement. But, why?

When I first got out, it was mostly because I had seen enough of CofS top to bottom to know that it was exploitive, abusive and corrupt beyond compare to anything else I had encountered in my life.

I had to make my mind up about the "tech" too. Should I continue exploring it outside CofS, whether independently or as a free zoner? After giving it much thought I came to my conclusion. I tried to picture myself going in session, and in session I would have to be asking myself - did L Ron Hubbard develop this particular process in his continued quest to enslave his followers, meaning me?

You gave it a lot of thought and reached a conclusion that works for you. Who can knock that?

Who could possibly make gain like that?

And in the end, it doesn't go anywhere. Hubbard himself died alone and probably crazy, his wife having been in jail, one son a suicide if not murdered, another son hated him, a daughter from an early marriage disowned... There are no perfect memories, no magical OT powers, no one has broken the cycle of birth and death if it even exists, no one has reached total freedom or native state if that exists.

If you want to spend your time sifting out "the good" in Scn be my guest, but don't be too surprised if others don't share your enthusiasm for all that awesome goodness. No offense intended.

Everfree - I think you have written a very good post telling why you would not bother to look for truths in Hubbard's tech. Your post is consistent and follows a logical thread. Basically, you are saying that YOU CAN differentiate enough to tell the good from the bad but "why bother?" You allow others the right to sift out "the good" in Scn but point out to those who do so that there will be others who do not share their enthusiasm. This is the best post I have seen so far representing your point of view.
Lkwdblds
 

Patricia Curtis

Patron with Honors
Ok, Gollum.
em-chuckling.gif


(Lovin' this thread, John.)
 

everfree

Patron Meritorious
Everfree - I think you have written a very good post telling why you would not bother to look for truths in Hubbard's tech. Your post is consistent and follows a logical thread. Basically, you are saying that YOU CAN differentiate enough to tell the good from the bad but "why bother?" You allow others the right to sift out "the good" in Scn but point out to those who do so that there will be others who do not share their enthusiasm. This is the best post I have seen so far representing your point of view.
Lkwdblds

Thank you. I at least initially felt it far more beneficial to myself to ~rid~ myself of any and all Hubbardian ideas, to strip myself down to, well... myself. My ideas, my perceptions, my truths. It took me some time to do so. Maybe I'm still not done but I feel more myself than ever.

If others feel the need to further explore Scientology, yes that's ok with me as long as they're not hurting others. So far as I'm concerned, people are welcome to believe whatever they'd like so long as they're not hurting others - or to a lesser degree themselves. It's the actions and results of those actions that most concern me.

I know perfectly well that some will, after spending however much time, money, and effort will never give up their belief in Scientology (and it ~is~ a belief system, regardless of protestations that it is not) be unwilling to give it up completely. That's fine with me. Personally, I don't think it's the healthiest choice and couldn't decide that myself, but I don't demand everyone agree with my views, they have their lives to lead as they see fit. I wouldn't take that away from anyone.

I can even take it a step further: not only can I let them do so but I can point out that if one were going to further explore Hubbardian Scientology, the way one could stay out of the multitude of traps laid into Scientology by Hubbard would be to

1. Keep in mind that you always have a choice of what part of Scientology to use or apply.
2. Use that part that truly brings about "solutions where everyone wins" and the actual "greatest good for the greatest dynamics" rather than the many moral shortcuts taken by Hubbard, Miscavige and the CofS under their direction.

For example, instead of pressuring SO members to have abortions so that they can continue producing, create the absolute best childcare possible that is so good that others will want to join and also produce. Would that not be the actual "greatest good"?

Personally, I think Hubbard was wrong - an enslaver of men, devoted to personal aggrandizement and enrichment. Instead of letting him remain wrong, make him right by choosing what aspects of Scientology to apply to bring about actual freedom. Some Scientologists in my experience did a pretty ok job at this, at least in the outer reaches less affected by the SO and management.

I think it could be done, and if CofS is to continue to exist it must be done. But that's someone else's fight, not mine. I don't care if CofS or Scientology continue to exist at all. I've seen enough of Scientology to know that it doesn't go anywhere I wish to be.

Not because I can't differentiate the bad from the good, but because I have no reason to. Feel free to have your own reason.
 

Rmack

Van Allen Belt Sunbather
whew!

Well, I almost got through that whole thread. I just have to comment, though.

Bts2free, I like your thread starter;

One tech to rule them all!
One tech to find them!
One tech to bring them all,
And in the Darkness, bind them!

And, just off the top of my head, Gadfly, your evals were very penetrating.

I think it comes down to this; Whether or not the 'tech' works, or rather if it produces any effects at all, is based on the premise that people, through their own efforts, helping each other, can achieve immortality as spiritual beings.

This is quite contrary and opposite to what the Bible says, of course. That tome clearly says that we are lost, and are in dire need of supernatural intervention. I'm sure most of you know where this goes.

These two views are illustrated very aptly in the 'separating of the Sheep and the Goats' in the last sections of said book.

Goats are very willfull, and very difficult to heard or train. Sheep, on the other hand, will follow a Shepard unquestioningly. Get it? One word for this is faith.

For instance, I think it's quite conceited, to put it mildly, to think that you can contact and control 'body thetans'. I mean, if there are other spiritual beings around, then they are all supposed to be dumbed down way more than us, even though they can apparently operate without bodies, which btw, is the friggin' GOAL of what you are trying to do?

At the top of this cult, the ultimate explanation is that we aren't gods able to just do what ever we please with or without bodies because we have all these degraded beings messing with us. And they are ALL from Laffy's bad science fiction plot. Puh-lezzz!

What if there are indeed spiritual beings that can operate without bodies, but they are playing you like a big fat piano if you let them? By doing, say, hours of talking to them on your handy-dandy bt communication device?

It's not whether the 'tech' makes you have a better opinion of yourself or not, it's your whole world view that's important here.



.
 
Last edited:

uniquemand

Unbeliever
Well, I disagree that the whole thing is about two people helping each other come to understand themselves as immortal spiritual beings. I think it's about a person coming to terms with their experience that they can make use of, rather than being used by their experience. I don't share the spiritual orientation of scientologists. I was always in it for the methods, rather than the religion.
 

Ladybird

Silver Meritorious Patron
For example, instead of pressuring SO members to have abortions so that they can continue producing, create the absolute best childcare possible that is so good that others will want to join and also produce. Would that not be the actual "greatest good"?

I tried Everfree, and I was not the only one who cared and tried to make the Sea Org what we all thought it was and should be.


I got kicked to the curb and declared for standing up and speaking out about abuses of the children and staff, especially the abortions. I was ordered to "handle" my staff who were pregnant to get abortions and divorces. I not only refused, I gave some of them a week off as I was shocked to find out that many had not seen their families for over 10 years. (I am also happy to report that none of those children were aborted and 8 of the 10 parents involved are now out of the cult. Sadly one couple and their daughter went back to Flag).

I had already turned around an order to cancel family time into a program to handle the QI and got all my staff together to cover for family time for the staff that had kids. We all covered each others posts and took each others kids on "libs" (Liberty=day off) to the beach and movies.

I had all the references from HCOBs, HCOPLs, LRH books and tapes, every thing I could find that Hubbard ever said about families, children, marriage, abortion, 2nd Dynamic, all of it!

I have many of the "Things that shouldn't be" reports and KRs I wrote and commendations from my staff at that time. My Comm-ev (Committee of Evidence is scientologies fake kangaroo court "Court Martial") even agreed with me, but they were sent to ethics for not declaring me and I was declared anyway by Bittie Miscavige and her sister Griffee Blythe.(who went on LOA to take care of her own grandchildren when her son died (rumored suicide).)

Bittie Miscavige said to me when I was pregnant and under a non-enturbulation order (under house arrest and not allowed to talk to anyone except the MAA) and I quote: "Your husband will leave you if you refuse to have an abortion. Your husband wants you to have an abortion. Your husband will never leave the Sea Org."

Well fuck you Bittie! I am a grandmother now and I am still happily married to my husband.

How do you sleep at night? I hope you don't.

I will reconsider if you grow a pair and stand up and tell the truth.

BTW Bittie, where is your sister-in-law Shelly Miscavige?
 
Top