Scientology & Denial

[Good twin]

2 cents

Ostrich, some are better at ignoring the obvious than others. Your Ignosis Rundown is obviously unflat.

 

[Gadfly]

Ostrich, some are better at ignoring the obvious than others. Your Ignosis Rundown is obviously unflat.

Damn!!!! I will report for the Ignosis RPF immediately. My bad.

And I will thus learn to better IGNORE the OBVIOUS, and better tolerate "ego dramatizations" & the often gross stupidity of others (no matter how much is due to real or imagined "emotional needs").

 

[Alanzo]

Cost/benefit might have some meaning to a personal ego (or business) traipsing through life, but it has little value past that. This is just another version of Hubbard's "survive/succumb" balancing act. More of the same old nonsense where something or some activity is trying to "survive" within and against everything else. More duality.

That is just some weird version of "greatest good for the greatest number". Good = benefit; Bad = Cost. Just balance it out!

Cripes, the Muslim kid putting on the C4 belt of explosives also conducts some sort of "cost versus benefit" analysis when choosing to blow up the bus of school children in the name of his "Islamic cause".

Earth and all its various dramas can easily and probably best be understood as nothing but a complex interaction of various "egos flaunting themselves". Each trying to maximize (personal) "benefit" and reduce (personal) "cost". Yawn. So boring.

Perhaps there is an MU that is making you natter so much.

COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS

 

[Gadfly]

Perhaps there is an MU that is making you natter so much.

COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS

Maybe. :confused2:

 

[Alanzo]

Maybe. :confused2:

Just kidding you.

I liked your thread.

Thanks for bringing all this up.

 

[small steps]

You know, Gadfly, for someone who seems to have rather a clear idea of what a bad thing ego is.......you appear to be incapable spotting your own. I am willing to take the rough with the smooth when it comes to interaction as a rule.....however, for the first time since I came to this board, I feel the need to put somebody on ignore. you. I know you won't care. I have no ill feeling towards you as a person....I have found some of what you have posted interesting and of value to me and I thank you for that.....but in the end I am just simply finding your loudness a little much. so thanks and bye.

 

[Gadfly]

Just kidding you.

I liked your thread.

Thanks for bringing all this up.

Hee-hee. It's okay. I probably DO have MUs or even NOT-Understoods on it! I extrapolated from the words, and drove it down a pathway. I am most likely guilty as charged!

I didn't take it as any sort of "attack". There is some "fencing" that goes on here, just for the "sport" of it, and it is all in good fun. We each, at least some of us, take on different viewpoints just to "argue" or "discuss". They can switch around in an instant.

The common view for me, with others of similar mind, is simply to help others see through Hubbard's system and organization of deception. Whether that is obvious or not to most readers, I get more than my fair share of PMs expressing thanks or interest in various points that I bring up. Just as I am sure you have over the years!

Other than THAT anybody can say and post anything.

 

[Gadfly]

You know, Gadfly, for someone who seems to have rather a clear idea of what a bad thing ego is.......you appear to be incapable spotting your own. I am willing to take the rough with the smooth when it comes to interaction as a rule.....however, for the first time since I came to this board, I feel the need to put somebody on ignore. you. I know you won't care. I have no ill feeling towards you as a person....I have found some of what you have posted interesting and of value to me and I thank you for that.....but in the end I am just simply finding your loudness a little much. so thanks and bye.

You wouldn't be the first, and I doubt that you will be the last (who finds the Gadfly persona annoying or irritating on some level).

Cripes, sometimes I go back a few weeks later and read something I posted, and I GET ANNOYED!!!!

I learned "loudness" screaming at an ashtray in the Upper Indoc Courseroom at Flag! :confused2:

Stand Up! Sit Down in THAT chair! STAND up! Sit DOWN in THAT CHAIR!

I never did quite get the cognition that it was intention, and not the volume that mattered.

 

[Lurker5]

Hey, I like you

Gadfly, I like you, even when you are coming off kind of annoying -

Hopefully you will like me too when I come off that way.

Or not

Kidding ! No, wait ! - I DO LIKE YOU, even when you are annoying - I am not kidding about that. Just the other stuff - though I can be annoying (too), that's no kidding either.

 

[Lurker5]

Or -----

Maybe I like you BECAUSE you are sometimes annoying ????

Annoy away . . .

 

[Alanzo]

Gadfly wrote:

...

Whether that is obvious or not to most readers, I get more than my fair share of PMs expressing thanks or interest in various points that I bring up. Just as I am sure you have over the years!

Actually no. Most people just ignore me and pray that I go away.

I do have a huge following in the Lurker Community, though. They never say anything, and I've never actually gotten any PMs from them, but I know they're huge. And they're out there.

I think the evidence on which I base my own colossal conceit is more subtle than yours.

 

[Gadfly]

Gadfly, I like you, even when you are coming off kind of annoying -

Hopefully you will like me too when I come off that way.

Or not

Kidding ! No, wait ! - I DO LIKE YOU, even when you are annoying - I am not kidding about that. Just the other stuff - though I can be annoying (too), that's no kidding either.

I always like you.

Lurker5, you are my current discussion board fantasy dream girl!!! :confused2:

I am hoping that I don't piss off any of my "other secret admirers" by that statement.

 

[Gadfly]

Gadfly wrote:

...Actually no. Most people just ignore me and pray that I go away.

I do have a huge following in the Lurker Community, though. They never say anything, and I've never actually gotten any PMs from them, but I know they're huge. And they're out there.

I think the evidence on which I base my own colossal conceit is more subtle than yours.

Alanzo, you are funny.

 

[pollywannacracker]

Are you sure he was imaginary? Not joking here. Very young children often (I read) can still perceive and interact with spiritual beings in their vicinity, that older people have lost the ability to perceive. We assume they are not real because we can't perceive them.

Paul

Good observation, Paul.

I just saw a segment on Discovery or History channels yesterday about psychic children. These children see or perceive spirits that others cannot see or perceive.

In the episode I watched, the children were brought together with an adult psychic and a therapist to help them deal with what they were going through. Both children felt that they were different and learned early on to not talk about their perceptions as the general public wouldn't be receptive (or in agreement) with it.

Seeing the children adapt to the level of their awareness stabilized them so much that they were no longer fearful of their perceptions. It was heartwarming.

i think that children are innocent and much wiser than we give them credit for being due to their lack of communication skills. Children can be so sure of what they perceive be it spirits, family interactions, et al...

It is this absolute certainty that gives credence to what they are able to communicate about their perceptions. I think we can lose this function as we mature and learn what society accepts or denies for conformity purposes.

-PWC

 

[pollywannacracker]

And looking at it again, from a conformity standpoint.

I think the majority try to conform rather than be looked upon as outcasts.

To think of the number of times I clapped over-enthusiastically to some stupid thing I heard at an event; said LRH was so wonderful to have come up with whatever idea that was shoved down my throat (all-the-while knowing full well I had read something similar elsewhere); having to bury my own thoughts on his writing skills (or lack thereof), after justifying that his literary skills were great but I just don't like the scifi genre...

THOSE are just some of the things that I learned to ignore upon my involvement in Scn.

-PWC

 

[Gadfly]

PWC, no doubt! Peer pressure and the urges to "conform" are NO SMALL aspect of ANY group experience. They are, of course, incredibly over-exaggerated in the world of Scientology where "agreement" is such a KEY component of the experience. The force exerted to "agree" is tremendous in Scn, simply by the way the indoctrination is designed.

 

[Opter]

One example of denial:

I remember a time as a PC at the AO ( on one of my OT levels ) I heard the DOP and one of the auditors - both were OTs - having a screaming "match" with each other in the admin room of the HGC. Everybody in the area could hear them but pretended they didn't. The screaming went on for about five minutes and it only ended when the C/S came out of her office/ ivory tower, entered the room and with a raised voice told them to stop.

At the time,I thought that it was very strange that two SO OTs behaved in that way ( I also thought they were very good friends ) and I explained it to myself that they needed more auditing and that was going to fix it.
and the line , which I was given by Scios so many times when I observed unethical or strange behavior,- mainly by staff members - popped into my head : Ron would have never behaved like that!!!!!!!!!!!!

Opter

 

[Gadfly]

One example of denial:

I remember a time as a PC at the AO ( on one of my OT levels ) I heard the DOP and one of the auditors - both were OTs - having a screaming "match" with each other in the admin room of the HGC. Everybody in the area could hear them but pretended they didn't. The screaming went on for about five minutes and it only ended when the C/S came out of her office/ ivory tower, entered the room and with a raised voice told them to stop.

At the time,I thought that it was very strange that two SO OTs behaved in that way ( I also thought they were very good friends ) and I explained it to myself that they needed more auditing and that was going to fix it.
and the line , which I was given by Scios so many times when I observed unethical or strange behavior,- mainly by staff members - popped into my head : Ron would have never behaved like that!!!!!!!!!!!!

Opter

But Ron would have acted like THAT! AGGGGHHHHHHH!

Yes, the "needs more auditing" was and remains a typical "dub-in" for devoted Churchies.

Great one Opter! Thank-you!

Come on the rest of you. I know that there are more. MANY more! Contribute here.

 

[degraded being]

Well, there are wise and unwise choices too.

But, you may remember a little story from Castaneda, about a cat that was being taken in to be 'put to sleep' and that got away. And, Don Juan suggested that Carlos' *choice* should be to believe that the cat survived and lived on happily, because it was a 'tale of power'.

However, there's a difference to maintaining a belief that Nkumbo Wananabe of Nigeria is really going to send you $20 million once you pay his solicitor $2,000. Or that Ron gives a fuck what you write to Him.

Zinj

Manipulating emotions about *harmless* cat-survives type stories means being able to extend it to "believe a lot of shit about me as your saviour" type stories.

I suppose if the cat stories can be true, then by some sort of logic any other BS can be true too. and conversely, if one feel-good belief is critically analysed, a person may start on other beliefs they hold. That may be something they don't want.

So, yes, there is some difference between the types of stories, but not to the deluded or those who have no motivation to question beliefs, faith, etc.

 

[SomeGuy]

Awesome thread.

I like that while I think Alanzo is mostly tongue in cheek, I actually lose the plot now and then and believe what he's saying.

I think Alanzo is my Carpo.