Scientology is all bad

[Gadfly]

You have to admit that #1 is true, even if #2 isn't.

Mark A. Baker

Yes, that is part of the aspect of what I was talking about where and how Hubbard spits out things that just about ANYBODY can agree with - because they ARE TRUE.

Even better for Hubbard, besides just being something he can get people to agree with, it fits "conceptually" into his larger framework of entrapment and trickery. By pointing out how BAD things are, which is often true, he can then sneakily segue into how Scientology can make it all better (which isn't at all true).

People often make the mistake of assuming that just because somebody can point out the faults in some area, that this same person (or group) can thus, almost automatically, be able to SOLVE these faults. That is a leap of logic that is often NOT valid. This occurs in politics all of the time.

 

[BardoThodol]

As for the debate over whether past lives are merely imagined:

http://www.victorzammit.com/evidence/childrenwhorememberpastlives.htm

There are enough anecdotal cases that can't be explained to suggest a closer link with past lives being real rather than merely imagination.

Problem is not everyone seems to have past lives. And mathematically, it would seem that there are insufficient past bodies to accommodate all the current individuals.

Unless you count buffalo and all the extinct species, including insects.

Curious stuff.

 

[Gadfly]

"Apparently" because something is operating through space and time to fashion trees, flowers, elk, people. Fashion these things with amazing skill and complexity.

Something is "OT." But, just what?

Well, even if something is organizing, fashioning and putting order into all-that-is, there is no reason to assume that each of us, as a human being, can do the SAME THING. Or, that we can do the same thing on some "lower harmonic" as an "advanced thetan".

To me when Hubbard was talking about theta and putting order into the stuff of reality (MEST), he was speaking metaphorically of "God".

And, equating the potential of a human being (thetan) to the basic creative beingness of the WHOLE UNIVERSE is absurd.

As I see it Hubbard greatly confused various LEVELS. He mixed up the micro with the macro. He confused the big picture with the many smaller pictures.

We are each a PART of the much larger universe, or God, and the ONLY WAY to approach the BIG PICTURE is to allow the personal, the separateness, and the arbitrary identities of self to vanish. YOU don't become "larger". You become "smaller", and thereby naturally meld into the bigger picture.

The Scientology view of becoming "bigger" and "more powerful" is ass-backwards, and is entirely EGO-based.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

About not leaving a session, and "the way out is the way through".

I was running R3R Dianetics back in 1976. I had already run quite a bit. ... .

Good post.

And a fairly common sort of experience for anyone who has actually experienced auditing. As you indicate, auditing fairly done makes clear that many effects that people feel are psychosomatic and as such can be relieved fairly easily through the process of honestly applying simple auditing techniques.

How an individual chooses to interpret the phenomena is wholly up to him, although hubbard's church implies there is only one possible 'truth'.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Gadfly]

Good post.

And a fairly common sort of experience for anyone who has actually experienced auditing. As you indicate, auditing fairly done makes clear that many effects that people feel are psychosomatic and as such can be relieved fairly easily through the process of honestly applying simple auditing techniques. How an individual chooses to interpret the phenomena is wholly up to him.

Mark A. Baker

I knew that you would like it!

Remember though, I was talking about DIANETICS. As others have similarly stated, I found most benefits from the LOWER Bridge. As time went on I found a mechanism of "diminishing returns" with Scientology. The more time and energy spent, past a certain point, the LESS the benefits.

I know that quite a few others have experienced the same.

It seems that the belief system and indoctrination into MANY arbitrary notions takes over where the auditing seems to have left off (of leveled off). THat is certainly true in my observations with many people who have still on through the "top of the Bridge". They have turned into people who are "dedicated true believers", as opposed to what they were told they were and could be in the beginning - an honest person who simply was willing to try Scientology and see that it worked. And, when it "ceases to work", then the Scientology BELIEF SYSTEM takes over to address and handle the now missing evidence.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

Well, even if something is organizing, fashioning and putting order into all-that-is, there is no reason to assume that each of us, as a human being, can do the SAME THING. Or, that we can do the same thing on some "lower harmonic" as an "advanced thetan".

To me when Hubbard was talking about theta and putting order into the stuff of reality (MEST), he was speaking metaphorically of "God".

And, equating the potential of a human being (thetan) to the basic creative beingness of the WHOLE UNIVERSE is absurd.

As I see it Hubbard greatly confused various LEVELS. He mixed up the micro with the macro. He confused the big picture with the many smaller pictures.

We are each a PART of the much larger universe, or God, and the ONLY WAY to approach the BIG PICTURE is to allow the personal, the separateness, and the arbitrary identities of self to vanish. YOU don't become "larger". You become "smaller", and thereby naturally meld into the bigger picture.

The Scientology view of becoming "bigger" and "more powerful" is ass-backwards, and is entirely EGO-based.

Another one with which I agree.


Mark A. Baker

 

[BardoThodol]

Well, even if something is organizing, fashioning and putting order into all-that-is, there is no reason to assume that each of us, as a human being, can do the SAME THING. Or, that we can do the same thing on some "lower harmonic" as an "advanced thetan".

To me when Hubbard was talking about theta and putting order into the stuff of reality (MEST), he was speaking metaphorically of "God".

And, equating the potential of a human being (thetan) to the basic creative beingness of the WHOLE UNIVERSE is absurd.

As I see it Hubbard greatly confused various LEVELS. He mixed up the micro with the macro. He confused the big picture with the many smaller pictures.

We are each a PART of the much larger universe, or God, and the ONLY WAY to approach the BIG PICTURE is to allow the personal, the separateness, and the arbitrary identities of self to vanish. YOU don't become "larger". You become "smaller", and thereby naturally meld into the bigger picture.

The Scientology view of becoming "bigger" and "more powerful" is ass-backwards, and is entirely EGO-based.

Yeah, I long ago gave up the notion of being God. I'm aware of what I can do and what I can't.

The entire concept of OT8 being total cause over matter, energy, space and time on all dynamics is pure vanity. We didn't start out as a bunch of beings, each with his own universe totally separate from all others.

The common denominator of unpleasant individuals is self absorption, a feeling of entitlement that ignores the rights of others.

Besides, if I got any bigger, I'd have to buy new jeans.

On the other hand, I could eat more pizza.

Ah, decisions, decisions, decisions.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

... I found most benefits from the LOWER Bridge. ...

Same here, although I found the Mayo HRD to be a really big boost also.


Mark A. Baker

 

[BardoThodol]

You're right. Hubbard was just trying to help Mankind and something went horribly wrong.

It was probably those damned homo saps. They're all over the place.

Veda has a sense of humor?

Cool.

 

[Gadfly]

Yeah, I long ago gave up the notion of being God. I'm aware of what I can do and what I can't.

The entire concept of OT8 being total cause over matter, energy, space and time on all dynamics is pure vanity. We didn't start out as a bunch of beings, each with his own universe totally separate from all others.

The common denominator of unpleasant individuals is self absorption, a feeling of entitlement that ignores the rights of others.

Besides, if I got any bigger, I'd have to buy new jeans.

On the other hand, I could eat more pizza.

Ah, decisions, decisions, decisions.

I have been watching the TV show "Criminal Minds" over the past few months. It is about the Behavioral Analysis Unit of the FBI. To me it is amazing and fascinating.

Each show starts and ends with some amazing quote from some amazing author.

One thing I have gotten from watching this show is what you just said. The true nutters in the world are entirely obsessed with their own strange unique SUBJECTIVE versions of reality, which in itself isn't necessarily bad, but becomes horribly bad when it comes at the EXPENSE of the subjective universes of others. There is no balance. It is common for psychopaths and severe criminals to be entirely UNABLE to see other people "as people". They are incapable of seeing oneself in all others. They have pushed their own separateness to an absurd limit (or forces in their life have pushed them into such an isolated frame of mind).

This of yours just NAILS a major component of the criminally insane:

The common denominator of unpleasant individuals is self absorption, a feeling of entitlement that ignores the rights of others.

Such exists to some degree in Scientology, as they ARE happy and willing to ignore the rights of any person who they (incorrectly) view as an enemy or critic.

That is why I prefer ideas of Buddhism where compassion, tolerance and forgiveness are senior to all else. Because, THESE attitudes involve an active and LIVING awareness of the thoughts and feelings of OTHERS. When one grows up to an active understanding, consideration and awareness of others, one becomes the OPPOSITE of what makes the criminally insane just what they are.

I notice that in EVERY case of a criminally insane person that he or she takes the urges, desires and needs of SELF WAY TOO SERIOUSLY. One is self-obsessed all out of usual proportion. The subjective and the ego have become monsters in such cases.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

... Problem is not everyone seems to have past lives. And mathematically, it would seem that there are insufficient past bodies to accommodate all the current individuals. ...

That is not logically a problem as it is based on assumptions which need not, and indeed almost certainly would not, apply.

If past lives exist then this suggests that a non-material basis to personality exists. Being immaterial the fundamental idea of conservation as an extension of physical conservation of mass and energy does not automatically apply.

Moreover, your foregoing consideration includes assumptions that all past lives are lived on this planet or this universe. Neither of these assumptions is necessarily true, realities which are traditionally acknowledged in both Buddhist & Vedic traditions.

Whether or not past lives are true, there are many other ways to conceive of such phenomena than in terms of the sequentially linear conservative pattern suggested in your statement.


Mark A. Baker

 

[BardoThodol]

I have been watching the TV show "Criminal Minds" over the past few months. It is about the Behavioral Analysis Unit of the FBI. To me it is amazing and fascinating.

Each show starts and ends with some amazing quote from some amazing author.

One thing I have gotten from watching this show is what you just said. The true nutters in the world are entirely obsessed with their own strange unique SUBJECTIVE versions of reality, which in itself isn't necessarily bad, but becomes horribly bad when it comes at the EXPENSE of the subjective universes of others. There is no balance. It is common for psychopaths and severe criminals to be entirely UNABLE to see other people "as people". They are incapable of seeing oneself in all others. They have pushed their own separateness to an absurd limit (or forces in their life have pushed them into such an isolated frame of mind).

This of yours just NAILS a major component of the criminally insane:

The common denominator of unpleasant individuals is self absorption, a feeling of entitlement that ignores the rights of others.

Such exists to some degree in Scientology, as they ARE happy and willing to ignore the rights of any person who they (incorrectly) view as an enemy or critic.

That is why I prefer ideas of Buddhism where compassion, tolerance and forgiveness are senior to all else. Because, THESE attitudes involve an active and LIVING awareness of the thoughts and feelings of OTHERS. When one grows up to an active understanding, consideration and awareness of others, one becomes the OPPOSITE of what makes the criminally insane just what they are.

I notice that in EVERY case of a criminally insane person that he or she takes the urges, desires and needs of SELF WAY TOO SERIOUSLY. One is self-obsessed all out of usual proportion. The subjective and the ego have become monsters in such cases.

One of the great ironies of some sociopaths is their ability to tune into others and read them precisely.

You would think that an individual who is completely self-absorbed would lack this ability. But some are highly skilled at it.

And, many of these really get a kick out of causing as much anguish in others as possible. Like vampire living off the feelings of others.

Not all of them are technically criminals. Some become successful politicians and corporate leaders or generals.

 

[Gadfly]

One of the great ironies of some sociopaths is their ability to tune into others and read them precisely.

You would think that an individual who is completely self-absorbed would lack this ability. But some are highly skilled at it.

And, many of these really get a kick out of causing as much anguish in others as possible. Like vampire living off the feelings of others.

Not all of them are technically criminals. Some become successful politicians and corporate leaders or generals.

It is funny that you say that. A few of these points have been brought up on the show. First, that some sociopaths are amazingly good at "profiling" (which members of the FBI BAU spend long periods of time studying), and second, that some of the biggest sociopaths are in "legal lines of work" such as politicians and business leaders.

 

[BardoThodol]

That is not logically a problem as it is based on assumptions which need not, and indeed almost certainly would not, apply.

If past lives exist then this suggests that a non-material basis of personality exists. Being immaterial the fundamental idea of conservation as an extension of physical conservation of mass and energy does not automatically apply.

Moreover, your foregoing consideration includes assumptions that all past lives are lived on this planet or this universe. Neither of these assumptions is necessarily true, realities which are traditionally acknowledged in both Buddhist & Vedic traditions.

Whether or not past lives are true, there are many other ways to conceive of such phenomena than in terms of the sequentially linear conservative pattern suggested in your statement.


Mark A. Baker

Mark,

I can only reason with what I know.

I can imagine all the things you say, and I can include them in my reasoning, which I have as a game of "what if..."

However, I don't know these things to be true.

I try to differentiate between creative thinking and "real-world" based logic.

Real world based logic involves continuous speculation. The more you find out to be true and observable, the more you can speculate.

But the speculation has to arrive at actually perceivable results or conditions.

Imagination is lots of fun. So is speculation.

But I'm going to put huge dents in my car if I imagine that the three foot parking space is actually ten feet and then proceed to park. Crunch!

 

[BardoThodol]

It is funny that you say that. A few of these points have been brought up on the show. First, that some sociopaths are amazingly good at "profiling" (which members of the FBI BAU spend long periods of time studying), and second, that some of the biggest sociopaths are in "legal lines of work" such as politicians and business leaders.

I've had a lot of personal experience with sociopaths. Up close and personal. So, my observations are first hand rather than out of books.

For a long time, I even thought I might be one. And I certainly would have ended up in prison.

Then I found out why and changed.

I might be a huge asshole, but I actually care about the well being of others.

 

[Gadfly]

For a long time, I even thought I might be one.

Well, if you thought for a moment that you might be an SP then you certainly are NOT one! (paraphrased Hubbard)

 

[BardoThodol]

Well, if you thought for a moment that you might be an SP then you certainly are NOT one! (paraphrased Hubbard)

Does that mean he wasn't either?

Bad on us.

What a convenient dodge.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

Mark,

I can only reason with what I know. ...

Absolutely.

The point is not that anyone should rush to believe in past lives, or assume that an auditing experience they have had must have indicated events that are true exactly as related. However, neither is it the case that simply because an auditing experience does not conform to the physical reality in which we presently find ourselves, that it must not nor can not be true.

Physical reality can be a powerfully persuasive argument, but there is nothing which requires the realm of mind & spirit to conform to it. A person can only judge the nature of phenomena based on their own experiences & understanding. Yet that shouldn't serve as a justification not to expand on one's understanding and ranging of experiences.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Dilpickle]

I don't believe we get smaller.. but to think with auditing or any kind of process we can be bigger than God is a bit much I think we become More Open.. More Aware.. More Understanding.. More able to live happy lives.. More able to access the spiritual world.. More imaginative and creative.. More Everything.. Not Smaller. The only thing that seems to become Smaller is the Valence.. the sleepwalker that most of us are.

The person who believes everything is solid, no spirit, no afterlife, no happiness.. no hope.. nothing beyond what is obvious.. no imagination.. that person can get smaller as they realize the abundance of life, energy and experience beyond that view.. and other portions of their awareness and acts and knowledge can get larger.. Definitely the EGO can get smaller.. but the idea of SELF ought not to be discarded.. I believe that's what keeps us grounded and rational in the flux of all the Mysteries

 

[Mark A. Baker]

I don't believe we get smaller.. but to think with auditing or any kind of process we can be bigger than God is a bit much ...

That depends on something which no one actually knows, the nature of god.


Mark A. Baker :angel: