Pre bait and switch auditing. Worth saving?

Veda

Sponsor
From the Wikipedia article:

'First girl I loved', and many other songs, were written before involvement with Scientology. The 'Wee Tam' and 'Big Huge' albums came about during the early involvement. IMO, the ISB initially benefited from their involvement with Scientology as Scientology public receiving introductory-level auditing. And I can remember when their music starting changing, losing its magic and creativity, with the band breaking up soon thereafter. This coincided with the ISB reaching the 'confidential' levels of the Grade Chart. Towards the end, the beautiful mystical poetry was gone - avoided as "R6 bank dramatization" and "mixing practices," etc., followed by several years of musical stagnation in the sterile land of Scientology, followed, eventually, by permanently exiting Scientology.

Scientology, since its inception has used - as in exploited - good ideas and good people. These are scattered amongst the sticky Hubbardian oobleck. By the way, addressing another post, I never stated that the good ideas were original with Scientology, or only to be found in Scientology, quite the contrary. :)
 

Student of Trinity

Silver Meritorious Patron
There may well be some value in some of the early stages of auditing, though I'd be surprised if there were anything that couldn't be found elsewhere, with less tar attached. One other thing that makes me skeptical about the value of auditing, though, is that I suspect that some of the early 'gains' may really be fueled mainly by hope.

You get a slight buzz, or have a little insight, or see the meter move in response to your thought. That's somewhat cool in itself, but you're being told that it's the first little step on this smooth, solid road towards the remedy for your 'ruin' — the road out of your personal misery, leading straight to your heart's desire. Even if you know you're not actually there yet, just believing that you're on the road to that must be tremendously exhilarating. I'm sure it'll boost your confidence, give you more patience with any little annoyances or setbacks, and generally make all of life seem so much better.

The joy of having hope is a wonderful thing. There's something downright evil in using it to suck people into a cult. And when the hoped-for things never come, how does that hope die? Does it suddenly shatter? Or does it slowly rot from the inside out, until all that's left is a bright coat of false enthusiasm painted over major depression? Admitting from the beginning that the road does not actually go very far would avoid that, and so in that way it would be very good to make that admission.

Take away the false promise that those first little gains are the signs of much more to come, though, and I bet that those first little gains will also seem a whole lot littler. How much of even the cheese in the trap isn't even actual cheese, but only the hope of future cheese that will never come?
 
:hifive: Thank you Trin, that was very wise and insightful! :goodposting:

I will agree with what I perceive Veda is considering that we promote in talking about Scientology processing exactly to this extend, and in this way: tell people the truth about it. All of it. Every step of the way!

If people knew the truth about the personality test (might be fun to do, like a magazine quiz, but as "science" it's bogus, made-up, results are meaningless, results will ALWAYS be skewed to "find your ruin" and get you to try Scientology auditing or training) as a highly manipulative sales technique and that finding one's ruin is really just a method of the Cult's operative getting a handle on where to "push one's buttons" to be better able to manipulate and control them more...who would really trust the results enough to pay a lot of money for auditing and training, and join up with the IAS to do the Bridge? Hardly anyone would. It's false advertising..."Scientology can do something about that", no matter what "it" is. :eyeroll: It's fraud, for the most part!!! The whole process of having one's ruin found, and then being sold coursework to address it! It's not counseling, it's fraud!!!

I'm sorry that the String Band members went downhill, and came apart.

I have not known anyone doing Scientology who did not eventually go downhill because of it! Some much further than others, sad to say. :no:
 

Veda

Sponsor
Mainly, I post this type of thread for the benefit of newbie lurkers who have inclinations towards Scientology. It's to warn them. It's interesting that the Scientologists and the not-a-Scientologist-buts people do not like it one bit. Thank heavens, they've not appeared on this thread. For that I am grateful. :)

So, has anyone had any good experiences with the "cheese" ?

cheese.jpg


Inside or outside the CofS?

I ask because the "Cheese" is a major part of Scientology's disguise and deceptive lead-in, and without recognizing the "Cheese" - which may have, occasionally, in and of itself, some actual "food value" or genuine positive aspect - a major part of the disguise of Scientology will be used without others being alerted to it.

I'm also interested in those who have "separated the Cheese from the Trap," and believe that at least some of the Cheese has some value.

As with almost anything having to do with Scientology, the Onion idea seems to apply. Auditing is one (more or less benign) thing on the surface of the Onion, another (increasingly manipulative) thing slightly into the Onion, and another (often damaging) thing deeply into the Onion.

This applies to the CofS, and to outside the CofS Scientology - both use the entire "auditing Onion."

yellowonion.jpg

The last thread attracted this reaction:

Perhaps anyone who has had a good experience in scientology might be reluctant to answer simply because they suspect you of baiting your own trap with such a question. (?)

As a result, amusingly, I received a record number of dislikes and WTFs? from someone called Jenni with an eye. So, it stirs the emotions in some.:melodramatic:

I was even accused of using "hypno-brainwashing techniques," and "being on a vendetta against others." It became quite strange.

:hattip:

In any event, IMO, thoroughly describing Scientology, in all its aspects, goes "against he grain." This is to Scientology's advantage, unfortunately.
 
Not sure what that was about, really...except that it is easy for one's tone and intentions to be mistaken on a message board... however, I can share that our Jenni with an I has a previous relationship with our Panda Termint... so that might account for some of it, if you seemed to squabble with him? :whistling: I have nothing more to say about that... :coolwink: :biggrin:
(For Panda and Jenni: :flowers2: :handinhand: :happydance:)


Just tell the truth, everybody... about whatever got you in, kept you in, helped you, hurt you, or stalled you...or, if you can, got or kept you stuck to the tar baby! :biggrin: :thumbsup: People will learn from that!

Of course, being able to do that all that is dependent upon your having recovered fairly fully from your cult experience, and done a lot of thinking and emotionally processing...having a lot of insight into your experiences and being willing to share it on a public message board. :)

If you are saying, don't make Scientology a big bugaboo in an effort to deter people from trying it or joining the Cult, as in the way anti-drug use propaganda films and lectures featuring outrageous overblown facts and half-truths did in the 50's...well I agree. That could be counterproductive. Just tell the truth about it to people. The truth about Scientology is bad enough, that if people really understand it, including all the manipulative techniques, all the lies and misdirection, the long, long history of crimes and abuses, chances are good that most normally healthy people will not get sucked into the Cult of COS, ever! Even if they have some pleasure moments or good experiences with initial auditing or whatever. Being lovebombed can be fun, so long as you keep in mind that they are just playing a game with you to win (you lose!), and to get something from you that they want (your agreement, your compliance and your money and effort on their behalf!) It's a manipulative sales technique! If you see it for what it is, that lessens it's effect on you. Gives you sales resistance where Scientology is concerned.

It's like being inoculated against it, once you know the truth about Scientology. Knowledge is power! :happydance:
 
Last edited:

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
Veda, it seems to me that in the analysis of Scientology's layers to describe them, it is helpful to look at the layers of Scientology as Hubbard described them, and Scientologists apply them.

It is fairly universally accepted that the first or outer layer is where the luring into Scientology's next and inner layers starts. (Ref. Luring Them In).

Hubbard said:
SCIENTOLOGY ZERO, 1. Scientology Zero is the problems and confusions and wrongnesses, zones of chaos of existence and the identification of those zones of chaos. At Scientology Zero you merely want the people to become aware of the fact of what the problem is . ( SH Spec 310, 6309C25) 2. descriptions of the environment and what is wrong with it. Scientology Zero simply takes care of the environment in which the person lives. The whole subject is instantly summatable in it’s own heading which is “the dangerous environment.” (SH Spec 328, 6312C10)

Hubbard, L. R., (1975) Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary. Los Angeles: Church of Scientology of California Publications Organization.

validity362-10.jpg


More re Scientology 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

I see Scientology Zero, and all Scientology for that matter, as a physical world protection racket masquerading as a spiritual protection racket.

Hubbard said:
But to jack up Scientology one level and run a whole new philosophy underneath of Scientology, which is immediately graspable, understandable and quickly agreed with, which can be discussed in the highest intellectual planes, over the very, very best breakfast tables, and in the lowest hovels, all with complete and utter reality the whole way, and to provide in that sphere a therapy, based on no different an understanding than this, and a reason why … And the last few weeks I’ve been walking around in a small circle trying to do just that and finally succeeded. And finally got a Scientology Zero that undercuts Scientology One, and which everybody would, I’m sure, agree with.

Scientology Zero, as you knew before, was descriptions of the environment and what was wrong with it, and so forth. This takes care of the world in which the person lives. Has nothing to do with his mind at all. Scientology One is the isness of things and takes care of his mind as well, but Scientology Zero simply takes care of the environment in which the person lives.

Now, the whole subject is instantly summable in—of its own heading, which is “the dangerous environment.” That’s all. You just say, “the dangerous environment,” you see. And that sums up what you’re talking about, and the frame of mind of the individual who is listening to you. You have immediate agreement that the environment is dangerous.

Now, the funny part of it is, a great many people who are professional dangerous environment makers—these include the politician, the policeman, the newspaperman, all of these blokes are specialists—the undertaker. These birds are specialists in the dangerous environment. That’s their mainstay. They sell a dangerous environment. If they didn’t sell a dangerous environment they feel they would promptly go broke, and so on. So it is to their interest to make the environment far more dangerous than it is. The environment is dangerous enough. But they make it far more dangerous than it is.

They sell a dangerous environment—100 percent. And like judo, the avidity with which these people sell a dangerous environment can be used by the Scientologist. The whole activity of judo is using the strength of the opponent to overcome the opponent. He aims a whale of a blow at your head and the strength which he used to propel that blow takes him over your shoulder and onto the floor.

So understanding Scientology Zero would include an understanding that the very person who is the worst enemy of Scientology—the chaos merchant, the slave master, the fellow who’s trying to hold everybody down, the fellow who’s trying to keep everybody shook up one way or the other and so he can’t ever get up again, and so forth, the fellow who makes his money and his daily bread out of how terrible everything is—that fellow, of course, would forward Scientology Zero for you with great speed. It’s an interesting comment to make and it’s worth thinking about in passing.

Hubbard, L. R. (1963, 10 December). Scientology Zero. Saint Hill Special Briefing Course, (SHSBC-360). Lecture conducted from East Grinstead, Sussex.

Hubbard said:
MERCHANTS OF CHAOS, there are in our civilization some very disturbing elements. These disturbing elements are the Merchants of Chaos. They deal in confusion and upset. Their daily bread is made by creating chaos. If chaos were to lessen, so would their incomes. It is to their interest to make the environment seem as threatening as possible, for only then can they profit. Their incomes, force, and power rise in direct ratio to the amount of threat they can inject into the surroundings of the people. (NSOL, pp. 17-18) 2. Merchant of Fear or Chaos Merchant and which we can now technically call the suppressive person. (HCO PL 5 Apr 65)

MERCHANTS OF FEAR, 1. probably the truly aberrative personalities in our society do not number more than five or ten per cent. They have very special traits. Where you find in the preclear’s bank a person with one or more of these characteristics, you will have the person who most thoroughly tried the preclear’s sanity. Such people would be better understood if I called them the “Merchants of Fear.” (PAB 13) 2. We can now technically call the suppressive person. (HCO PL 5 Apr 65, Handling the Suppressive Person)

Hubbard, L. R., (1975) Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary. Los Angeles: Church of Scientology of California Publications Organization.

So Hubbard jacked up Scientology and ran Scientology Zero in under his whole philosophy. He had to have done this because Scientology was not working, or working well enough without this layer. Scientology Zero, "the Dangerous Environment," is the layer where Scientologists learn the basics of Hubbard's toxic SP doctrine. Scientologists must perform the same function as the Merchants of Fear or Chaos Hubbard taught them to hate and attack. Gerry wrote a paper for presentation in St. Petersburg, Russia, titled Scientology, the Dangerous Environment Racket.

Gerry Armstrong said:
David Miscavige, Scientology's boss since Hubbard died in 1986, is just as gargantuan a liar and just as conscienceless. Miscavige's and Scientology's aggression and sociopathy are not limited or restrained by conscience, but by their fear of public exposure, opprobrium and criminal prosecution.[16]
A "racket," as used in the title of my talk, "Scientology: the Dangerous Environment Racket," is defined as "a usually illegitimate enterprise or activity that is made workable by coercion, bribery, or intimidation; a system of obtaining money or other advantage illegally, fraudulently, or undeservedly usually with the outward consent of the victims." This is what the Scientology cult is and does.

In its use of threat to make itself workable, and to obtain money, or other advantages -- such as time, cheap or free labor, intelligence (the espionage kind), false testimony, injustice, fanatical allegiance, complete submission, silence, etc. - Scientology is similar to what is known as a "protection racket."

This is from Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia:
A protection racket is an extortion scheme whereby a powerful entity or individual coerces other less powerful entities or individuals to pay protection money which allegedly serves to purchase protection services against various external threats.

Those who do not buy into the protection plan are often targeted by criminals. These crimes are typically thought to originate from the organization itself. When a person or group refuses to pay for protection, word is put out that they are outside of the local organization's protection (these organizations often exist in the absence of a trusted police force) and that the person or group in question is therefore free game for freelance criminals or the organization itself."

Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard identified people outside his organization's protection plan with the more common term "fair game." "Free game" and Scientology's "fair game," are in fact identical.

The cult is a powerful, global entity and Hubbard was a power-mad individual, as is Miscavige. They have coerced billions of dollars and unconscionable advantages from countless less powerful entities or groups and individuals.

Scientology and Miscavige put the word out officially and publicly on orders or fatwahs called "Suppressive Person Declares," that the people they can't shake down or shut up are outside their protection and fair game. Most of Scientology's and Miscavige's orders to the organization's hired professionals or its own enforcement or intelligence personnel to fair game Miscavige's enemy targets are issued in secret and unpublished.

The term "dangerous environment," in the title of my talk, "Scientology: the Dangerous Environment Racket" comes from founder Hubbard, and appears many times in scripture. He made it a key precept in what is known in Scientology as the "Suppressive Person" or "SP" doctrine. My wife Caroline Letkeman and I have a website, "suppressiveperson.org" dedicated to exposing and opposing this doctrine.

Armstrong, G. (2009) Scientology, the Dangerous Environment Racket. suppressiveperson.org. Retrieved from http://suppressiveperson.org/spdl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=544&Itemid=68.

No one who studies Scientology in a critical way and who speaks out against the Scientologists' abuses deserves Hubbard's diabolical diagnosis of "Merchant of Fear," Merchant of Chaos", "Suppressive Person," etc., and no one deserves the Scientologists' concomitant fair game.

Scientology's onion model identifies the layer where Scientologists interface with the "wog world" and the wogs they target. Each front group generates a dangerous environment. It makes sense to use their model, and this could also be used to stop their fear and chaos merchandising. Whether there is something else to be saved after dealing with the SP doctrine might then become evident.

Looked at that way, is there some value in Scientology Zero? It has value for the Scientologists, the Merchants of Chaos, the Merchants of Fear. Manufacturing an environment that is dangerous, or more dangerous than it already is, has no value to the targets, the suckers or victims.

Here is more on the Merchants of Chaos that Hubbard was talking about in his Scientology Zero lecture.

Hubbard said:
When we examine this extremely accurate and very brief account we see that there must be amongst us some very disturbing elements for anything else to be believed about Scientology.

These disturbing elements are the Merchants of Chaos. They deal in confusion and upset. Their daily bread is made by creating chaos. If chaos were to lessen, so would their incomes.

The politician, the reporter, the medico, the drug manufacturer, the militarist and arms manufacturer, the police and the undertaker, to name the leaders of the list, fatten only upon “the dangerous environment.” Even individuals and family members can be Merchants of Chaos.

It is to their interest to make the environment seem as threatening as possible for only then can they profit. Their incomes, force and power rise in direct ratio to the amount of threat they can inject into the surroundings of the people. With that threat they can extort revenue, appropriations, heightened circulations and recompense without question. These are the Merchants of Chaos. If they did not generate it and buy and sell it, they would, they suppose, be poor.

Hubbard, L. (1963, 10 December) Scientology Zero The Dangerous Environment The True Story of Scientology. Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology. (1991 ed., Vol VII, pp. 356-358.) Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.
 

Veda

Sponsor
Veda, it seems to me that in the analysis of Scientology's layers to describe them, it is helpful to look at the layers of Scientology as Hubbard described them, and Scientologists apply them.

It is fairly universally accepted that the first or outer layer is where the luring into Scientology's next and inner layers starts. (Ref. Luring Them In).



validity362-10.jpg


More re Scientology 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

I see Scientology Zero, and all Scientology for that matter, as a physical world protection racket masquerading as a spiritual protection racket.





So Hubbard jacked up Scientology and ran Scientology Zero in under his whole philosophy. He had to have done this because Scientology was not working, or working well enough without this layer. Scientology Zero, "the Dangerous Environment," is the layer where Scientologists learn the basics of Hubbard's toxic SP doctrine. Scientologists must perform the same function as the Merchants of Fear or Chaos Hubbard taught them to hate and attack. Gerry wrote a paper for presentation in St. Petersburg, Russia, titled Scientology, the Dangerous Environment Racket.



No one who studies Scientology in a critical way and who speaks out against the Scientologists' abuses deserves Hubbard's diabolical diagnosis of "Merchant of Fear," Merchant of Chaos", "Suppressive Person," etc., and no one deserves the Scientologists' concomitant fair game.

Scientology's onion model identifies the layer where Scientologists interface with the "wog world" and the wogs they target. Each front group generates a dangerous environment. It makes sense to use their model, and this could also be used to stop their fear and chaos merchandising. Whether there is something else to be saved after dealing with the SP doctrine might then become evident.

Looked at that way, is there some value in Scientology Zero? It has value for the Scientologists, the Merchants of Chaos, the Merchants of Fear. Manufacturing an environment that is dangerous, or more dangerous than it already is, has no value to the targets, the suckers or victims.

Here is more on the Merchants of Chaos that Hubbard was talking about in his Scientology Zero lecture.

:)

As far as I know, the first official expression of Hubbard's Applied Sneakiness Philosophy was in March 1955, with the 'Manual on Dissemination of Material', where he presented a system of layering and compartmentalizing of Scientology, so as to monitor who said what to whom.

"An outline of the communication lines of Scientology follows:

"1. [What we would like the] General public [to say] to the general public.

"2. Scientologists to general public."

And then eight more categories of ________ to ________.

Some more from Hubbard's 1955 'Manual on Dissemination of Material' [bracketed material added]:

"...this communication line [to the general public] is that Scientology does not pose any threat, that Scientologists are good citizens, and that they can be trusted with problems of a private and confidential nature... Another frame of mind that we would like to see the public have and register are that people attacking Scientologists have something wrong with them... As a subdivision of this, the actual substance of communication about what Scientology actually is... from the general public to the general public [what the 'Homo Saps' should say to each other about Scientology] should be that Scientology says that good health and immortality are attainable. That it is compounded out of all Man knows about Man..."

Then, addressing Scientologists:

"No Scientologist should ever consent to take a position on a panel or public stage engaging in debate of Scientology with some other subject. This is an entirely unclear communication line... Any such debate engaged upon demeaned or degraded Scientology by permitting it to be talked about contemptuously before a group - a thing which SHOULD NEVER BE PERMITTED [Capitalization in original]...

"Never defend. Always attack...

"NEVER BE INTERESTED IN CHARGES. DO, yourself, much MORE CHARGING, and you will WIN..."

And, also from the same 1955 'Manual on Dissemination':

"The purpose of the suit is to harass and discourage rather than to win.

"The law can be used very easily to harass... If possible of course, ruin him utterly."

This is Scientology in March 1955. The era of "insouciance." :unsure:
 

ClearedSP

Patron with Honors
That's the stuff that tar babies are made of.

I tried composing a reply to this thread last night, but gave up because it was getting too late. Glad that you and Veda already did most of the heavy lifting.

Veda poses the existence of both good and bad, while you look at the same thing, and see one integrated, holistic entity which is toxic, and can't be broken up. You can't even fly an ARC break or teach OT-TR-0 without indoctrination, and without indoctrination the results would have been different. Faith healers can't perform miracles on non-believers.

I take the holistic view, but I can easily understand the desire to extract the good from the bad. Being an auditor is VERY empowering, and you'd like to be able to use the methods you worked on for years, somehow. Writing it all off as a learning experience is hard, and regrets about the indivisibility of scientology are inevitable.
 

Mojo

Silver Meritorious Patron
Show me one good element in Scientology auditing or training that's effective and worthy of being disseminated into the world that can't already be found elsewhere! WITHOUT all the Cult tar on it!

Go ahead, name ONE!

Basic book one dianetic auditing?

While I imagine the 'divorce' between dianetic auditing and scientology 'fill in the blank' would be damn near impossible, I also imagine that certain specific bits of structure regarding basic dianetic auditing are not found in any other field of mental health practices.

Talk-therapy may come close, but still, no cigar.

There are at least 3 distinct elements of basic auditing that I find to be inherently or intrinsically essential to basic auditing that are not found, or practiced uniformly, elsewhere. Being 1: unwavering repetition (of a recollection of an emotionally charged event) 2: complete absence of 'suggestions' for resolution, and 3: the cans, providing some direction for the auditor. There may of course be more that I am not aware of.

In fact, I would venture to say if I could whip out my magic wand (which I keep hidden for safe keeping) and wave it around the room, and thus have the word scientology, and everything related to that word, vanish from the individual and collective consciousness of every person on the planet, within 3 months I could start up a dianetic auditing 'mission' and have the space of it literally overflowing with enthusiastic adherents/subjects. I'm thinking hundreds in a few months, thousands in a few years, and, well, taking over the entire world in one generation. Ok, the taking over the whole world part in one generation was just alittle J&D.

The obvious problem is that dianetics is like a parent of a mass murderer, whose name is infamous (like scientology). It would be kinda like trying to start a 'Charlie Manson school for proper etiquette' but just calling it 'Mansons Place'. The stigma is too overwhelming.

Mojo
 

Student of Trinity

Silver Meritorious Patron
I'm sure you can take some good out of Scientology, if you've spent years in it. I doubt that Scientology itself is a good guide for how to do that, because Scientology itself would have you believe that Scientology is an indivisible monolith. Scientology's whole con is to hold the good things hostage, so you'll take the bad things for their sake.

All kinds of belief systems do this. The really stupid kinds of fundamentalist Christianity, for instance, tell you that you have to take all or nothing; that if you don't swallow young Earth creationism, you're somehow not allowed to believe that God so loved the world. They try to just talk too fast for you to notice, that the belief that you have to take all or nothing is itself just part of the all, that you don't actually have to take.

I know fundamentalist Christianity better than Scientology, though I was never really in that cult either, but for what it's worth, I bet that the thing about salvaging good stuff from Scientology is probably this. Scientology is all about 'tech'. There's supposed to be a specific way of doing things that is somehow right. So Scientology would probably tell you that what you can best salvage from Scientology is tech — specific procedures for doing things, taught in Scientology, that are somehow specially effective. From Scientology itself you probably get the idea that the smart kind of ex-Scientologist is one who goes through the Scientology tech, rejects the processes that don't work, but finds a few that do work great, and keeps them.

I'm not sure that's right. I expect that this enormous faith in fixed procedures is itself one of the parts of Scientology that doesn't work. There's probably not even one formal, rote procedure from Scientology that is really worth keeping.

Instead, though, there are probably experiences, attitudes, or even habits that are good. Stuff that's much less rigid than any particular drill or process. Some of that stuff, picked up over many years, may well be very good.

That would seem to be a very un-scientological attitude to Scientology. But I think that's the point.
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
Thanks, Veda. :)

The Church of Scientology was incorporated in December 1953. (Ref. Incorporation document). Only weeks earlier, in mid-November, Hubbard published PAB (Professional Auditors Bulletin) 13 "On Human Behavior" which is Hubbard's earliest document studied on the How to Confront and Shatter Suppression Course. In that issue, Hubbard was calling the SP "the aberrative personality" and "merchant of fear." From that issue:

Hubbard said:
What we will call the aberrative personality does the following things:

1. Everything bad that happened to the preclear was (a) ridiculous, (b) unimportant, (c) deserved.

2. Everything the preclear and others did to the aberrative person was (a) very important, (b) very bad, (c) irremediable.

3. Those things which the preclear could do (a) were without real value, (b) were done better by the aberrative personality or by others.

4. Sexual restraint or perversion.

5. Inhibition of eating.

Such people would be better understood if I called them the “merchants of fear.” The most degraded control operation of which the GE is capable is utilized by these people for their sole method of getting on in the world. They have lost all ability themselves to create, they cannot work themselves, they must either amass money which is never to be spent or must prevent others from amassing money. They produce nothing, they must steal one way or another, and then devaluate whatever they obtain.

They speak very sternly of honesty or ethics and put on a formidable front of complete legality. They are impartial, which is to say they are incapable of decision but ride continually a maybe. They close terminals easily with courts, for courts are, sad to say, more or less of this disposition themselves. They feel called upon at no pretext to become adjudicative on subjects where their opinion has not been invited.

Probably a society could be cleared and allowed to bloom if these people were simply rounded up and removed from contagion with the remaining populace, for they are not numerous.

Hubbard, L. (1953, mid-November) On Human Behavior. How To Confront and Shatter Suppression Course. Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.

Even earlier, in 1951, Hubbard wanted to round up roughly the same class of people and deprive them of their rights. From the 2007 edition of Science of Survival:

Hubbard said:
The only answers would seem to be the permanent quarantine of such persons from society to avoid the contagion of their insanities and the general turbulence which they bring into any order, thus forcing it lower on the scale, or processing such persons until they have attained a level on the Tone Scale which gives them value.

In any event, any person from 2.0 down on the Tone Scale should not have, in any thinking society any civil rights of any kind. (p. 152)

[...]

The reasonable man quite ordinarily overlooks the fact that people from 2.0 down have no traffic with reason and cannot be reasoned with as one would reason with a 3.0. There are only two answers for the handling of people from 2.0 down on the Tone Scale, neither one of which has anything to do with reasoning with them or listening to their justification of their acts. The first is to raise them on the Tone Scale by unenturbulating some of their theta by anyone of the three valid processes. The other is to dispose of them quietly and without sorrow. Adders are safe bedmates compared to people on the lower bands of the Tone Scale. Not all the beauty nor the handsomeness nor artificial social value nor property can atone for the vicious damage such people do to sane men and women. The sudden and abrupt deletion of all individuals occupying the lower bands of the Tone Scale from the social order would result in an almost instant rise in the cultural tone and would interrupt the dwindling spiral into which any society may have entered. (p. 183)

Hubbard, L. (1951) Science of Survival (2007 ed.) Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.

Interesting that Hubbard projected his fear of [STRIKE]adders[/STRIKE] snakes onto his SP targets. (Ref. The Admissions). In any case, the SP doctrine pervades Scientology from the religion, cult, or protection racket's earliest beginning.
 

Student of Trinity

Silver Meritorious Patron
There are at least 3 distinct elements of basic auditing that I find to be inherently or intrinsically essential to basic auditing that are not found, or practiced uniformly, elsewhere. Being 1: unwavering repetition (of a recollection of an emotionally charged event) 2: complete absence of 'suggestions' for resolution, and 3: the cans, providing some direction for the auditor. There may of course be more that I am not aware of.

I'm not sure about 1. If you mean multiple repetitions of emotionally charged events, reciting the story over and over until you get numb to the words, then I guess I'd have to admit that no other therapy I know besides Scientology places such emphasis on that, or puts such faith in it as a technique. The idea that you get some relief just from telling the story, though, and the idea that getting that relief from telling then helps you move on — those ideas are really common. Is multiple repetition, unto numbness, actually a good idea? I'm not convinced.

As to 2, this is also very common, to the point of being the universal basic assumption. Very, very few counselors will try to solve your problems for you. Even priests don't do that nowadays — and their final 'pray for me, also a sinner' is ancient.

3 would indeed seem to be special to Scientology. Again, I'm not sure it's a good idea. The cans might in principle be of some value, but I'm not convinced that Scientology's simplistic interpretation of the meter movements is really going to be better, over the long haul, than not using the e-meter at all.
 

TG1

Angelic Poster
Not sure this adds too much to the conversation, but here's my take this afternoon:

Relatively speaking (relative to other kinds of Scientology auditing), the auditing done at lower levels is pretty light-handed. For the pc, there are no big performance standards to meet, no onerous auditing schedules to keep, and you get through it pretty fast.

And if you're lucky enough to get a "nice auditor" who's kind and has a good "comm cycle" and doesn't muck up the metering and drag shit out forever and screw up "the session" (those of you who've been there know everything I mean), it's a little like getting a spiritual massage.

Mostly, it's just pleasant to have someone be interested and listen to you. (That's the definition of an auditor, remember?) And how often does that happen to most people in life -- that someone is interested in what you have to say and listens without telling you you're wrong or "you almost got it right" or that you need to tweak this little thing or two and soon you'll have it. Again, if you've held the cans and had "good sessions," you know the charm and safety of being in session where "the pc is always right."

(Apologies for the air quotes.)

There are many who, if they could afford it, would enjoy those experiences -- for a lark or because they felt they really needed it. And like a spiritual massage, the lower levels do little damage, even if they don't guarantee a long-term fix. They feel good, and (if you've got the bucks) you might enjoy coming back.

Now if pcs could only wear big, plush white robes and disposable flip flops in session and afterwards get a free mani/pedi it might be an easy sale.

:)

TG1

P.S. I feel I should add a postscript to clarify that the above was written quite tongue-in-cheek. The trouble of Scientology is the addictive nature of all that time one spends being "right." It's a great set-up for what comes later. Ripping this stuff apart at the seams is so dicey -- because some of the seams are so very hard to find.
 

Gadfly

Crusader
I'm not sure about 1. If you mean multiple repetitions of emotionally charged events, reciting the story over and over until you get numb to the words, then I guess I'd have to admit that no other therapy I know besides Scientology places such emphasis on that, or puts such faith in it as a technique. The idea that you get some relief just from telling the story, though, and the idea that getting that relief from telling then helps you move on — those ideas are really common. Is multiple repetition, unto numbness, actually a good idea? I'm not convinced.

I think that the portraying this as going over the upsetting past event until one becomes "numb" is NOT what happens.

As I see it, that is a misrepresentation and distortion of what happens in ANY type of therapy that uses similar methods.

A person desensitizes the event by repeatedly contacting it, going over it, and also brings various previously unconscious aspects of it into consciousness. This can help the past to cease being such a strong unconscious influence on the present. To me, there is no doubt that people's unconscious past thoughts, ideas, pain and memories VERY MUCH affect them (often to their detriment).

As always, I could be wrong . . . . :confused2:
 

ClearedSP

Patron with Honors
A person desensitizes the event by repeatedly contacting it, going over it, and also brings various previously unconscious aspects of it into consciousness. This can help the past to cease being such a strong unconscious influence on the present. To me, there is no doubt that people's unconscious past thoughts, ideas, pain and memories VERY MUCH affect them (often to their detriment).

As always, I could be wrong . . . . :confused2:

There's a fine summary of abreaction therapy here:
http://www.onnovdhart.nl/articles/Abreaction_Re.pdf
 

TG1

Angelic Poster
Not sure this adds too much to the conversation, but here's my take this afternoon:

Relatively speaking (relative to other kinds of Scientology auditing), the auditing done at lower levels is pretty light-handed. For the pc, there are no big performance standards to meet, no onerous auditing schedules to keep, and you get through it pretty fast.

And if you're lucky enough to get a "nice auditor" who's kind and has a good "comm cycle" and doesn't muck up the metering and drag shit out forever and screw up "the session" (those of you who've been there know everything I mean), it's a little like getting a spiritual massage.

Mostly, it's just pleasant to have someone be interested and listen to you. (That's the definition of an auditor, remember?) And how often does that happen to most people in life -- that someone is interested in what you have to say and listens without telling you you're wrong or "you almost got it right" or that you need to tweak this little thing or two and soon you'll have it. Again, if you've held the cans and had "good sessions," you know the charm and safety of being in session where "the pc is always right."

(Apologies for the air quotes.)

There are many who, if they could afford it, would enjoy those experiences -- for a lark or because they felt they really needed it. And like a spiritual massage, the lower levels do little damage, even if they don't guarantee a long-term fix. They feel good, and (if you've got the bucks) you might enjoy coming back.

Now if pcs could only wear big, plush white robes and disposable flip flops in session and afterwards get a free mani/pedi it might be an easy sale.

:)

TG1

P.S. I feel I should add a postscript to clarify that the above was written quite tongue-in-cheek. The trouble of Scientology is the addictive nature of all that time one spends being "right." It's a great set-up for what comes later. Ripping this stuff apart at the seams is so dicey -- because some of the seams are so very hard to find.

I want to add something else to the above post. Essentially, I'm not a meat and potatoes kind of person. I have had experiences in my life -- a rather wide array of them -- that have been psychologically (or spiritually, if you will) transformational. They were pivotal moments when I felt tremendously alert and aware of what was going on, "saw" things more clearly, made important life decisions, or changed directions in ways, not always huge, that led to better paths for me.

Magical feelings (woo-woo'ness, if you will) was not part of all those moments. Some were rather accidental -- in that there was no big lead-up to them. But looking back on them, I see them all as vivid inflection points that represented the first sentences in all the chapters of my life.

I would bet that not everyone views their life this way or believes it's possible for anyone else to be transformed in such ways. I can only affirm that this is my own interpretation of my life.

For me and others like me, it's the validity of such moments that make us susceptible to the attractions of cults like Scientology. But for me and others like me, I think it's also important to distinguish carefully between the validity of such moments and the invalidity of anything else associated with those moments. Does one have to believe war is "good" in order to benefit from a life-changing epiphany one had on the battlefield?

Transformations are where you find them. A few of mine have been in auditing rooms. Others have been in hospital rooms, on sidewalks, beside Roman ruins, in country bars, and on mountaintops.

At some point, it's probably wise to stop trying to revise the life that happened to you. It was your life. Why not embrace it and say, "This was mine."

TG1
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
:lol: Veda, quoting me as a springboard for your views works just as well as an invitation! :biggrin:

I'm with TG1, ^^^ that's as good an explanation as any, IMO. :)
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
Basic book one dianetic auditing?

While I imagine the 'divorce' between dianetic auditing and scientology 'fill in the blank' would be damn near impossible, I also imagine that certain specific bits of structure regarding basic dianetic auditing are not found in any other field of mental health practices.

Talk-therapy may come close, but still, no cigar.

There are at least 3 distinct elements of basic auditing that I find to be inherently or intrinsically essential to basic auditing that are not found, or practiced uniformly, elsewhere. Being 1: unwavering repetition (of a recollection of an emotionally charged event) 2: complete absence of 'suggestions' for resolution, and 3: the cans, providing some direction for the auditor. There may of course be more that I am not aware of.

...also:

Jon Atack said:
If you want your redefinition to take root, you have only to use the basic three r’s of exploitative persuasion – repetition, repetition and repetition:

Hubbard said:
The way to redefine a word is to get the new definition repeated as often as possible. Thus it is necessary to redefine medicine, psychiatry and psychology downward and define Dianetics and Scientology upwards. This, so far as words are concerned, is the public-opinion battle for belief in your definitions, and not those of the opposition. A consistent, repeated effort is the key to any success with this technique of propaganda... (Propaganda by Redefinition of Words)

http://infinitecomplacency.blogspot.com/2013/02/a-cult-by-any-other-name.html

As is the case with Scientology's propaganda tech applied in the environment, basic auditing includes repetitive processes:

Hubbard said:
BASIC AUDITING, 1. the fundamental and most important elements of auditing—the skill of handling and keeping the preclear in session, proper use of the auditing communication cycle, the repetitive use of the auditing communication cycle to flatten a process, the correct application of the technology of Scn, and the ability to use and read and E-meter correctly. (Scn AD) 2. the handling of the pc as a being, the auditing cycle, the meter. (HCOB 26 Nov 63)

Hubbard, L. R., (1975) Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary. Los Angeles: Church of Scientology of California Publications Organization.

Hubbard said:
REPETITIVE PROCESS, 1. is simply a process that is run over and over with the same question of the pc. The pc answers the thing and the auditor gives him an acknowledgment. Gives him TR-4 on his origins and it is run until it is flat. (SH Spec 169, 6207C10) 2. process which permits the individual to examine his mind and environment and out of it select the un-importances and importances. (SH Spec 67, 6509C21)

Hubbard, L. R., (1975) Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary. Los Angeles: Church of Scientology of California Publications Organization.

Hubbard said:
FLATTEN A PROCESS, 1 . to continue a process as long as it produces change and no longer. (Scn AD) 2. flattening something means to do it until it no longer produces a reaction. (HCOB 2 Jun 71 I) See also END PHENOMENA.

Hubbard, L. R., (1975) Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary. Los Angeles: Church of Scientology of California Publications Organization.

Repetitive processes is a designation of Scientology Two, but really that auditing feature or technique pervades all layers and levels.

Hubbard said:
SCIENTOLOGY TWO, academy HPA/HCA accomplishment level. Scn for use in spiritual healing. This is a healing strata, using the wealth of past processes which produced results on various illnesses. The auditing level is reach and withdraw and repetitive processes. The target is human illness. (HCO PL 2 Aug 63)

Hubbard, L. R., (1975) Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary. Los Angeles: Church of Scientology of California Publications Organization.

Going over and over engramic or traumatic events is also a feature of Dianetics, as Mojo mentioned above. Other introductory and entry level processes exist, such as "Book and Bottle" and other "Objective Processes," use repetitive commands to flatten affect on compliance, control issues, etc., supposedly to bring preclears into "present time."

The repetitive nature of basic auditing in its many forms as above, done in a highly controlled and authoritarian environment seems to desensitize previous authorities (parents, wogs, civil authorities, religious authorities, etc.) and to establish the authority of the Scientology system and hierarchy in an exploitative way.

Repetition is a fundamental feature in Scientology training as well:

Hubbard said:
NUMBER OF TIMES OVER THE MATERIAL EQUALS CERTAINTY AND RESULTS (a major study datum which has been proven beyond any question in Dianetics and Scientology).

Hubbard, L. (1981, 21 July) What is a Checksheet? (Organization Executive Course Technical Division) (1991 ed., Vol IV, pp. 441-2). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.

Certainty and knowledge are synonymous in Scientology:

Hubbard said:
CERTAINTY, [...] 2. knowledge itself is certainty; knowledge is not data. Knowingness is certainty. Sanity is certainty, providing only that that certainty does not fall beyond the conviction of another when he views it. To obtain a certainty one must be able to observe. (COHA, p. 187)

Hubbard, L. R., (1975) Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary. Los Angeles: Church of Scientology of California Publications Organization.

The TRs (Training Routines), model session, basic auditing, and Scientology's many forms and modalities could, by their repetitive nature, be deleterious. Certainly, in the hands of power hungry cult leaders, Scientology technology is demonstrably deleterious. And certainly Scientology is always and forever authoritarian. Who else but cult leaders or wannabes would find value in such a system?
 
Top