Mathison spots Hubbard's M.O.

SchwimmelPuckel

Genuine Meatball
Simply because I didn't see it as being in trance.

Yes, you could argue that it produces a state of reduced conciousness. But that is what you would expect. You actually want it to be DOING something. It's not like you would be running around sleep walking and could not remember anything what happened afterwards. You are still in control of yourself and you get to read the references first, at least when you co-audit, and you know where you are. So no, I did not feel somebody is putting me into a trance state.
.. There's the effects that we can all observe scientologists to do.. Even true blue and mesmerized scientologists can observe it: Scientologists 'willingly' pay all they can earn, and loan, and sometimes even steal, to get more 'auditing'. They 'accept' an 'ethical' obligation to abandon freinds, family and even their own kids for getting more 'auditing'...

Well, if Coca Cola's marketing were that effective we would call it hypnotism.. Those of us that were not hypnotized, that is.

:eyeroll:
 

Techless

Patron Meritorious
I think the site :
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Secrets/E-Meter/index.html
has the most comprehensive info base on the emeter. While some info may be outdated, or is a bit too subjective, (and there are some dead links and such now), it is a great resource.
I think Dave T's entire site is a great info base for everything Scn, especially the upper level stuff.

I think there's has been way too much significance put on the darn e-meter thing really. It's a very simple electronic circuit. But then again, people still buy magic eight balls too, so whatever.
 

Techless

Patron Meritorious
Well Balthasar if you don't like the word hypnosis or have some disagreement with it, would you agree that at least there is a control and direction of attention and thus external manipulation of focus which also involves a relinquishment of self control? What do we have then? And from there? Do we get the subject accepting/transplanting data and or control that is accepted, per the PR that such acceptance will benefit him/her and subsequent assertion of that in success stories. I think some would call that externally initiated self-hypnosis, perhaps. And has the person now, become programmed and if so by whom?
Definition of Scientology 666. the knowing or unknowing manipulation of minds and the will of souls (for the entertainment, and enslavement by, a diabolically lost soul?

Sound like school or church - in childhood - to me, or anything else I've ever had to or decided on my own to learn. All of (my bolded words) above, always had these things there acting upon me. Nothing special about it in Scn.
 

Loohan

Am I Mettaya?
The problem with auditing, in terms of stuff that happens outside consciousness, is what's called "the transference". Trances of all kinds can happen at movies, while having sex, watching TV, listening to music: essentially, anytime you are passively receptive. Trances, IMO, are not the problem. The problem is transference, which binds you to the orgs and to Hubbard/your auditor increasingly, regardless of your analytical realization that something is wrong.

I think it is pointed out in "Messiah or Madman", that one is always pressured to be on course, training, when not in session. That is, you get keyed out in session; something big and ugly is GONE and you feel great.:happydance:
There is now this big empty spot in your psyche just waiting to be filled with something new and shiny. So you do the pro-survival thing and go on course.

And a lot of the stuff on the courses might also be rewarding and empowering and fun.

But at the same time...:screwy:
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
The lower Bridge, I'd agree, is not dangerous in itself. The danger is only that the person comes to trust the auditor and the Church more than they trust their own judgment and intuition. This trust and the "wins" from session are then abused to have the person by more and more unnecessary services, some of which ARE dangerous (implant crap or anything else which the Church has decided to keep confidential because it exposes their racket).

Hypnosis is not dangerous, inherently. Abuse is dangerous. Since hypnosis can be abused, many people want hypnosis stopped, even when it is not being abused.

Interesting, uniquemand. I think the danger of the Scientology Bridge includes a misplacement of trust, and you certainly raise a good point about trusting the auditor and other Scientology authorities more than one's own knowledge, judgment and intuition. This aspect of Scientology abuse, "their racket," starts with first contact, not with the upper levels. The disseminator finds someone with a problem or ruin which s/he hasn't been able to solve, and then the disseminator sells Scientology as the solution, the authority for the mind, etc. (Ref. Tom Cruise video.)

Also, I don't know who wants hypnosis stopped, even when it is not being abused. I think that would be an unreasonable goal or approach.

Preclears, however, MUST trust the auditor and auditing environment, according to the basic laws of auditing. And auditors, being dedicated to Scientology, are universally untrustworthy.

Hubbard said:

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 30 APRIL 1969​

Remimeo
Dianetics Checksheet

AUDITOR TRUST​

A pc tends to be able to confront to the degree that he or she feels safe.

If the pc is being audited in an auditing environment that is unsafe or prone to interruption his or her confront is greatly lowered and the result is a reduced ability to run locks, secondaries and engrams and to erase them.

If the auditor’s TRs are rough and his manner uncertain or challenging, evaluative or invalidative, the pc’s confront is reduced to zero or worse.
This comes from a very early set of laws (Original Thesis):

Auditor plus pc is greater than the bank,
Auditor plus bank is greater than the pc,
Pc minus auditor is less than the bank.​

(By “bank” is meant the mental image picture collection of the pc. It comes from computer technology where all data is in a “bank”.)

The difference between auditors is not that one has more data than another or more tricks. The difference is that one auditor will get better results than another due to his stricter adherence to procedure, better TRs, more confident manner, and closer observance of the Auditor’s Code.

No “bedside manner” is required or sympathetic expression. It’s just that an auditor who knows his procedures and has good TRs inspires more confidence. The pc doesn’t have to put his attention on or cope with the auditor and feels safer and so can confront his bank better.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Hubbard, L. (1969, 30 April) Auditor Trust. Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology (1991 ed., Vol VIII, p. 384) Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.
[/size]

Hubbard pronounced that confidence is key to the "success" of the auditing process. When that confidence is misplaced in the auditor and organization, (and how can it not be?) we are dealing with a confidence scam. Even Aleister Crowley recognized Hubbard to be an ordinary confidence trickster.

Here are some of the recognized dangers with respect to hypnotic manipulation:

Carla Emery said:
Karl du Prel was a German hypnosis researcher. In an 1889 book (Das hypnotische Verbrechen und seine Entdeckung), he predicted that the developing technology of hypnosis might create a new and very dangerous type of criminal. He said it, in such a case, it might be very hard to find evidence because of hypnotically-suggested amnesia, suggested false memories, and/or hypnotic manipulation of the testimony of witnesses. He said that suggested amnesia for events under hypnosis would be the biggest problem for criminal investigators. Du Prel also worried about the possibility of sealing suggestions, which would prevent easy rehypnotization of the victim.

Du Prel felt that the growth of hypnotic technology required a parallel increase in knowledgeability on the part of lawyers and jurists. He suggested that police
authorities should be prepared to use hypnotism to detect crimes involving hypnotism. He urged that the public be warned that anybody who allows himself to be
hypnotized takes a chance. He wanted to prohibit hypnotism, except with clear safeguards.[SUP]1[/SUP]
__________
1. In “Hypnosis in Criminology” (Brit. J. Med. Hypn., Summer 1950, 1, 17), Alexander Cannon surveyed some European writings on unethical hypnosis and
cited Karl du Prel at length.

Emery, C. (1998) Secret Don't Tell: Encyclopedia of Hypnotism. Claire, Michigan: Acorn Hill Publishing
 

Stat

Gold Meritorious Patron
Perhaps, intricate manipulation that involves the use of semantics, the ready worldview/cosmology model, spiritual/physical high hopes,
electronic device "to guide and prove it all" and a loyal organization to monitor all of the above is much better substitute to hypnosis.

Hypnotic or not, it's possibly a whole new breed in the mind control business.
 

Techless

Patron Meritorious
"...you certainly raise a good point about trusting the auditor and other Scientology authorities more than one's own knowledge, judgment and intuition." from Caroline

I guess this is why I never felt the whole effect of the cool-aid - I never did anything but trust own knowledge, judgment and intuition. Perhaps why auditing didn't seem to wanna work on me. I guess too this may be the 'break point' for all others in whatever reality was playing out for them. For, I was told from the get to only "trust your own knowledge, judgment and intuition" (the bait part I'm sure) So, at least I followed that part of it. And that part I swore I would never stop doing. And it saved my sorry ass.

Suppose I am still not getting how others where led away from that basic, initial concept?!? Sure auditing, hypnotism, various evil mind-control things getting slowly 'impinged' upon you. But really, how, why, when did this shift occur? Maybe I was one of the lucky ones who couldn't be hypnotized - and yet I wanted to be, to find out the 'secret' or hidden truth, etc.. mainly about the 'next level' and such, so It wasn't like I was secretly trying to not be brainwashed. HHmmm - something for all to maybe consider or think over.

This point or shift being a regularly asked question on the board. Would be good for newbs to digest beforehand, although it's always seeming like even now: you gotta go through it to answer the question. Paradox again - but closer to this 'hard to explain' thing that happens.

It's late - shouldn't be yapping - what did I say??? AAhhhh
 

Techless

Patron Meritorious
Perhaps, intricate manipulation that involves the use of semantics, the ready worldview/cosmology model, spiritual/physical high hopes,
electronic device "to guide and prove it all" and a loyal organization to monitor all of the above is much better substitute to hypnosis.

Hypnotic or not, it's possibly a whole new breed in the mind control business.

Ehh? It was/is just another stage prop, whether it be pentagrams, dead chickens, or little baby Jesus on a cross - or all the various 'saints' one had for either their car dashboard, or another to bury under their home...all stage props to idolize, or get your attention. Sure, the needle will move when your body resistance changes (keep in mind the e-meter looks at very, very tiny changes in this.) if you could just strap one on your chest to look at, held the cans, then walked around and watched as you went the bathroom, had sex with your honey, and then watched a great movie, you'd get more TA than any auditor could ever make any sense out of. See these things do react to everything that happens with the body, they don't (and cannot) differentiate between 'spiritual duress' or 'I just had an orgasm!!" (I'm sure this reaction would indicate SP!!)

I'm waiting for next release of solar power e meters.. Now that, would be so eco-friendly, sustainable and lovely, that folks will buy them just for that fact alone, but then would have no clue how to get past a 'can squeeze' test, which I failed at quite consistently. (secret: i'm not human...)

As far as: "new breed in the mind control business" that will be a completely wireless doodad, with microprocessor linked to database of thus far 'evaluated' responses - way scarier than now, since there's no database ...yet.. And also: you won't necessarily know that you are being scanned. It's a coming...

I have much more to suggest about this - but it's rather scary and not appropriate for some eyes (with minds attached)
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
. . . <snip> . . . To me this attempt to make auditing appear to be some horrible mind-controlling hypnosis is WAY over-exaggerated and quite a distortion of what is actually going on.

It is the 3rd dynamic hypnosis that causes 95% of the problems. Now, granted the state of key-out or blow-out does temporarily reduce ones defenses, and in an ultra-controlling setup like Scientology one CAN and WILL be taken advantage of.

I think consent is the point, rather than the general use of hypnotic-like routines and drills. So, sure, by all means, hypnotise people if you must, but - please - get their consent first. Without consent, the auditing process is horrible and mind-controlling, and to say so is a valid statement of what is actually going on. Today, there are people sitting around duplicating Xenu; the destruction of rational-thought which is required to do so is laid down during the lower grades. This sort of thing is going on regularly, both in the ultra-controlling Scientology set up and in the Free Zone / Indie Dependent training [STRIKE]camps[/STRIKE] centres.
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
"...you certainly raise a good point about trusting the auditor and other Scientology authorities more than one's own knowledge, judgment and intuition." from Caroline

I guess this is why I never felt the whole effect of the cool-aid - I never did anything but trust own knowledge, judgment and intuition. Perhaps why auditing didn't seem to wanna work on me. I guess too this may be the 'break point' for all others in whatever reality was playing out for them. For, I was told from the get to only "trust your own knowledge, judgment and intuition" (the bait part I'm sure) So, at least I followed that part of it. And that part I swore I would never stop doing. And it saved my sorry ass.

Suppose I am still not getting how others where led away from that basic, initial concept?!? Sure auditing, hypnotism, various evil mind-control things getting slowly 'impinged' upon you. But really, how, why, when did this shift occur? Maybe I was one of the lucky ones who couldn't be hypnotized - and yet I wanted to be, to find out the 'secret' or hidden truth, etc.. mainly about the 'next level' and such, so It wasn't like I was secretly trying to not be brainwashed. HHmmm - something for all to maybe consider or think over.

This point or shift being a regularly asked question on the board. Would be good for newbs to digest beforehand, although it's always seeming like even now: you gotta go through it to answer the question. Paradox again - but closer to this 'hard to explain' thing that happens.

It's late - shouldn't be yapping - what did I say??? AAhhhh

Consider yourself lucky. What you're describing as your Scientology experience would suggest to a Scientologist that you did not "qualify" for Scientology because you were PTS "A to J." Possibly Type E or F.

For more understanding, can you say how far you went up the cult's "bridge," if you wrote any success stories along the way, if you paid the Scientologists any money, and if you did any work for them.

Hubbard said:
e. Persons who are not being audited on their own determinism are a liability as they are forced into being processed by some other person and have no personal desire to become better. Quite on the contrary, they usually want only to prove the person who wants them audited wrong and so do not get better. Until a personally determined goal to be processed occurs, the person will not benefit.

f. Persons who “want to be processed to see if Scientology works” as their only reason for being audited have never been known to make gains as they do not participate. News reporters fall into this category. They should not be audited.

Hubbard, L. R., (1964, 27 October). Policies on Physical Healing, Insanity and Sources of Trouble. How To Confront and Shatter Suppression PTS/SP Course. (2001 ed.). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.

Another possibility is that you were never properly "ruined" by your disseminator. This video by a clinical psychologist may be helpful.

[video=youtube;2Ztug8uNR3I]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2Ztug8uNR3I[/video]
 

Techless

Patron Meritorious
Consider yourself lucky. What you're describing as your Scientology experience would suggest to a Scientologist that you did not "qualify" for Scientology because you were PTS "A to J." Possibly Type E or F.

For more understanding, can you say how far you went up the cult's "bridge," if you wrote any success stories along the way, if you paid the Scientologists any money, and if you did any work for them.



Another possibility is that you were never properly "ruined" by your disseminator. This video by a clinical psychologist may be helpful.

[video=youtube;2Ztug8uNR3I]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2Ztug8uNR3I[/video]

Oh, I'm sure I was PTS of some type (type L = lucky)! I was on staff for under 2 year contract, then moved to different area and was a public. I did lotsa courses, got lotsa books and read them several times. I was always in ethics too. Cause I kept speaking out about how it didn't make senses or jive with the original goals, etc. I was up to grade 0, which ain't much for sure, but after having read alot of upper level stuff, I just couldn't see paying for baby 'steps'. I still will have to write the whole thing out at some point it's just really rather crazy and spread out over a big chunk of time. Tons of little details that need to be there for it to make any sense to me, which it doesn't quite yet.

Thanks for asking - I'll gladly answer any more questions you may have
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
Oh, I'm sure I was PTS of some type (type L = lucky)! I was on staff for under 2 year contract, then moved to different area and was a public. I did lotsa courses, got lotsa books and read them several times. I was always in ethics too. Cause I kept speaking out about how it didn't make senses or jive with the original goals, etc. I was up to grade 0, which ain't much for sure, but after having read alot of upper level stuff, I just couldn't see paying for baby 'steps'. I still will have to write the whole thing out at some point it's just really rather crazy and spread out over a big chunk of time. Tons of little details that need to be there for it to make any sense to me, which it doesn't quite yet.

Thanks for asking - I'll gladly answer any more questions you may have

That your Scientology experience took place over a long period of time would tend to indicate the consumption of Kool-aid. After all, the Scientologists got out of you what they wanted: labor, money, allegiance. And no realization that you had been defrauded.

I appreciate your observation about the lower levels being baby steps.
 
Trance states do not generally last for days and days or weeks and weeks.

A stated purpose of Objectives is to BREAK DOWN "automatic behavior responses" (aka "automaticities"). I did all of the Objectives, fully and completely. Other than the biggies, like Op Pro By Dup (Book and Bottle), the duration is not very long. I did spread Op Pro By Dup over a few days.

Now, yes, while doing the process, there were moments where I lost consciousness, became docile, and slipped into what might be called a hypnotic trance. But, it was surely NOT the aim to remain in such a state. The idea, "the way out is the way through" applied very much. As my twin persisted in getting me to do the process, I moved OUT of the fixed dull state of consciousness (that had been activated along the way), and ended off VERY AWARE, with NO tendency to walk around in some obedient daze.

I did over 500 hours of auditing on the lower bridge. I remained and actually became a WORSE pain-in-the-ass who refused to obediently follow orders. I suspect there might be a light trance state with some forms of auditing - like the state of "reverie" in dianetics. But it is light and gentle, one never actually snaps into another reality, and it is very easy to come out of. In fact, at the end of each chain, one comes out of it.

Now sometimes when I meditate (mantra style), I do slip into what might be called a trance. It is entirely intentional, and to me desirable. And, I come out of it, switching back to regular everyday consciousness.

The simple fact of repeating something over and over does not make it a trance. I practice guitar riffs over and over. Do I slip into an trance? Mmmm? Actually sometimes I do, but it is a GOOD thing. I lose awareness of the rest of the world, I sort of become one with the musical instrument, time slows down, and I play MUCH better.

Rituals are used in various aspects of life to add continuity and meaning. These all involve very exact repetitive patterns. I think people get all worked up about this "trance" thing. It is an aspect of consciousness, and exists to varying degrees in many aspects of life (for good and bad).

There is a modern form of music that is called "trance".

Now, reading and studying the Hubbard paradigm, and allowing it to take over your mind, DOES induce a sort of CONTINUING TRANCE where one sees the world and reality differently because his or her observations and experiences are filtered through the system of fixed ideas known as Scientology. When I watch an audience standing up together and loudly clapping to a picture of Hubbard, now THAT does seem like a trance state.

To me, the worse aspect of Scientology is the shared trance-like state that the believers share. A True Believer of any ideology very much exists in a trance state that is defined by the boundaries of the nutty belief system. He or she sees and experiences an entirely different version of reality than everyone else. To me, they are truly in a trance. But, it has little or nothing to do with auditing.

could you give us a quick timeline?

when did you first hear of scn?

contact it?

read DMSMH?

start study/auditing

join staff, SO

first declare?

leave?

and i'd especially like to get much more of the story on the last two

thanx

CB
 
Top