Scientology is warning its members about Feb 10th

Rose

Patron
That rub and yawn exercise was bizarre. I thought it was stupid at first, but I did it anyway and I remembered all kinds of things I thought I'd forgotten or hadn't thought about in years.
 

Alanzo

Bardo Tulpa
That rub and yawn exercise was bizarre. I thought it was stupid at first, but I did it anyway and I remembered all kinds of things I thought I'd forgotten or hadn't thought about in years.

I like Paul's Robot Auditor.

It reminded me how much I liked Scientology auditing.
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
I hope you found it useful, Rose.

There are three versions, that you can access from links at www.yawnguy.com. One is a non-Internet version called The Yawn Machine; one is the YouTube videos; the other is Paul's Robot Auditor.

They all work. :)

Paul
 

Rose

Patron
So, auditing must be like hypnosis in a way, am I right? That means, it could be used for good or evil. I know a doctor, a surgeon, who had a degree in psychology and hypnosis prior to changing his career. He told me that he quit hypnosis because it was just too dangerous, in his opinion. The power he had over a human being was something he was not comfortable with and he was afraid he might inadvertently hurt someone.

Sorry, that was a bit off the subject, it just came to me. So the purpose of these sessions is what? What is one trying to achieve. Not criticizing, just curious.
 

Bea Kiddo

Crusader
Auditing is supposed to be about self-discovery. Self-realization.

It could have been.

Not in that church though.
 

Alanzo

Bardo Tulpa
So, auditing must be like hypnosis in a way, am I right? That means, it could be used for good or evil. I know a doctor, a surgeon, who had a degree in psychology and hypnosis prior to changing his career. He told me that he quit hypnosis because it was just too dangerous, in his opinion. The power he had over a human being was something he was not comfortable with and he was afraid he might inadvertently hurt someone.

Yes, auditing produces a hypnotic state which makes you open to suggestion.

I think Paul's Robot Auditor tends to reduce the vulnerability of being in that state with another person who may want to implant suggestions into you for their own gain.

Unfortunately, Hubbard would have never approved of Paul's Robot Auditor.

It's one of the things that makes Paul a "Squirrel Extraordinaire".
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
So, auditing must be like hypnosis in a way, am I right? That means, it could be used for good or evil. I know a doctor, a surgeon, who had a degree in psychology and hypnosis prior to changing his career. He told me that he quit hypnosis because it was just too dangerous, in his opinion. The power he had over a human being was something he was not comfortable with and he was afraid he might inadvertently hurt someone.

It is like hypnosis in that the practitioner is causing a manipulation of the client's mental or spiritual imagery in some way or other.

But auditing is supposed to be done with the client fully aware of what is happening; whereas in hypnosis the client is not usually fully aware of what is happening.

As for "power over people", well yes, so does a masseur or dentist or hairdresser.

Paul
 

Zinjifar

Silver Meritorious Sponsor
Yes, auditing produces a hypnotic state which makes you open to suggestion.

I think Paul's Robot Auditor tends to reduce the vulnerability of being in that state with another person who may want to implant suggestions into you for their own gain.

Unfortunately, Hubbard would have never approved of Paul's Robot Auditor.

It's one of the things that makes Paul a "Squirrel Extraordinaire".

The problem I see is that much of the worst of the 'implants' of Scientology auditing and 'processing' is not given as a direct 'command', but, is either 'pre-loaded', in the sense that the target first gets the 'suggestion' through his reading, watching tapes, and even the general mileu of the 'org' and classroom and Cult. Then, during the hypnotic 'process' the 'Church' and Ron are accepted as the 'trusted authority' of the hypnotist and the 'suggestions' already made are internalized.

It's suggestion by implication, and, one reason so many Scientologists flatly deny the hypnotic elements in Scientology 'Processes', because there *was* no direct 'command'.

It's hypnosis by implication and proxy.

I think Paul's 'Robot Auditor' scripts are far less likely to be directly 'dangerous', because the 'Church' is out of the loop as the 'authority'.

However, they're not danger-free, since, for someone already exposed to the 'pre-load' it can re-activate the suggestion that 'The Tech Works', even though the 'Church' doesn't get the benefit directly.

It's far less obviously dangerous for someone *not* trained in Scientology.

Zinj
 

ExScnDude

Patron with Honors
Yes, auditing produces a hypnotic state which makes you open to suggestion.

I think Paul's Robot Auditor tends to reduce the vulnerability of being in that state with another person who may want to implant suggestions into you for their own gain.

Unfortunately, Hubbard would have never approved of Paul's Robot Auditor.

It's one of the things that makes Paul a "Squirrel Extraordinaire".

I respect your opinion, Alanzo and am open to being convinced by argument that what you say here is true - maybe more so with Book One or Dianetic auditing.

But my experience as an auditor is very much different than that. During the time when I was an auditor, I audited many people brand new to auditing - and brand new to the subject of Scientology. Many of these people had never even read a Scientology book. The group I'm talking about is probably somewhere between 50 and 100 people over a span of 15 years.

Auditing is basically an exercise in helping someone look at their own data, their own decisions, their own computations etc.... I, as the auditor, am not feeding them anything - they aren't in a state of reverie like in Book One or NED. I'm running a repetitive process which just prompts the PC to look at his own data and respond - no evaluation - no invalidation. In a bit - the PC gives a "Hey you know what - blah blah blah" - and is happy about it - realizes something was a bit wacky about something or gains a different perspective about something.

You know to me it's just a very relaxed situation; and I don't see how something as benign as this activity could be harmful to anyone.

Personally, I think that if someone is in such a state that a simple process like this has the effect of hypnotizing them, then that PC has been misprogrammed. I'm thinking that a person would have to have been in a "suggestable" state to begin with before auditing that addresses their own data would have that effect upon them.

I'm not ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater - and besides - most of this really workable stuff was developed by people like Alan and others of his time.

Yeah - some of the huge subject of Scientology belongs in the trash can, a huge trash can - but much of it has some workability.
 

Alanzo

Bardo Tulpa
I respect your opinion, Alanzo and am open to being convinced by argument that what you say here is true - maybe more so with Book One or Dianetic auditing.

But my experience as an auditor is very much different than that. During the time when I was an auditor, I audited many people brand new to auditing - and brand new to the subject of Scientology. Many of these people had never even read a Scientology book. The group I'm talking about is probably somewhere between 50 and 100 people over a span of 15 years.

Auditing is basically an exercise in helping someone look at their own data, their own decisions, their own computations etc.... I, as the auditor, am not feeding them anything - they aren't in a state of reverie like in Book One or NED. I'm running a repetitive process which just prompts the PC to look at his own data and respond - no evaluation - no invalidation. In a bit - the PC gives a "Hey you know what - blah blah blah" - and is happy about it - realizes something was a bit wacky about something or gains a different perspective about something.

You know to me it's just a very relaxed situation; and I don't see how something as benign as this activity could be harmful to anyone.

Personally, I think that if someone is in such a state that a simple process like this has the effect of hypnotizing them, then that PC has been misprogrammed. I'm thinking that a person would have to have been in a "suggestable" state to begin with before auditing that addresses their own data would have that effect upon them.

I'm not ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater - and besides - most of this really workable stuff was developed by people like Alan and others of his time.

Yeah - some of the huge subject of Scientology belongs in the trash can, a huge trash can - but much of it has some workability.

What you described is hypnosis as well, and produces a hypnotic state. Not an unconscious state - a hypnotic state.

You know Hubbard mis-defined hypnosis quite thoroughly. And then he said that auditing was the OPPOSITE of hypnosis!

Have you ever read about hypnosis from a source other than Hubbard? Like what kind of a mental state it is, whether the person remembers what happened while under hypnosis, etc?

Here's a good place to start from Scientific American.

And here's a good definition of the term by the American Society of Clinical Hypnosis:

From their website:
"Definition of Hypnosis
Hypnosis is a state of inner absorption, concentration and focused attention. It is like using a magnifying glass to focus the rays of the sun and make them more powerful. Similarly, when our minds are concentrated and focused, we are able to use our minds more powerfully. Because hypnosis allows people to use more of their potential, learning self-hypnosis is the ultimate act of self-control."
...
Practitioners use clinical hypnosis in three main ways. First, they encourage the use of imagination. Mental imagery is very powerful, especially in a focused state of attention. The mind seems capable of using imagery, even if it is only symbolic, to assist us in bringing about the things we are imagining. For example, a patient with ulcerative colitis may be asked to imagine what his/her distressed colon looks like. If she imagines it as being like a tunnel, with very red, inflamed walls that are rough in texture, the patient may be encouraged in hypnosis (and in self-hypnosis) to imagine this image changing to a healthy one.

A second basic hypnotic method is to present ideas or suggestions to the patient. In a state of concentrated attention, ideas and suggestions that are compatible with what the patient wants seem to have a more powerful impact on the mind.

Finally, hypnosis may be used for unconscious exploration, to better understand underlying motivations or identify whether past events or experiences are associated with causing a problem. Hypnosis avoids the critical censor of the conscious mind, which often defeats what we know to be in our best interests. The effectiveness of hypnosis appears to lie in the way in which it bypasses the critical observation and interference of the conscious mind, allowing the client's intentions for change to take effect.
Sound familiar? :)

This is why I say that Dn and Scn auditing is a highly developed form of hypno-therapy.
 

ExScnDude

Patron with Honors
Alanzo wrote:

"Definition of Hypnosis
Hypnosis is a state of inner absorption, concentration and focused attention. It is like using a magnifying glass to focus the rays of the sun and make them more powerful. Similarly, when our minds are concentrated and focused, we are able to use our minds more powerfully. Because hypnosis allows people to use more of their potential, learning self-hypnosis is the ultimate act of self-control."


Well.... If that is the definition you are using, then I'd have to agree with every thing you had to say about it.

On the other hand, in my given profession using the same definition, I am in a hypnotic state most of the time. :)

Hmmmm.... not sure how this really applies.

However, the definition you cite, doesn't appear to have any harmful connotation unless you were given suggestions by an auditor while your mind was in a "concentrated and focused" state?

Do you feel that the bogus crap in Scientology that you read between sessions bypassed "the critical censor of the conscious mind" in your case due to the auditing you had?

The examples of hypnotism that I am most familiar with have to do with having the patient concentrate and focus on something like a spinning watch. Do you think that the act of focusing ones mind on ones own data has a similar effect?

I'm not being argumentative but am instead trying to understand where you are coming from.
 
Last edited:

Alanzo

Bardo Tulpa
Alanzo wrote:

"Definition of Hypnosis
Hypnosis is a state of inner absorption, concentration and focused attention. It is like using a magnifying glass to focus the rays of the sun and make them more powerful. Similarly, when our minds are concentrated and focused, we are able to use our minds more powerfully. Because hypnosis allows people to use more of their potential, learning self-hypnosis is the ultimate act of self-control."


Well.... If that is the definition you are using, then I'd have to agree with every thing you had to say about it.

On the other hand, in my given profession using the same definition, I am in a hypnotic state most of the time. :)

Yes. A trance state or hypnotic state is natural to human beings. We move in and out of them throughout the day.

They're aren't wierd-o "woo-woo" states at all.

You are very familiar with them.

For instance, when you become totally absorbed in a really really good movie. It could be three hours long and, when the movie is over, you had no idea the time had passed. You kind of "wake up" and start looking around and realize that you have been somewhere else the whole time.

It's a very familiar state.

In that state of mind, you are not unaware, or unconscious at all.

Instead, you are VERY aware and VERY conscious of ONE THING, to the exclusion of ALL OTHER THINGS in the environment.

Just like being really IN SESSION with a good auditor.

That's why LRH isolated TRs and placed so much emphasis on them. They were so important because TRs serve as the vital skill necessary to keep the pc "interested in own case and willing to talk to the auditor", or keeping the PC "IN SESSION".

The state of being IN SESSION is a trance or hypnotic state.

Hmmmm.... not sure how this really applies.

However, the definition you cite, doesn't appear to have any harmful connotation unless you were given suggestions by an auditor while your mind was in a "concentrated and focused" state?
Right. Hubbard mis-defined hypnosis and made it this VERY BAD thing over there, while making auditing very different and VERY GOOD over here.

It was a misdirection technique he used on us. Auditing came straight from techniques of hypnosis, and auditing, I believe, is correctly categorized as a highly developed form of hypno-therapy.

Do you feel that the bogus crap in Scientology that you read between sessions bypassed "the critical censor of the conscious mind" in your case due to the auditing you had?
Along with the social coercion techniques that Hubbard built into Scientology like stats, disconnection, screaming at juniors, elitist hierarchies which can not be questioned, sec checking for any doubt or dissidence, etc, I think that the hypnotic nature of auditing served to soften up Scientologists so that his positive suggestions, and enforced suggestions, would take hold more deeply.

Hubbard was a hypnotist. He knew what he was doing. If you read the Chapter in Barefaced Messiah on the missing research for Dianetics, you'll see interviews with Forrest Ackermen and others about Ron's use of hypnosis on others at SF conferences and dinner parties. Russell Miller could not find any other evidence for Hubbard's research into Dianetics than his work as a hypnotist.

The examples of hypnotism that I am most familiar with have to do with having the patient concentrate and focus on something like a spinning watch. Do you think that the act of focusing ones mind on ones own data has a similar effect?
Yes.

The guy who coined the word "hypnosis" in the late 1800s, James Braid, realized that since hypnosis has nothing to do with sleep at all, he had used the wrong term for it. So he tried to change the word to "MONOIDEAISM".

But it was too late. "Hypnosis" had stuck.

And even Ron says that focusing one's own mind on one's own data has a similar effect. Remember SOS and DMSMH and those early books where he's always talking about hypnosis?Take a look at some of those references from Ron by way of the indexes on hypnosis, or "hypnotism". I believe it was in SOS that he said that any time you return a pc down the time track you make him more suggestible.

And anyway - whatever happened to the "cancellor" from DMSMH?

If dianetics was going to make you so vulnerable to suggestions that you had to install a cancellor at the end of every session, then where the hell did it go after 1951?

I'm not being argumentative but am instead trying to understand where you are coming from.
The key is to look into hypnosis, suggestion, trance states, etc on your own and WITHOUT data from Hubbard.

Get an understanding of these things from those who had nothing to do with Hubbard.

You will see what Hubbard was doing with hypnosis, and with scientologists.

Don't get me wrong.

Hypnosis is not at all what Hubbard told you it was.

Hypnotic states can be extremely therapeutic and always have been for human beings. They are states of mind in which you can become extremely aware of one thing, to the exclusion of all other things. And in that state you can finally grasp things you were not able to grasp before. As a result, your whole world can change.

You are just vulnerable to certain degrees in that state to suggestions from others slipping in and taking over your inner world.

Unethical practitioners will exploit those vulnerabilities for their own gain.

Like Hubbard did.
 
Last edited:

Hanover Fist

Patron with Honors
The key is to look into hypnosis, suggestion, trance states, etc on your own and WITHOUT data from Hubbard.

Get an understanding of these things from those who had nothing to do with Hubbard.

You will see what Hubbard was doing with hypnosis, and with scientologists.

Don't get me wrong.

Hypnosis is not at all what Hubbard told you it was.

Quoted for emphasis.:thumbsup:

Hanover Fist
 

Free to shine

Shiny & Free
Hypnosis is not at all what Hubbard told you it was.

Hypnotic states can be extremely therapeutic and always have been for human beings. They are states of mind in which you can become extremely aware of one thing, to the exclusion of all others things. And in that state you can finally grasp things you where not able to grasp before. As a result, your whole world can change.

You are just vulnerable to certain degrees in that state to suggestions from others slipping in and taking over your inner world.

Unethical practitioners will exploit those vulnerabilities for their own gain.

Like Hubbard did.

Excellent post!
That really gave me a bigger viewpoint on the whole thing, thanks. :thumbsup:
 

shader

Patron with Honors
I vote this bit get excerpted into a new thread somewhere.

It is too good to be lost at the end of a totally unrelated thread.

But i defer to Alanzo and the other participants for that.
 

ExScnDude

Patron with Honors
I vote this bit get excerpted into a new thread somewhere.

It is too good to be lost at the end of a totally unrelated thread.

But i defer to Alanzo and the other participants for that.

That's fine by me.

But I'd like to clarify something:

All I said to Alanzo is that I thought his reply was well researched and thus convincing.

But not so fast.

I would agree based upon his reasoned argument that some subset of all the individuals involved in Scientology were possibly implanted with bogus Scientology material due to being in a hypnotic state induced by auditing.

However - we don't live in a black and white universe, folks!

I would tend to believe that there is also a subset of all individuals receiving auditing who were not hypnotized at all. Suggestibility itself is a multi-valued variable. The auditor's skill is also extremely variable. The culture of the organization within which the auditing took place is another multi-valued variable.

Alonzo's argument is really nothing more than an untested hypothesis. It has not been measured against all the possible variables and outcomes.

Looking for that one "zinger" of an idea that "explains it all" is what got most of us into trouble to begin with.

The one lesson that should be learned very well by any ex-Scientologist is to be very wary of any *.ism or *.ology that attempts to reduce the incredibly complex subject of human behavior into a set "facts" which don't encompass the entire array of all possible outcomes.
 

shader

Patron with Honors
It's not an "explain it all" post, it's a reasoned and reasonable post encouraging scientologists to "false data strip" hypnosis.
 

Björkist

Silver Meritorious Patron
However - we don't live in a black and white universe, folks!

I would tend to believe that there is also a subset of all individuals receiving auditing who were not hypnotized at all. Suggestibility itself is a multi-valued variable. The auditor's skill is also extremely variable. The culture of the organization within which the auditing took place is another multi-valued variable.

Alonzo's argument is really nothing more than an untested hypothesis. It has not been measured against all the possible variables and outcomes.

Looking for that one "zinger" of an idea that "explains it all" is what got most of us into trouble to begin with.

The one lesson that should be learned very well by any ex-Scientologist is to be very wary of any *.ism or *.ology that attempts to reduce the incredibly complex subject of human behavior into a set "facts" which don't encompass the entire array of all possible outcomes.

Quoted for emphasis. :thumbsup:
 
Top