Lone Star
Crusader
Stand tall Scientologists. Be proud.
An ordinary Scientologist towers above the great sages and prophets of the past.
OMG! I forgot about this ridiculous picture!
And to think, they actually believe this shit!
Scientology is all bad
- Thread starter Veda
- Start date
OMG! I forgot about this ridiculous picture!
And to think, they actually believe this shit!
SweetnessandLight
Crusader
Aw...is that the one with Uwe's picture? Or his replacement...
Either way, that photo always makes me think of Uwe and his tragic story...
For the newbies and the Lurkers:
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...ck&highlight=understand+happened+Stuckenbrock
Either way, that photo always makes me think of Uwe and his tragic story...
For the newbies and the Lurkers:
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...ck&highlight=understand+happened+Stuckenbrock
TG1
Angelic Poster
Given how many times the words hypnosis and hypnotic state appeared in the Anderson Report -- and crops up in criticisms of Scientology training and auditing -- I found Veda's and others’ suggestions that we explore definition(s) of hypnosis and hypnotic behavior a useful suggestion.
Here’s one definition from wikipedia:
Hypnosis: The induction of a state of consciousness in which a person apparently loses the power of voluntary action and is highly responsive to suggestion or direction. Its use in therapy, typically to recover suppressed memories or to allow modification of behavior by suggestion, has been revived but is still controversial.
Per this very general definition of hypnosis, would anyone be open to the idea that the following activities and practices also qualify as hypnosis or have hypnotic qualities?
Here’s one definition from wikipedia:
Hypnosis: The induction of a state of consciousness in which a person apparently loses the power of voluntary action and is highly responsive to suggestion or direction. Its use in therapy, typically to recover suppressed memories or to allow modification of behavior by suggestion, has been revived but is still controversial.
Per this very general definition of hypnosis, would anyone be open to the idea that the following activities and practices also qualify as hypnosis or have hypnotic qualities?
- An infant and his mother stare into each other's eyes for hours, days, weeks and months to bond in ways that inspire enormous devotion and sacrifice.
- A young woman experiences adrenaline highs from mountain treks and is attracted to other high-risk outdoors recreation.
- A man attends daily Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, often volunteering to read aloud passages from The Book and to testify about his understanding and application of AA’s principles – to stay clean and sober.
- A woman engages in brief meditation exercises throughout the day to reduce the stress of her law practice.
Jquepublic
Silver Meritorious Patron
Smilla
Ordinary Human
States of consciousness are of particular interest to me, and something that I've researched in depth.
The two states that we're all aware of are the sleeping and waking states. No surprises there, but there are many others. Coma is interesting, as it is a state which looks like sleep, but is quite different from it.
Similarly, hypnotic reverie looks like the waking state, but is quite different from it...
The two states that we're all aware of are the sleeping and waking states. No surprises there, but there are many others. Coma is interesting, as it is a state which looks like sleep, but is quite different from it.
Similarly, hypnotic reverie looks like the waking state, but is quite different from it...
TG1
Angelic Poster
What about these activities? Do they induce hypnotic states?
1. Chanting a mantra aloud for hours
2. Attending rock and roll concerts
3. Attending highly interactive fundamentalist Christian revival meetings
4. Running 30-40 miles a week
5. Going to Catholic mass every morning and saying the rosary twice daily
6. Watching television 12 hours a day
1. Chanting a mantra aloud for hours
2. Attending rock and roll concerts
3. Attending highly interactive fundamentalist Christian revival meetings
4. Running 30-40 miles a week
5. Going to Catholic mass every morning and saying the rosary twice daily
6. Watching television 12 hours a day
HelluvaHoax!
Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
Excellent!!
That would be a sane approach.
Just tell them that Clear brings the person's ability up to the :
* Recognition that they are mocking it up.
* Ability to not mock it up for themselves at will.
* Ability to not mock it up for themselves at will.
Just knowing that you are "mocking it up" doesn't mean that you can do any damn thing about it. Otherwise, why are "Clears" mocking up so many problems and upsets for themselves after they are "Clear"? It's not all the fault of BTs, ya know. LOL.
And tell beginners after they prove they have those ABILITIES they will then be working on the next level of ability which is the OT LEVELS where they will address and attain the ability to:
* Recognize that other beings are mocking it up. Could be people in their lives, family, at work, wherever. Or it could be BTs. It's kind of like auditing, you might run this lifetime or a past life, it doesn't really matter.
* Ability to not let other being's mock-ups affect you.
* Ability to not let other being's mock-ups affect you.
Now, I don't believe any of that is even possible or true because nobody has actually done it. But it is a cool theory if people want to try it. If anyone figures out how to do that I would be interested. Otherwise, why bother, it's just a wild guess and hypothecation that has no more merit than the cults who believe that a UFO is going to pick them up before the world ends.
None of this would really be possible in Scientology because they are determined to rape people's finances for no reason whatsoever. It doesn't cost much to deliver auditing. Just an auditor and a meter and someone to CS. The rest of the hundreds of millions wasted on garbage promo, black ops, OSA, buildings, lawyers, attacking others and trying to cover up the lies is not actually needed if the tech works.
SweetnessandLight
Crusader
What about these activities? Do they induce hypnotic states?
1. Chanting a mantra aloud for hours Oh Yeah!
2. Attending rock and roll concerts Depends on the Band
3. Attending highly interactive fundamentalist Christian revival meetings Quite possibly
4. Running 30-40 miles a week Hello, runners high! Possibly with syncing breathing and footfalls, etc. I'd say, experienced runners, Yes!
5. Going to Catholic mass every morning and saying the rosary twice daily Nope not really, the liturgical call and response and ritual, eh...maybe a little, but you'd have to do it for like twenty years... saying the rosary twice, Nah. Saying twenty rosaries in a row, Oh Yeah!
6. Watching television 12 hours a day ABSOLUTELY, without a doubt! Duh!
Veda
Sponsor
While I have mixed feelings about the Anderson Report, there's no denying that Anderson was spot on - almost prescient - regarding Hubbard's use of the "Brainwashing Manual" on Scientologists.
By 1965, the date of the issuing of the Anderson Report, Hubbard had only implemented - maybe - half the ideas and methods of that manual on Scientologists, while also gradually incorporating it into the doctrine.
It would be 1974 before full implementation would have occurred, yet, in the mid 1960s:
"One remarkable exhibit tendered to the Board was a series of extracts form the Brain-washing manual..."
This was almost 50 years ago. Amazing.
It would be over 30 years before the book 'Messiah or Madman?' would feature a chapter about the "Brainwashing Manual": http://www.xenu-directory.net/writings/brainwashing-corydon.html
And almost 15 years until the e-book 'Brainwashing Manual Parallels' appeared: http://www.xenu-directory.net/critics/ambry1.html
In the first edition of 'Madman?' there is no mention of Anderson, nor any mention in 'Parallels'. They appear to have independently arrived at the same conclusions, regarding the "Brainwashing Manual, " as the Anderson Report.
I had looked over the Anderson Report with disdain as a Scientologist years ago, and only fairly recently examined it again, particularly the amazing reference to the "Brainwashing Manual" as the "blueprint" for Scientology.
So, excuse me if I don't regard Anderson and his report with utter disdain.
By 1965, the date of the issuing of the Anderson Report, Hubbard had only implemented - maybe - half the ideas and methods of that manual on Scientologists, while also gradually incorporating it into the doctrine.
It would be 1974 before full implementation would have occurred, yet, in the mid 1960s:
"One remarkable exhibit tendered to the Board was a series of extracts form the Brain-washing manual..."
This was almost 50 years ago. Amazing.
It would be over 30 years before the book 'Messiah or Madman?' would feature a chapter about the "Brainwashing Manual": http://www.xenu-directory.net/writings/brainwashing-corydon.html
And almost 15 years until the e-book 'Brainwashing Manual Parallels' appeared: http://www.xenu-directory.net/critics/ambry1.html
In the first edition of 'Madman?' there is no mention of Anderson, nor any mention in 'Parallels'. They appear to have independently arrived at the same conclusions, regarding the "Brainwashing Manual, " as the Anderson Report.
I had looked over the Anderson Report with disdain as a Scientologist years ago, and only fairly recently examined it again, particularly the amazing reference to the "Brainwashing Manual" as the "blueprint" for Scientology.
So, excuse me if I don't regard Anderson and his report with utter disdain.
Panda Termint
Cabal Of One
Yes, above all else, the Scientology Bridge is an exercise in marketing.
Veda
Sponsor
"Hypnosis" is a problematic term. It has many definitions. My suggestion was to by-pass the word (if possible) and use a concise definition or description sans the word "hypnosis."
IMO, the word, "hypnotic," is less problematic, and I have used it a few times on this thread - with quote marks - but, I've found that discussions of the word "hypnosis" usually dead-end with little accomplished, since no one is certain what the other means when he or she uses the word, "hypnosis," or has his or her own pet definition, while ignoring other's definitions.
Try not using the word "hypnosis" at all, and use, instead, a brief description of what you mean by "hypnosis," and perhaps a worthwhile discussion may occur.
That has already happened in a few places on this thread.
But it's easier said than done.
IMO, the word, "hypnotic," is less problematic, and I have used it a few times on this thread - with quote marks - but, I've found that discussions of the word "hypnosis" usually dead-end with little accomplished, since no one is certain what the other means when he or she uses the word, "hypnosis," or has his or her own pet definition, while ignoring other's definitions.
Try not using the word "hypnosis" at all, and use, instead, a brief description of what you mean by "hypnosis," and perhaps a worthwhile discussion may occur.
That has already happened in a few places on this thread.
But it's easier said than done.
HelluvaHoax!
Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
...
This whole business of "HYPNOSIS" got me thinking.
I kind of figured out where it fits in exactly with Scientology. At least, this makes complete sense to me.
PREMISE: Scientology is like a planet ("Planet Scientology") whose goal it is to get every being into its gravitational pull and into orbit around it.
TECH: Scientology has three (3) basic ways to draw people close enough that they can be "captured" by it's gravitational field and fall into orbit around it.
Apologies for the hand-drawn graphic (I had no freaking idea how to do this on a computer).
HOW IT WORKS: There are three WOGS (A, B & C) that Scientology wants to pull into its gravitational field.
WOG "A": This is a person who has an already-existing 'field' around them which we will describe as "CURIOSITY" and "SELF IMPROVEMENT". Those two things motivate Wog A to read a Scientology book or otherwise reach for it. Scientology tries to give them "WINS" and when that happens, Wog A is pulled (yellow arrows) back towards Planet Scientology. When it gets close enough (sufficient "wins") it goes into orbit around Scientology and gravity alone keeps it in orbit forever--unless something knocks it out of orbit. That's another discussion.
WOG "B": This is the only 1 of the 3 Wogs that does not require Scientology do much at all to "pull in" the Wog, besides no-cost TRICKS & LIES using words. Wog A, has a force field around them just chock-full of GULLIBILITY and BLIND FAITH. So they actually propel themselves towards Planet Scientology. It's analagous to fishermen throwing out huge nets and coming back later to see what they caught. The fish swims into the net all by themselves, they don't have to be fought, wrestled and reeled-in at great effort. The orange arrow depicts Wog B's direction of travel into the Tricks/Lies net, which is nothing more than just saying words like "clear" or "OT" or "Total Freedom" or "Scientology can handle that".
WOG "C": This one was not so obvious. I had to think about that a bit. But it's actually simple now. Wog C is a normal human being with normal human psychology. That makes them susceptible to hypnosis, suggestion, authority, following orders, avoiding conflict, blind spots et al. That alone could fill volumes, how and why a human can be subjected to another's command and will. It's programmed into the DNA of human's mind and body, and perhaps even spirit. Wog C also might just be naive and not know that there are such things as con men, hoaxes, scams and con games. This also allows Scientology to use hypnosis to steer another because they are "suggestible" to things that they don't really understand. For example, when my son was very small, he was standing on a kitchen counter and I told him that if he flapped his arms like a bird he could fly over to me on the other side of the room. And he had a huge "win" on that. I counted to three and told him to "JUMP!!" Well, of course he leaped off the counter head first but I was already there to catch him. That is naiveté, not gullibility or blind faith. He just hadn't learned yet that kids can't fly. LOL. Scientology uses hypnosis ("suggestion") to "8C" people to do what they want them to do. There are other less-recognizable derivatives of hypnosis/suggestion, such as "certainty" or "love bombing" which are simple variations on how to put someone under your thrall.
FINAL NOTE: Scientology employs any one or all three of those techniques to get and keep a person in orbit. This explains, in large part, why there is so much confusion about what traps a person in Scientology. And the "Wins" technique has extreme limitations and is normally at its greatest strength right at the beginning of the Bridge and diminishes as hope and expectation slowly dies over the course of trying to go Clear and OT.
This whole business of "HYPNOSIS" got me thinking.
I kind of figured out where it fits in exactly with Scientology. At least, this makes complete sense to me.
PREMISE: Scientology is like a planet ("Planet Scientology") whose goal it is to get every being into its gravitational pull and into orbit around it.
TECH: Scientology has three (3) basic ways to draw people close enough that they can be "captured" by it's gravitational field and fall into orbit around it.
Apologies for the hand-drawn graphic (I had no freaking idea how to do this on a computer).
HOW IT WORKS: There are three WOGS (A, B & C) that Scientology wants to pull into its gravitational field.
WOG "A": This is a person who has an already-existing 'field' around them which we will describe as "CURIOSITY" and "SELF IMPROVEMENT". Those two things motivate Wog A to read a Scientology book or otherwise reach for it. Scientology tries to give them "WINS" and when that happens, Wog A is pulled (yellow arrows) back towards Planet Scientology. When it gets close enough (sufficient "wins") it goes into orbit around Scientology and gravity alone keeps it in orbit forever--unless something knocks it out of orbit. That's another discussion.
WOG "B": This is the only 1 of the 3 Wogs that does not require Scientology do much at all to "pull in" the Wog, besides no-cost TRICKS & LIES using words. Wog A, has a force field around them just chock-full of GULLIBILITY and BLIND FAITH. So they actually propel themselves towards Planet Scientology. It's analagous to fishermen throwing out huge nets and coming back later to see what they caught. The fish swims into the net all by themselves, they don't have to be fought, wrestled and reeled-in at great effort. The orange arrow depicts Wog B's direction of travel into the Tricks/Lies net, which is nothing more than just saying words like "clear" or "OT" or "Total Freedom" or "Scientology can handle that".
WOG "C": This one was not so obvious. I had to think about that a bit. But it's actually simple now. Wog C is a normal human being with normal human psychology. That makes them susceptible to hypnosis, suggestion, authority, following orders, avoiding conflict, blind spots et al. That alone could fill volumes, how and why a human can be subjected to another's command and will. It's programmed into the DNA of human's mind and body, and perhaps even spirit. Wog C also might just be naive and not know that there are such things as con men, hoaxes, scams and con games. This also allows Scientology to use hypnosis to steer another because they are "suggestible" to things that they don't really understand. For example, when my son was very small, he was standing on a kitchen counter and I told him that if he flapped his arms like a bird he could fly over to me on the other side of the room. And he had a huge "win" on that. I counted to three and told him to "JUMP!!" Well, of course he leaped off the counter head first but I was already there to catch him. That is naiveté, not gullibility or blind faith. He just hadn't learned yet that kids can't fly. LOL. Scientology uses hypnosis ("suggestion") to "8C" people to do what they want them to do. There are other less-recognizable derivatives of hypnosis/suggestion, such as "certainty" or "love bombing" which are simple variations on how to put someone under your thrall.
FINAL NOTE: Scientology employs any one or all three of those techniques to get and keep a person in orbit. This explains, in large part, why there is so much confusion about what traps a person in Scientology. And the "Wins" technique has extreme limitations and is normally at its greatest strength right at the beginning of the Bridge and diminishes as hope and expectation slowly dies over the course of trying to go Clear and OT.
Last edited:
HelluvaHoax!
Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
"Hypnosis" is a problematic term. It has many definitions. My suggestion was to by-pass the word (if possible) and use a concise definition or description sans the word "hypnosis."
IMO, the word, "hypnotic," is less problematic, and I have used it a few times on this thread - with quote marks - but, I've found that discussions of the word "hypnosis" usually dead-end with little accomplished, since no one is certain what the other means when he or she uses the word, "hypnosis," or has his or her own pet definition, while ignoring other's definitions.
Try not using the word "hypnosis" at all, and use, instead, a brief description of what you mean by "hypnosis," and perhaps a worthwhile discussion may occur.
That has already happened in a few places on this thread.
But it's easier said than done.
When I use the term "hypnosis" I simply mean suggestion by means of suspension of disbelief.
When I use the term "hypnosis" you are also feeling very, very sleepy.
Your eyes are closing....closing.....closed.
You are feeling a much lighter feeling (especially in the back pocket area where your wallet used to be).
Panda Termint
Cabal Of One
I will let it go. It seems like you are completely convinced and that any effort on my part to have you examine things more closely is wasted effort. I guess that, ultimately, people choose their own Authorities in life. I don't believe a thing to be true just because someone else said it "authoritively". I'm more of what you'd call a "what is true for me" kinda guy, lol.
I'll cease bugging you about it.
As a comment to others who might be following the conversation;
I happen to agree more with Veda's take on the Anderson Report...
(I know!!!)I do not dismiss the entire Report out of hand. It contains some valuable insights into scientology but is quite flawed in other respects, mostly to do with the biased nature of the "investigation" and the haphazard conduct of its proceedings. If Anderson had done a better job of it, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
SweetnessandLight
Crusader
This is just to help create a pleasure moment, nothing hypnotic about it, just cuteness:
Jquepublic
Silver Meritorious Patron
This is just to help create a pleasure moment, nothing hypnotic about it, just cuteness:
I just spent 4 hours with a 3 month old baby. A sweet, talkative, butterball with a quick smile.
To comment on the previous posts : I have plenty I agree with about the Anderson Report. I'm taking issue with one chapter in particular because I think the majority of what it included is no longer in use. The route to Clear was completely different, for one thing. People were doing R6EW, Power - those were alternate routes to Clear by the 90s. I don't agree with the idea that everything in Scn is hypnosis. If the experience of looking inward is a hypnotic reverie, then you're hypnotized half the day anyway, so it's a moot point. And where are the suggestions? What's being suggested to the person receiving auditing? What behavior is modified? Are they getting that from setting goals at start of session? That's not done anymore. Rudiments are flown. And why wouldn't it be mandatory to do it if it were the source of some hypnotic induction? Because ruds are not always flown - many times, the C/S would be for "fly rud if no F/N".
To make it really simple.. My idea of CLEAR is someone who is no longer dramatizing their valence. They are not Reacting to people. They do not automatically attack back if someone attacks them. They don't get their feelings hurt. They don't really care if someone likes them or not.. or if they get any admiration... but they have an overall caring for people. Once the Reactive Mind/Valence is gone, they are not automatically elevated to operating OT, if such a thing exists. It's like they have to start FRESH.. find out who they really are without all the props/automaticity.. that's how I see it anyway. I've known a few people I consider Clear.. so far I have not seen anyone do anything OT - no walking thru walls or levitating.. nope. A Clear is not restimulated by his own reactive mind.. his reactive mind is not telllng him DANGER! Man in Yellow Shirt approaching.. etc. that kind of thing. His analytical mind is FREE of the little voice telling him what to do. Now he has to make his OWN decisions on what to do next.
As far as hypnosis goes.. I've never had a hypnosis type therapy.. but from everything I've heard about it, someone else is taking all the power and authority over your case. They tell you what incident to go back to.. say the time you started smoking, and then they have you talk about it, perhaps, and then they say WHEN YOU WAKE UP YOU WILL NO LONGER HAVE THE URGE TO SMOKE.. IF YOU DO, IT WILL TASTE LIKE CASTOR OIL, or something. In other words.. they are in charge. You are not.
When you are in session, the whole idea is that nobody is feeling sorry for you, sympathizing, trying to make you cry or feel sorry for yourself, hugging you, trying to be your father figure, telling you what incident to run or what to think about it or how to handle it in the future. That to me is the difference in hypnosis and auditing. If going back on your track and viewing an incident is something hypnotists can make you do, that does not prove that the auditor is MAKING you do anything. It is YOUR CHOICE what incident you want to look at, not his, and it is your choice what you want to do about that type of problem/incident in the future.
The winning PC (when that has really happened) has taken his power, not given it away.
I think the power we gave away in the church was to believe ALL OF IT WORKED, Admin tech as well, get stats up, etc etc, RPF, you name it.. it came from Ron so it must be OK.. and we allowed others to push us around and run our lives while on staff or as PCs.. not the auditing.. although I must say, some of the processes DO NOT WORK.. I still believe they were deliberately made not to work by LRH to stall us on our Bridge and bring in more $$.
When you are in session, the whole idea is that nobody is feeling sorry for you, sympathizing, trying to make you cry or feel sorry for yourself, hugging you, trying to be your father figure, telling you what incident to run or what to think about it or how to handle it in the future. That to me is the difference in hypnosis and auditing. If going back on your track and viewing an incident is something hypnotists can make you do, that does not prove that the auditor is MAKING you do anything. It is YOUR CHOICE what incident you want to look at, not his, and it is your choice what you want to do about that type of problem/incident in the future.
The winning PC (when that has really happened) has taken his power, not given it away.
I think the power we gave away in the church was to believe ALL OF IT WORKED, Admin tech as well, get stats up, etc etc, RPF, you name it.. it came from Ron so it must be OK.. and we allowed others to push us around and run our lives while on staff or as PCs.. not the auditing.. although I must say, some of the processes DO NOT WORK.. I still believe they were deliberately made not to work by LRH to stall us on our Bridge and bring in more $$.
SweetnessandLight
Crusader
O.K. ~~~
Let's take everything you just said and look at it in the light of "there is no such thing as a reactive mind".
Ron made that up, and it is not real.
Where would things stand then?
Let's take everything you just said and look at it in the light of "there is no such thing as a reactive mind".
Ron made that up, and it is not real.
Where would things stand then?
Last edited:
I told you I was trouble
Suspended animation
Emphasis mine ...
That sounds like a description of a normal person who has basic good manners and some self esteem in fairly equal measure.
I realise that is what 'the book' states about a 'clear' but, do you honestly know of anyone that lives life like that (apart from someone with known mental issues) and if so, was the person parented well or brought up to believe the world is a scary, terrifying place?
That sounds like a description of a normal person who has basic good manners and some self esteem in fairly equal measure.
I realise that is what 'the book' states about a 'clear' but, do you honestly know of anyone that lives life like that (apart from someone with known mental issues) and if so, was the person parented well or brought up to believe the world is a scary, terrifying place?