Scientology concepts that still "make sense" to you.

[Mick Wenlock]

???

I don't think I'm the only person around that has used this law to deal with an ongoing conflict.

(And, I'm not talking about creating conflicts - that would go against my integrity - I'm talking about dealing with it, if you see others causing such conflict).

This has nothing to do with belief.

You don't know me - and I don't appreciate your bashing.

Oh puleeze, the "bashing"?? What bashing? That I don't believe what you are saying? Have I berated you for it? Have I slagged you down for any of it? That I disagree with you is now the scientology buzzword "bashing"? Where do you come up with this stuff?

History is full of examples of where people were sure something was one way, only to later find out that they were completely ignorant of the truth. I'm sure you've heard, even the earth was considered to be flat not that long ago? And, I'm sure you've heard how those, that dared to bring up a different viewpoint, were treated?

they were treated fine - did you read any history books? Where did you get your data that they were treated badly? The only real instances I know of people being treated badly for thinking for themselves is when religion gets involved. look at Scientology as a great example of how people who actually dare to think and act independently get bashed.

Allow me to introduce a concept here.

The concept that good ideas, when new, have sometimes been attacked does not mean that something that is attacked is a good, new idea. Bad new ideas have also been ridiculed and laughed out of existence and some bad new ideas have attracted acolytes who will swear blind that their guru has all the answers.

In fact some of the best treatment has been lavished on those who thought and acted differently and who opened up new areas for mankind.

I'm just saying, keep your eyes open, you might find something useful.

well my advice to you would be to keep your mind open - you may learn something.

btw- I know nothing about you. Would you mind sharing your story?

M.

google my name or read my posts on OCMB. Feel free to ask me anything about that.

 

[freet43]

Oh puleeze, the "bashing"?? .

oops - another button? how naughty of me

did you read any history books? Where did you get your data that they were treated badly? .

It's been a long while since I was reading about this. If I have time, I'll search for some good examples.

Allow me to introduce a concept here.

The concept that good ideas, when new, have sometimes been attacked does not mean that something that is attacked is a good, new idea. Bad new ideas have also been ridiculed and laughed out of existence and some bad new ideas have attracted acolytes who will swear blind that their guru has all the answers.

It's not a new concept, but I agree with that.

In fact some of the best treatment has been lavished on those who thought and acted differently and who opened up new areas for mankind. .

examples?

well my advice to you would be to keep your mind open - you may learn something..

Don't worry. It is.

If it wasn't, I would not have left the CO$ back in the late 70s.

google my name or read my posts on OCMB. Feel free to ask me anything about that.

Will do. And, I look forward to more interesting conversations.

M.

 

[freet43]

The following is posted on an alternative health site I frequent.

The Doctor (a DO) is not, and never was in Scn that I know of.

Somehow I don't think he coined this - I'm pretty sure I'd heard this before.

Here goes - and it'll probably push a few more buttons...

"All Truth Goes Through Three Stages

First it is ridiculed

Then it is violently opposed

Finally, it is accepted as self-evident "

Any historians out there - anyone know who this quote comes from?

How about scientists- anyone know of examples?

M.

Here's the link
http://mercola.com/

and I highly recommend this from the JAMA (Journal American Medical Association) regarding Doctors are the THIRD leading cause of death in the US, causing 225,000 Deaths every year.

The link to the peer reviewed article, authored by Dr. Starfield from Johns Hopkins is at:

http://mercola.com/2000/jul/30/doctors_death.htm

 

[Nec_V20]

freet43,

It is from Arthur Schopenhauer, 1788-1860 a German philosopher and the quote is:

in the first it is ridiculed;
in the second, it is resisted;
in the third, it is considered self-evident.

 

[Björkist]

Dynamics
Ethics Conditions
Conditions of Existence (Be, Do, Have) and its parallels in the Cycle of Action, etc.
Service Facsimiles
O/W
Ally computations


And probably more. Scientology definitely explains and codifies things more concisely and less confusedly than other subjects attempting to resolve the same issues.

:champion:

 

[Little Bear Victor]

I find some value in the definition of Art as the "quality of communication." I'd classify that as an LRH original discovery.

Victor

 

[Zinjifar]

I find some value in the definition of Art as the "quality of communication." I'd classify that as an LRH original discovery.

Victor

That would be at best an adjective or an adverb.

*ART* would be to me a 'communicable reference to experience'

'Art' is a noun. Artsy Fartsy is an adjective or adverb

Zinj

 

[Björkist]

That would be at best an adjective or an adverb.

*ART* would be to me a 'communicable reference to experience'

'Art' is a noun. Artsy Fartsy is an adjective or adverb

Zinj

Zinjifar, you always bring so much to the table.

 

[Chipallina]

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....


for me Book 1 99.9% - OT levels maybe 30% but then again I never went OT I just wrote ethics summaries for them

 

[Zinjifar]

Zinjifar, you always bring so much to the table.

And, I don't even ask for a tip

Zinj

 

[Royal Prince Xenu]

Third Party is something I encounter a great deal, and not all of it is intentional. In fact, most of it is due to a misunderstanding. In one workplace the big boss was partially deaf and often intoxicated, so when another staff member complained about something I had said or done, it would get blown way out of proportion.

My handling was to go to the person who had made the original complaint and generally find out it was a minor remark in passing that was handled in five minutes.

As a result, whenever I sense third party, I bypass it and go straight to the alleged source, have lunch and sort it once and for all.

 

[Mick Wenlock]

Third Party is something I encounter a great deal, and not all of it is intentional. In fact, most of it is due to a misunderstanding. In one workplace the big boss was partially deaf and often intoxicated, so when another staff member complained about something I had said or done, it would get blown way out of proportion.

My handling was to go to the person who had made the original complaint and generally find out it was a minor remark in passing that was handled in five minutes.

As a result, whenever I sense third party, I bypass it and go straight to the alleged source, have lunch and sort it once and for all.

That's not "Third Party". It would only be "third party" if that same person, while dissing you to your drunk, deaf boss was also dissing your drunk deaf boss to you.

And, as you know who it is - it does not fulfill the "unknown to both sides" bit either.

In short what you are doing is "how to handle a gossip" which is basic "tech" from the middle ages and has nothing to do with Scientology or Hubbard.

 

[Mick Wenlock]

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....


for me Book 1 99.9% - OT levels maybe 30% but then again I never went OT I just wrote ethics summaries for them

guess the 0.1 % of Book 1 would include those howlers about "psychosomatic" illness , clears don't get colds, clears live longer and so on.