OSA capabilities

Wilbur

Patron Meritorious
Marx, Lenin and Stalin all struggled with dialectics. They started out trying to understand logic that included mysticism as a variable but found that to be too abstract for class revolution doctrine and evolved into materialism but by the 1900s physics started breaking down the physical universe to the point where it was about as abstract as mysticism so what became important to them was what was observable but that is again dependent on perception and now they are pretty much back to mysticism again with everything being relative and subject to reinterpretation while still pushing materialism. I think they lost the plot because they were never really interested about logic - they were interested in forming revolutionary doctrine. Again the problem is motivation and self-interest. That is probably the biggest variable

I think if anyone is going to have a sensible debate they need to be willing to agree on the parameters of the specific issue without getting too abstract. Obviously if one's position is not logical or the ramifications are harmful or need to be obscured then they will be unwilling to agree on parameters to that degree. That is how I perceive much of the debate about Scientology. So much of what constitutes Scientology is not provable or even observable but the net harm it causes is, so one side must avoid anything that disproves Scientology or proves it's harm. That will be the side that is most dependent on deflective rhetoric, blame and division. I have noticed that much of Alanzo's premises depend upon logomachy or getting bogged down in arguments about words instead of things that can be agreed to be observable.

The whole agenda to stop calling Scientology a cult and to characterize critics as the cultists is basically logomachy. If Scientology funded a study to replace fair gaming or gaslighting as it applies to minority religions in the vernacular it would probably be something fancy and devoid of any derogatory meaning like "Perception Inversion" and ironically if you don't go along with the study and the new term you are still gaslighting and ignorant for not respecting the study. So the underlying motivation is really about deflecting and redirecting criticism and not reaching a logical premise or to make it impossible to conduct a sensible conversation about the subject in general.

Hubbard not only redefined words and created new words but he created a contextual bubble that made all words conform to Scientology's interests. That in itself is a special kind of indoctrination AND training. I would expect Scientologists to naturally gravitate to and depend upon logomachy as a basis for debate.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/logomachy

logomachy
noun
lo·gom·a·chy | \ lō-ˈgä-mə-kē
\
plural logomachies
Definition of logomachy

1 : a dispute over or about words
2 : a controversy marked by verbiage

Did You Know?
It doesn't take much to start people arguing about words, but there's no quarrel about the origin of "logomachy." It comes from the Greek roots logos, meaning "word" or "speech," and machesthai, meaning "to fight," and it entered English in the mid-1500s. If you're a word enthusiast, you probably know that "logos" is the root of many English words ("monologue," "neologism," "logic," and most words ending in "-logy," for example), but what about other derivatives of "machesthai"? Actually, this is a tough one even for word whizzes. Only a few very rare English words come from "machesthai." Here are two of them: "heresimach" ("an active opponent of heresy and heretics") and "naumachia" ("an ancient Roman spectacle representing a naval battle").
First Known Use of logomachy
1569, in the meaning defined at sense 1
History and Etymology for logomachy
Greek logomachia, from log- + machesthai to fight
Sorry to be logomachic about your folk etymology, but in fact the Greek logos component of the word logomachy comes from the 3rd Century BC word Sciologos, coined by Elronius Elrayimus, the Roman general who spoke Greek.
 

TheOriginalBigBlue

Gold Meritorious Patron
Sorry to be logomachic about your folk etymology, but in fact the Greek logos component of the word logomachy comes from the 3rd Century BC word Sciologos, coined by Elronius Elrayimus, the Roman general who spoke Greek.
Wasn't he the guy who played the pipe organ while Rome burned?
 

He-man

Hero extraordinary
Wasn't he the guy who played the pipe organ while Rome burned?
I don't think the pipe organ was invented pre medieval times. Do you refer to the sacking of Rome 410AD or the more recent one in the 16th century by the German Emperor? I suppose pipe organs existed at that time.

EDIT: Oh it actually DID exist! That's so cool! The things you learn in life!
 

TheOriginalBigBlue

Gold Meritorious Patron
I don't think the pipe organ was invented pre medieval times. Do you refer to the sacking of Rome 410AD or the more recent one in the 16th century by the German Emperor? I suppose pipe organs existed at that time.

EDIT: Oh it actually DID exist! That's so cool! The things you learn in life!
Prolly invented it in a past life but didn't get proper credit for it. Technology was lost until he remembered it in a medieval lifetime. Actually, originally invented 75 million years ago before Xenu's tax auditors chased him into hiding.
 

He-man

Hero extraordinary
Prolly invented it in a past life but didn't get proper credit for it. Technology was lost until he remembered it in a medieval lifetime. Actually, originally invented 75 million years ago before Xenu's tax auditors chased him into hiding.
I have a clear and livid memory of playing a pipe organ in a church at one time, no idea if it's a past life memory or just one of those things I did in a drunken stunt back in my university years, but since there is no police record of the incident I'll stick with it being a past life memory.
 

TheOriginalBigBlue

Gold Meritorious Patron
I have a clear and livid memory of playing a pipe organ in a church at one time, no idea if it's a past life memory or just one of those things I did in a drunken stunt back in my university years, but since there is no police record of the incident I'll stick with it being a past life memory.
I know just how you feel. I remember blowing up a planet but I'm also reasonably certain it was in a past life.
 

Alanzo

Bardo Tulpa
Well this is one of those alternatives that I keep going on about.

In order for Scientology to gain tax exempt status in the US, you have to consider the idea - just consider it - that outright blackmail of all the Harvard attorneys and forensic tax accountants, and FBI agents who had only 12 years earlier sent Mary Sure to prison, did not need to happen. In fact it would be pretty difficult to blackmail all those particular people - if you would only think about it.

Marty has said that all they needed to do was apply pressure to get a seat at the table. Once they had a seat at the table, it was a 'slam dunk' for the government to approve tax exemption - because it is clear by all standards in use for such things that Scientology qualifies.

I'm not saying this hypothesis is 100% true. I'm saying that the likelihood here is not zero.

So it is a viable hypothesis that should be considered, TOO.

You should also consider that Scientology and the Aftermath was unable to create a review of Scientology's tax exemption.

Why?
 
Last edited:

He-man

Hero extraordinary
If you want to get a review of the tax exemption status, are you pressuring your federal politicians to get that? Have you submitted a complaint to the IRS? Has anyone actually done that the past ten years?
 

TheOriginalBigBlue

Gold Meritorious Patron
Naughty you, all I ever got up to was raiding space lanes and bounty hunting for lord Xenu.
Keep working on it. I'm sure you blew up a planet. That's why we're here. Scientologist blew up so many planets in past lives that this was the only one left close enough without the DC-8s having to refuel.
 

Veda

Sponsor
Well this is one of those alternatives that I keep going on about.

In order for Scientology to gain tax exempt status in the US, you have to consider the idea - just consider it - that outright blackmail of all the Harvard attorneys and forensic tax accountants, and FBI agents who had only 12 years earlier sent Mary Sure to prison, did not need to happen. In fact it would be pretty difficult to blackmail all those particular people - if you would only think about it.

Marty has said that all they needed to do was apply pressure to get a seat at the table. Once they had a seat at the table, it was a 'slam dunk' for the government to approve tax exemption - because it is clear by all standards in use for such things that Scientology qualifies.

I'm not saying this hypothesis is 100% true. I'm saying that the likelihood here is not zero.

So it is a viable hypothesis that should be considered, TOO.

You should also consider that Scientology and the Aftermath was unable to create a review of Scientology's tax exemption.

Why?
Look at what you've been reduced to: You're trying to convince people that "the likelihood is not zero" that David Miscavige is telling the truth and that he really is the ecclesiastical head of a minority religion which really is a non profit operation.

Why? So you can convince others that the Aftermath "had no effect."

"You have zero effect" | Ex Scientologist Message Board

You need to get some new material.
 

Dotey OT

Cyclops Duck of the North - BEWARE
Hello, I'm Ready Taxalot, and I'm the lead auditor (No, not the one who listens, the one YOU FRICKIN NEED TO LISTEN TO). Up to a little while ago, we were busy taking a bite out of conservative not-for-profits, and having quite the fun. We can't be bothered by such a small time beach party as a thing called The Choich of Slime-a-tology.
 
Top