PTS and SP, as concepts

[Udarnik]

Seriously though folks psychopaths can be useful, in times of dire action needed the cold steel of a real SPs brain can come in handy when the murderous pirates are climbing aboard with knives between their teeth you don't need a team of fluffy empaths you need an angry Mongo. A lack of empathy is not always a bad thing, just most of the time. It takes all sorts to make a world.

I don't agree. If you read memoirs such as "With the Old Breed" by U.S.M.C. Corporal E.B. Sledge or "Band of Brothers" about Major Dick Winters and Easy Company, or talked to my late father-in-law about his experience, we all have it in us. The more combat we endure, the more vicious we become.

The sociopath only enjoys a slight advantage in surprise situations in peacetime - i.e. their main advantage is when they are jumping someone who is not expecting it. This advantage accrues mostly to criminals, not soldiers.

Once in combat, the sociopath tends to enjoy the death and destruction more than the neurotypical, and is much more likely to commit an atrocity such as My Lai, rather than sacrifice his life for his brothers in combat. The sociopathic narcissist, like Hubbard, becomes a shirker and malingerer.

I see this argument all the time about business leaders being mostly sociopathic, and how we'd kill competition if we didn't have them. That's patent BS. When allowed to rise tot he top, non-sociopaths have better long term business success, it's just that, I think deliberately, our short-term Wall Street incentive system rewards the sociopath too much. Good guys can finish first, if they aren't Fair Gamed.

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

I think we need a lot more psychopaths to help fight global warming, get out of your cars and use a bike. It's good for the environment.

Seriously though folks psychopaths can be useful, in times of dire action needed the cold steel of a real SPs brain can come in handy when the murderous pirates are climbing aboard with knives between their teeth you don't need a team of fluffy empaths you need an angry Mongo. A lack of empathy is not always a bad thing, just most of the time. It takes all sorts to make a world. Hubbard wanted SO members that were cold and unreasonable at the same time he wanted to rid the world of suppressive persons, hows that for confusion. In times of peace nasty people are destructive, but when it's time to roll up sleeves they come into their own. Scn thinks it's at war, so they love the minimongo.

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

I'm not an expert on psychopaths but I remember reading, amongst other books on the subject, Harvey Cleckley's "The Mask Of Sanity" and Alan Harrington's book "Psychopaths" a while back. If they and others (such as Elton MacNeil, who also wrote about a sociopath he knew) are right, psychopaths would be a very bad bet to have on your side because they have no conscience or sense of loyalty. They'd sell you out the first chance they got.

 

[Commander Birdsong]

yeah claire...

i too think there is something to PTS/SP as concepts

however...

the biggest problem with the PTS/SP tech is no one applies it with such enthusiasm as an SP

 

[Leon]

Here's a link from Arnie's recommended reading page. Read this and tell me again that SPs and PTSes don't exist. That it is all just Hubbard's bullshit.

http://www.addictiontoday.org/addictiontoday/2013/10/empathy-trap-sociopath-triangle.html

 

[Knows]

I worked with hundreds of ex-felons for five years in a "get back to work program" and can attest that 99% of them are regular guys and ladies just like you and me who got off in the wrong direction at some point. They were not, each one, individually, suppressive people according to the definitions.

Welcome Cdub!! Glad you are hear!! :dancer::dancer::dancer:

 

[La La Lou Lou]

Udarnik and Cat's Squirrel, I think you must be right, when I think about it surrounding myself with psychopaths in times of trouble doesn't feel like a safe option.

 

[Commander Birdsong]

CoS is just soooooooooo fucked up with it's thoroughly hamfisted ignorant application of it's own materials...

their SP declares have no relation to the materials it's just HE&R and politics

but what it does wrecks friendships and family relationships

and it's so bloody monotone. what about repressive or oppressive personalities?

 

[Gib]

Here's a link from Arnie's recommended reading page. Read this and tell me again that SPs and PTSes don't exist. That it is all just Hubbard's bullshit.

http://www.addictiontoday.org/addictiontoday/2013/10/empathy-trap-sociopath-triangle.html

SP's & PTS may exist, the mental field names them as anti-social personality, psychopaths, whatever.

What is Bull Shit about hubbard's policy and so called tech on it

is labeling somebody who speaks up about scientology lies and crimes as a anti-social personality. As Enthetan explains, Hubbard linked or equated anti-social personality to anti-scientology or crimes against scientology. Hubbard sold us on this.

If one really listens to the Jerry Armstrong video linked by Infinite, Jerry explains it with references.

The above is why I say it's bullshit. And by bullshit I mean another one of hubbards tricks.

Shit, people take this hubbard shit way to seriously like as in KSW.

ps - kind of funny how the beginning of these SP/PTS policy's & tech bulletins all came out in 1965. Same year as KSW. And just prior to the Sea Org project. And just prior was St Hill where hubbard used the good works of Gordan Bell, Alan Walter, etc as explained in the Opening Pandora's box thread. All to build a better Bridge to Total [STRIKE]Freedom[/STRIKE] Slavery.

 

[Leon]

Oh I agree with you on that. 100%

Hubbard continually misused his own tech in order to justify his overts. But underlying what he did with it is something worth knowing about it all.

 

[Veda]

Oh I agree with you on that. 100%

Hubbard continually misused his own tech in order to justify his overts. But underlying what he did with it is something worth knowing about it all.

Hubbard didn't misuse the tech. He used the tech, all the various deceitful and manipulative layers of it. The actual, complete, tech.


The essence of the SP Doctrine can be found in Hubbard's writings as early as 1950 and 1951, although it wasn't formalized until 1965.

John Sanborn was the editor of many of Hubbard's early books, and of 'Ability' magazine. (Sanborn tried unsuccessfully to have "disposed of quietly and without sorrow" and "no rights of any kind" - for the anti-Dn/anti-Scn/anti-LRH low toned - removed from the 1951 book 'Science of Survival'.)


Here Sanborn comments on the first SP Declare:

Hubbard had Marilyn Routsong, who was the World Wide Ethics Officer at St. Hill, deliver the first Suppressive Person Declare. He had written this system up and now he was going to use it.

Hubbard said declare so and so. And she put out the Order. Boy, in those days, being Declared was like a death sentence.

He said, 'As soon as you give him the order come back.' And when she did he said, 'How did he act? What did he say? Did he say anything?' He was thrilled like a kid to see how his new dictatorial system was going to work.


Hubbard, from 1965, describing some Scientology "crimes" or "suppressive acts":

DISAVOWAL, SPLINTERING, DIVERGENCE:
Public disavowal of Scientology...
Announcing departure from Scientology...
Dependence on mental or philosophy procedures other than Scientology...


Did Hubbard know what he was doing when he formally adopted his "new dictatorial system"?

From Hubbard's (secretly authored) 1955 'Brainwashing Manual' - recognized almost a half century ago as the secret blueprint for the Scientology operation. [With word substitution]:


It should become well known that only the insane attack Psychiatry [Scientology]...

An immediate attack on the sanity of the attacker is the best defense...

It's important to know that the entire subject of loyalty is thus as easily handled as it is. One of the first and foremost missions of the psycho-politician [Scientology] is to make an attack on Communism [Scientology] and insanity anonymous. No layman [rank and file Scientologist] would dare adventure to place judgment upon the state of sanity of an individual whom the Psychiatrist [Scientology] has already declared [a Suppressive Person] insane...


It is the mission of the psycho-politician [Scientology] first to align the obedience and goals of the group, [to 'put ethics in'] and then maintain their alignment by the eradication of the effectiveness of the ['out ethics'] persons and personalities which might swerve the group toward disaffection...

But where the individual is troubled by conflicting propaganda, where he is permitted to think thoughts critical of the state [Scientology] itself... we will discover that his constitution [physical well being] will suffer...

So certain is this principle that when finds a sick individual, could one search deeply enough, he would discover a misaligned loyalty and an interrupted obedience to the person's group unit.


In 1960, five years before instituting the SP Doctrine, Hubbard had introduced metered Security Checking in which the person was asked, "Have you ever had unkind thoughts about LRH?"

And five years before that, in his 'Manual on Dissemination of Material', Hubbard had instructed, "Another frame of mind we would like to see the public have and register is that people attacking Scientologists have something wrong with them."

 

[Anonycat]

 

[Leon]

yes dear.

 

[Veda]

The average Scientologist towers above the religious and philosophical leaders of ages past.​

-snip-

I think there is an element of truth in the idea of PTSness, even though it is grossly abused by the CofS.

-snip-

Reading this thread for the first time, I see that you're doing what Leon was doing. Both of you have been immersed in others' criticism and critiquing of Scientology by reason of participation in the NET and ESMB. Yet neither of you quite 'gets it.'


The idea of 'PTSness' is not 'misused' by the CofS, it is used. It was not 'misused' by Hubbard; it was used by Hubbard.


'PTSness' and 'SP', of course, are Hubbardisms. They come with all the hidden hooks, angles, and manipulative and abusive twists and layers that infest almost all Hubbardisms.

I know you both partially understand this, but there's something preventing your complete understanding of it.

Frankly, at the moment, I'm at a loss as to what to do about that, other than to mention it.

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

The average Scientologist towers above the religious and philosophical leaders of ages past.​

Reading this thread for the first time, I see that you're doing what Leon was doing. Both of you have been immersed in others' criticism and critiquing of Scientology by reason of participation in the NET and ESMB. Yet neither of you quite 'gets it.'

The idea of 'PTSness' is not 'misused' by the CofS, it is used. It was not 'misused' by Hubbard; it was used by Hubbard.

'PTSness' and 'SP', of course, are Hubbardisms. They come with all the hidden hooks, angles, and manipulative and abusive twists and layers that infest almost all Hubbardisms.

I know you both partially understand this, but there's something preventing your complete understanding of it.

Frankly, at the moment, I'm at a loss as to what to do about that, other than to mention it.

This is purely speculative because I haven't been inside an org for many years now, but after I left the CofS I was told that no one in the CofS is allowed to name a Scientology staff member (much less Miscavige himself) as an SP.

Which leads me to this suggestion;

I think the truth is that the CofS is afraid of the tech of SP / PTSness because it knows it's bigger than they are. If either staff or public were allowed to carry out an SP rundown, on any scale, and were allowed to name any terminal as an SP which came up, the Church would be in big trouble.

There is a precedent for this; according to Pilot, the CofS once piloted an ethics rundown which was both comprehensive and very searching. They ended up withdrawing it because it put the people it was run on in open conflict with the Orgs and CofS policy, which they tried to fix - good for them, but not so good for the CofS which promptly declared them.

PTSness we might have to agree to differ on, but as has been pointed out by a number of people in this thread, a number of other authors have described personality types or disorders not all that different from SPdom. Are they to be rejected as well?

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

But this makes my point. It should be for the person receiving services to decide from their own knowingness who is an SP and who isn't. It's not up to any Church to tell them (or you).

It's no different from Matthew Fox, at the time a young Catholic priest, being silenced by the Vatican for talking about "creation spirituality" (though I believe they've now relented) and, according to his wiki, refusing to condemn homosexuality. It doesn't mean he was evil, quite the reverse; he was a threat to their institutional authority because he was speaking truths they didn't want to hear.

(Obviously there have been heretics burned at the stake in the past; I'm just choosing a contemporary example.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Fox_(priest)

 

[Veda]

-snip-

I think the truth is that the CofS is afraid of the tech of SP / PTSness because it knows it's bigger than they are.

-snip-

Is that what 'The Pilot' said?

Oh, never mind... :confused2:

 

[Winston Smith]

Just my two bits: While I had a certain dread of PTSness and SPs "back in the day," persons who are pains in the ass today just register as persons to be ignored by me today. In other words no power whatsoever over me. The operative thing is that I am retired and do not have to fear or worry about "my standing" in a job. I also these days am not a threat to others. Just a lovable little fuzz ball.

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

Is that what 'The Pilot' said?:

No. And your point is...?

Either it's right or it isn't, it doesn't matter whether he or anyone else said it first.

Oh, never mind... :confused2:

OK then, I won't.

You really ought to knock off your near constant contumely if you want me to take any notice of what you are saying.

 

[GreyLensman]

I've found PTS to be mostly invalid. All illness is PTS - bullshit. Lack of sleep, lack of nutrition, cigarettes, coffee, all of that contributes to a body being liable to disease or illness. All of that is part of the stress of living the Scientological lifestyle. So, instead of looking at your Scientological lifestyle as the source of your fucking illness, you look for the SP. You assign it as hallucinatory cause, and you recover from your cold in three to seven days... Amazing how the tech works...

This is yet another mechanism to prevent questioning or thinking outside of the box that is Scientology. It works, to keep people from pursuing any answer that might lead to the realization that Scientology is a complete scam and any workability is completely accidental and that you'd be better the hell out of it asap.

Sp - there is true evil in the world. LRH was not honest in defining it, he was busy hiding his own evil from himself and others... Working against LRH's bullshit scam organization is not an evil thing to do at all. That pretty much invalidates, for me, any sense that this is worth taking up at all.

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

I've found PTS to be mostly invalid. All illness is PTS - bullshit. Lack of sleep, lack of nutrition, cigarettes, coffee, all of that contributes to a body being liable to disease or illness. All of that is part of the stress of living the Scientological lifestyle. So, instead of looking at your Scientological lifestyle as the source of your fucking illness, you look for the SP. You assign it as hallucinatory cause, and you recover from your cold in three to seven days... Amazing how the tech works...

This is yet another mechanism to prevent questioning or thinking outside of the box that is Scientology. It works, to keep people from pursuing any answer that might lead to the realization that Scientology is a complete scam and any workability is completely accidental and that you'd be better the hell out of it asap.

Sp - there is true evil in the world. LRH was not honest in defining it, he was busy hiding his own evil from himself and others... Working against LRH's bullshit scam organization is not an evil thing to do at all. That pretty much invalidates, for me, any sense that this is worth taking up at all.

All I can say is, it didn't for me. I had a big win on my "Ups and Downs" course (an introductory level PTS rundown) in which a long standing and very painful stomach condition cleared up pretty much overnight - and I still thought the Church sucked and walked out of there as soon as I finished my comm course.

It didn't "stop me thinking outside the box" at all.