Scientology concepts that still "make sense" to you.

[Lulu Belle]

This thread is strictly for ex-Scientologists, because those who haven't been in won't get it.

Even if you have totally decided that Scientology is a sham, that LRH was a lunatic, and the church is a criminal organization....

There are still concepts that exist in Scientology that will pop into your mind when you see things in life.

I know that it has been argued many, many times that nothing that LRH came up with was original, that he got it all from someplace else. I don't know whether or not that is true, and I'm really not here to argue that point.

There are things that I got from Scientology that were unique to me that still come to mind when I am in the "wog world".

Has anyone else experienced this?

I'll start with an example:

The "service fac".

I see it a lot at work. The person who HAS to be right, and whose entire existence is built around making himself right.

Nothing quite explains the phenomena as well as "ser fac".

What other concepts that you feel are "unique to Scientology" do you experience?

 

[jodie]

The "service fac".

I see it a lot at work. The person who HAS to be right, and whose entire existence is built around making himself right.

Nothing quite explains the phenomena as well as "ser fac".

What other concepts that you feel are "unique to Scientology" do you experience?

Sure, the concept of the missed withhold. When you inadvertantly touch on something someone does not want you to know about, and then they react with hostility and aggression - they attack you. Happens IRL every day.

I have not seen that concept articulated quite so well anywhere else.

Serv fac is also a pretty neat concept, which you can see playing out IRL.

There is a lot of good in Scientology. Yes. There is also some lethal stuff - infinity valued logic, for instance, is deadly. (Either, or - no middle ground). Example - you are either for or against, as per the ethics formulas - there is no room for middle ground, and real life simply does not work like that.

So there is some good stuff that is workable, and some quite deadly stuff that is not.

Is that a satisfactory answer to your question?

ARC,

- jodie

 

[programmer_guy]

I've occasionally seen the missed withhold phenomena (natter). This does happen. I saw it at work just a few weeks ago.

But just because someone natters does not necessarily imply a missed withhold.

Just because A implies B does NOT mean that B implies A.

All chevy camaros are automobiles BUT not all automobiles are chevy camaros.

This is a big logical fallacy as taught in HCOBs.

Not everyone who has a missed-withhold will natter. AND not everyone who natters has a missed-withhold. (i.e. some complaints are legitimat.)

 

[TheSneakster]

Wrong definition of "natter"

Legitimate complaints are not now and never were "natter".

The original Tech definition still means *irrational* criticism and complaints.

Just because the non-Tech trained morons in the Sea Org who crazily define *any and all* complaint as "natter" never bothered to "clear their word", does not change the *technical definition*.

Michael A. Hobson
(Jay Random User on ARS and Warrior Mike in XSO)

 

[Romuva]

Interesting topic

It reminded me alot of a quote from Messiah or a Madman(I'll have to
find it) but basically the person was arguing that they felt there were
some positive benefits to auditing and Scientology but that Hubbards
work needed to be sorted through the lies,falsehoods,tricks.ect.

It was basically the argument that it shouldn't be dismissed outright
and looked into.I agree with that to a certain point.

Of course COS will argue that the "Physchs" will tear it apart and
it will become ineffective.

As far as the labels or traits Scientology identifies ,there may be some truth
but in my opinion it's counterproductive and misleading at times to put the
labels on people that Sci does.

For instance ,somebody being right all the time.Some people have had experiences in life that they hold a certain conviction or maybe they
were tramautized or had a loss that it's justified.

The whole "suppressive person " label to me is ludicruous.There are better
physchological/sociological traits or identities that do a better job explaining
the Physche of a person.

The idea of SP in my opinion goes back to Hubbards fixation on this whole
track and past lives ect.It's unprovable and gives the appearance of
Science-fiction fantasy to anybody trying to be objective about the subject.


and alot of the terms seem to have the point of exposing a person which
is destructive in my opinion.or it's the need to label a person to justify
the reason of that certain person's viewpoint or deny credibility to the person
you percieve as "wrong" ...or this or that..and so on.It can play out different
ways.

It's also simplistic,people have certain personalities that are complex and
sometimes it takes time to understand a person ,why they have certain
convictions,querks and do some of things they do.Just because somebody is..ie
obsessive compulsive,controlling,self-righteous,Chuvanist..ect. doesn't
always explain their whole personality and life experiences and at the same time they could have good qualities along with bad ones.Simply put, it's
dangerous to label.

In fact,it seems similar to the discussion we are having about critics on other
message boards and Scientologists in general.

 

[tarbaby]

It was basically the argument that it shouldn't be dismissed outright and looked into.I agree with that to a certain point.

As "fruitful" as picking raisins out of turds, IMO.

Dennis

 

[Romuva]

Thanks Tarbaby ,you gave me a good laugh with my morning coffee

intuitively that's how I feel about Scientology but I try to be objective
here.Maybe I should just be honest

 

[Romuva]

Scientology's argument of able or ability

Hey,I was just curious what kind of opinions people had on this.


Scientology makes the argument about increasing ability.Say for example
re-examining your viewpoints and beliefs. Everyday life improvements
being maybe you could find a better job or start a business,start some interesting hobbies.You had more confidence to approach a problem or situation in life.


Maybe just overall confidence to take on situations in life.Maybe you
were able to work through a relationship at home or at work.

In other words you actually found some real improvements in your life.
Not just this "I'm a jedi master of my mest universe" stuff.

I'm not necessarily implying Scientology did this but what were some thoughts on this?

I mean even if you still developed a really big ego when you were in COS
did you find that some of the confidence you gained ,helped you?
Or was it just bravado?

I understand the argument you could gain confidence just in daily life
by taking on challenges on getting involved and doing certain things.
People make arguments for example that the military or going to college
do this.

In some ways is this some of the real glue that holds COS together,so to speak.They can argue"Well you did this...and this..)Did scientology actually
assist or aid you in making desired improvements in your life?

I always wanted to ask this question to long time ex-members and their
thoughts on it.I'm not arguing pro-scientology(I know it sounds like that)

just raising the question.

Sorry,I'm know I'm spamming the shit out of this board and I'll read for a while.

thanks

 

[Terril park]

JODIE
There is a lot of good in Scientology. Yes. There is also some lethal stuff - infinity valued logic, for instance, is deadly. (Either, or - no middle ground). Example - you are either for or against, as per the ethics formulas - there is no room for middle ground, and real life simply does not work like that.
BB
You got that back to front. My secretary will post the rest.

TECH DICT:
In DN, there is a new way of thinking about things which underlies a great deal of technology. Instead of two valued logic or three valued logic we have INFINITY VALUED LOGIC. Here is a gradient scale which permits no absolute at iether end. In other words, there is not an absolute right and an absolute wrong, just as there is no absolute stillness and no absolute motion. Of course, It is one of the tenets of Dn. that absolutes are not obtainable but only approachable.

http://www.freewebs.com/techoutsidethecofs

http://internationalfreezone.net

 

[Lulu Belle]

I'll tell you another favorite of mine that doesn't seem to have an equivalent in wog speak.

DEV-T.

 

[Terril park]

I majored in admin, did it all, and don't agree with it all. But do mostly

I find little or no fault with tech. No doubt there are other viewpoints.


http://www.freewebs .com/techoutside thecofs

http://internationa lfreezone. net

 

[tarbaby]

I'll tell you another favorite of mine that doesn't seem to have an equivalent in wog speak.

DEV-T.

Hey Lulu,

Maybe you ought to explain in english to the readers who didn't have opportunity to sift through Elrong's Droppings, exactly what Dev-T is and define all the different types he listed out for us.

IMO they are just numerous ways to enforce the pecking order; to tell another staff member to eff-off and stop bugging you.

Dennis

 

[Alan]

As with most things and subjects it all boils down to intent!

If the intentention is based upon: "All of mankind shall be my slaves and not know why!"

Then it is evil.

But if taken away from that intent, there can be a lot of good, if each part is fully understood and the consequences of its use are recognized..

Alan

 

[Lulu Belle]

Hey Lulu,

Maybe you ought to explain in english to the readers who didn't have opportunity to sift through Elrong's Droppings, exactly what Dev-T is and define all the different types he listed out for us.

If you read what I said when I started the thread, I said that this thread is specifically for ex-Scientologists, because those who weren't in won't "get" it.

So, I don't feel the need to explain the terminology.

 

[Emma]

Things that I still "see" in myself and others:

• Ser facs
• MWH phenomena
• 2nd phenomena (MUs)
• Stuck in an incident and still dramatising it
• Stuck in another's valence
• Incomplete cycles of action creating insanity
• Blowing charge by finding the REAL alterisness

I'm not saying these things aren't explained or covered in other technologies or belief systems, but these are the things in Scn that I learnt about that I still see. I don't know whether that is because I'm still an "indoc'd clam" or they are real phenomena that LRH uncovered (or plaguerised from another).

 

[tarbaby]

If you read what I said when I started the thread, I said that this thread is specifically for ex-Scientologists, because those who weren't in won't "get" it.

So, I don't feel the need to explain the terminology.

Heh, right Lulu.

Still, it would be intresting to see if you (or anyone) even CAN explain all the types of Dev-T in English and share the data with the wogs on the board. I'm sure they would be quite amused to hear what the word supposedly means to you.

I know I would be.

Dennis

 

[Lulu Belle]

Heh, right Lulu.

Still, it would be intresting to see if you (or anyone) even CAN explain all the types of Dev-T in English and share the data with the wogs on the board. I'm sure they would be quite amused to hear what the word supposedly means to you.

I know I would be.

Dennis

That's the point.

I don't know if I could exactly explain the concept to someone who has no previous knowledge of Scientology.

But I certainly do experience it every day in my "wog" work world.

 

[tarbaby]

That's the point.

I don't know if I could exactly explain the concept to someone who has no previous knowledge of Scientology.

But I certainly do experience it every day in my "wog" work world.

Heh, Lulu.

Now see, I think you've made the point I was trying to make. And that is that if the term had a real meaning it would apply to the real world (not just the cult enviornment) and you would be able to describe what relevance it has in english to wogs.

You claim it has relevance in the "wog" work world. So I wonder if you could actually explain it to them. I'm actually curious if anyone could; beyond simply stating it's a complicated list of and ethics reporting system for rejections used to send back things and people passed along to one worker by another that doesn't feel it's his job to deal with them.

Is it really more than that? I don't think so.

Dennis

 

[Pooks]

I still have to make an effort to NOT use certain Scn words that I find
very useful. Not using the words, but finding wog words to explain things
has been very helpful in getting rid of the scn mindset.

But one Scn term I really find useful is: 2D.

It explains a concept much better than "significant other".

 

[tarbaby]

I still have to make an effort to NOT use certain Scn words that I find
very useful. Not using the words, but finding wog words to explain things
has been very helpful in getting rid of the scn mindset.

But one Scn term I really find useful is: 2D.

It explains a concept much better than "significant other".

And it works fine as long as you don't connect it with what the "D" means and how it ties to other concepts. It's those backing up concepts you might run into trouble explaining.

I'm sorry but what's wrong with: my husband, wife, partner, lover, girlfriend, hug, etc.

Whatever you call it, him or her, an english word will do, IMO.

Dennis