ESMB has entered archive mode. All posts and threads that were available to the general public are still readable. The board is still searchable. 

Thank you all for your participation and readership over the last 12 years.

If you want to join in the conversation, please join the new ESMB Redux at

PRe OT and OT Levels

Discussion in 'Grundy's Guide to Scientology' started by grundy, Mar 12, 2008.

  1. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Veda View Post
    David Mayo saw the notes from Hubbard that were to become the upper upper OT levels. He described them as gobbledygook.

    Have you got a source for this statement about Mayo calling LRHs upper OT level notes gobbledygook? Web link if possible.

    *I thought I would ask again as you obviously weren't consciously expanded enough to be aware of the question a few posts back...
  2. uniquemand

    uniquemand Unbeliever

    Evolution. Crazy theory, I know, but it seems to be true.
  3. And how did evolution come about in the first place?
  4. uniquemand

    uniquemand Unbeliever

    Because you don't have an answer, does that mean you need to invent one that has no basis in fact and represent it as "religion"?
  5. No, I was asking you the question, not because I don't have the answer to that question, but because you seemed quite certain that the mind was invented by evolution. So I was interested to know what YOU think about how evolution came about to exist. Seeing as you quite matter of factly answered the first question, I thought I might get an equally confident answer to a follow-up.

    Seems I was wrong.
  6. uniquemand

    uniquemand Unbeliever

    I'm confident that the mind was created through evolution because:

    A) I can see scenarios where this COULD happen

    B) I can see that people do, apparently (well, most of us) have minds

    C) I have no other working theory.

    I'm not sure that's right, just confident, and that's the avenue I'd look down for answers.

    I can completely speculate on the cause of evolution, but that would get us into a discussion of negative entropy, and information theory, and I think that would go beyond the scope of the discussion. I'd just say that the initial conditions of the universe seem to have set it up in such a way that there is a tendency towards increasing organization of information, and that I consider life INEVITABLE if a system is not prevented from letting it generate. Once it starts, I consider it equally inevitable that it would progress through evolution, due to errors in reproduction and changing environments, so long as extinction level events don't occur.
  7. And how did those "initial conditions of the universe" come about?
  8. uniquemand

    uniquemand Unbeliever

    I could speculate about that, too, but science hasn't penetrated that far yet. The best explanation I've seen is given in Brian Greene's "The Elegant Cosmos". Remember that time is a property of the universe as it stands, that we perceive. It may flow differently in other universes. Could well be that the start of our universe was the end of another ending in a black hole, and on "our side" appeared as a Big Bang. It may be far stranger than an Abrahamic God, and no intelligence may have been necessary for starting conditions.
  9. So how did the previous universe come about?

    *Btw, string theory is not a science but is mathematics-
  10. uniquemand

    uniquemand Unbeliever

    True enough. Astronomy is based on mathmatics, though, for understanding distances, which are a part of deriving times, etc. Cosmology involves understanding of both, as well as particle physics and relativity.

    Your question about previous universes only makes sense if you assume time exists outside of this universe, which it may not, or as I said above, it may operate and flow differently.

    And, again, not knowing what the cause of something doesn't mean God did it.
  11. No, I didn't ask when the previous universe came about, I asked how. So HOW did the previous universe (that caused this universe) come about?
    Sure, I'm not arguing for God. I'm just asking how stuff works according to your theory of the mind, evolution and universe(s)...
  12. uniquemand

    uniquemand Unbeliever

    My theory? Lol. These aren't my theories. They are the prevailing theories.

    A) Evolution through natural selection (I didn't make this).

    B) Big bang and the inflationary universe (I can't take credit for this gem, either)

    Again, time could move differently in other universes. How they came about is something I cannot explain. I don't have special access to the laws of the universe. I'm not saying anything radical, just that the Big Bang occurred, thermodynamics applies here, negentropy exists and I think it relates to evolution, evolution occurs, and perhaps the one area I'm a bit out on a shaky limb on is that I believe consciousness occurs in creatures with well-developed neo-cortexes. I think spirituality is an error of a program trying to understand itself, sort of like looking at yourself in a mirror, and thinking it's someone else. We reflect on ourselves, and think there's someone or something else there. That's all I've got.
  13. Never meant yours in terms of you originating them (obviously), just in terms of adopting them as your preferences.
    So your speciality is just the mind and evolution then?

    There is also the theory of the consciousness of matter (no neo-cortex needed!)

    There are lots of theories of the mind, nature and origin of the universe, and same of consciousness, but no real scientific proof on any of it really. The somewhat overwhelming thing is that there is an infinite amount of data to perceive and record, and infinite ways to interpret that data, meaning infinite theories, and infinite models of realities.

    How did the program come about?
  14. uniquemand

    uniquemand Unbeliever

    How does DNA create bodies? Feedback, evolution. DNA, to me, uses a programming language (amino acids) to build bodies. I think it's entirely due to evolution. I feel the same about the mind, I think it's an evolution due to evolutionary advantages for tool use. I think it's a byproduct of that sort of problem-solving.

    It's my specialty in that I've looked at a lot of material concerning this (not just scientology stuff, not by a longshot), but not in that I consider myself a special master, or something, just have a lot of viewpoints and information, still trying to find the best way to arrange it all. Best thing I've seen so far is metapsychology, but I like Pinker, too.
  15. So you are saying the mind is a program written by DNA using amino acids as a programming language.

    How did DNA come about?

    I'm not too familar with metapsychology other than it using dianetic and scientology techniques and being originated by scientologists. What does metapsychology say about the nature/origin of the universe/mind/consciousness?
  16. Carnaubawax

    Carnaubawax Patron Meritorious

    1. Define 'Mind.'

    2. Locate 'mind.'

    If you can do either 1 or 2 in a useful way, I will be impressed.
  17. uniquemand

    uniquemand Unbeliever

    1. A collection of viewpoints held by a person at one time or another, and any considerations about those viewpoints, or about his considerations.

    2. Located inside a virtual reality created by his nervous system.

    Hope you're impressed.
  18. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    Wikileaks OT levels

    The Wikileaks OT levels link in the thread (post #3) below is currently working. Similar link in top post is not.

    My apologies for some duplication in links attached to other linked posts.
  19. XenuEtrawls

    XenuEtrawls Patron

    Originally Posted by ImOut View Post
    I wonder if I'm a past life OT II. I have NO problem confronting my whole track. Just can't see the whole damn thing.

    "I can't see my "whole track" at all. Guess I as-issed it in a past life."

    I CAN see the WHOLE TRACK as well. I'm a BiG HUGE *thetanic* OT but I can still sit on the floor and play with my kid and his 'lectric train too. And when I DO, I can see the whole damn entire TRACK. Oh and I can have fun, also. ;-)

    The rest of the mumbo-jumbo on this thread, I must've as-ised -as you did with the whole track- in a previous life.

    Forget about "Scientology," it originally meant "pseudo-science" anyway and who cares about that?! Personally, I find it hard to conceive some would still attempt to promulgate the ramblings, prevarications & plagiarizations of a CON MAN!

    There are NO Clears or OTs in ALL Scientology; the Cof$, Freezone or whatever else anyone wants to call it. Zero, none, zilch. The day there are, they'll have people tripping over themselves to get some. So all of Ron's P.R. would be TRUE if his original premises about Clears, OTs & others, were also TRUE. But all there ever was from the Prevaricating Trouble Source were LIES and MORE LIES. Maybe that's why he called them the Ls, for LIES.

    To me, it's all mental masturbation. But I guess it's also a right and can be a good "hobby" for some - no matter how they want to embellish it.

    Count me ALL THE WAY OUT! I'm going back to my Markabian Home Planet on my favorite DC-8. Good luck with the stroking.

    P.S. Does anyone remember the other evil character's name we'd also meet or encounter besides Xenu that I remember reading on the Free Zone or Ron's orgs; possibly started by Cptn Bill?
  20. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    Wasn't it something like Yastrus, although that isn't it exactly? I don't know where the idea came from, but would guess it was one of CBR's telepathic sessions with Ronnie baby on the mothership.