Scientology, Ron Hubbard and Hypnosis

[Bill]

So tell me Gibby...

How about Christianity?

Would you say that too is all rhetoric? empty and ultimately meaningless?

There's a tough question for you; if you say "yes" you'll be agreeing with Hubbard and if you say "no" you'd be agreeing with me

 

[programmer_guy]

Scientology auditing is hypnotic...
...Scientology auditing is hypnotic...
......Scientology auditing is hypnotic...
.........Scientology auditing is hypnotic...
............Scientology auditing is hypnotic...
...............Scientology auditing is hypnotic...


Sorry, I couldn't resist!

 

[lotus]

This is certainly an opinion firmly held by many members of this board and as well the French court.

You and your contingent are welcome to your polemic and it's expression.

I'd be so glad to be introduced to the french court


Manifest please!

Although Birdie you may CSW To be part of my contingent if you wish. The only pre-requisite is To read LRH's affirmations till you cognite. Then you can be my follower.

 

[pineapple]

That weird off-topic side trip with Birdy points out another aspect of Hubbard's persuasion technique.

Hubbard's big thing about "OT" was "postulates". In Hubbard's make-believe world, "postulates" are senior to everything ... but only IF you are really, really good at "postulating" really, really hard.

If you don't get "OT" you are not "postulating" hard enough! "Postulate harder!"

And, in my opinion, that can work like self hypnosis. I see Birdy as a good example of this carried to the extreme.

Postulates = affirmations = autosuggestion.

If only I'd known that when I was in scn, maybe my "postulates" would've worked better!

"Autosuggestion is a psychological technique related to the placebo effect, developed by apothecary Émile Coué at the beginning of the 20th century. It is a form of self-induced suggestion in which individuals guide their own thoughts, feelings, or behavior. The technique is often used in self-hypnosis."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autosuggestion

 

[lotus]

Postulates = affirmations = autosuggestion.

If only I'd known that when I was in scn, maybe my "postulates" would've worked better!

"Autosuggestion is a psychological technique related to the placebo effect, developed by apothecary Émile Coué at the beginning of the 20th century. It is a form of self-induced suggestion in which individuals guide their own thoughts, feelings, or behavior. The technique is often used in self-hypnosis."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autosuggestion

This is what I use to help a condition hard to stand till I can get proper care.

It does wonder to bring relief but it doesn't cure
It is often used, for example, to stop smoking or withdraw from substances abuse.

For example LRH could have use it properly in saying:

" I don't need anymore to masturbate compulsively"

But on the other side, if saying"

" my teeth are not rotten anymore and are beautifully shining"

It wouldn't have work!

Indeed!

Although, it is different from postulate. Suggestion must be worked daily for many days, since postulates require we strongly believe it will happen; It's a belief

 

[Clay Pigeon]

it's not a tough question.

You actually don't understand the purpose of rhetoric, and it's 3 means of persuasion. It's 3 means of persuasions are to convey the truth thru ethos, pathos and logos.

Rhetoric came before Christianity, look at the timeline:

http://www.english.hawaii.edu/criticalink/archive/aristotle/times.html

The question becomes did Christianity use rhetoric to tell the truth?

Did Hubbard tell the truth?

It appears to be tough enough for you to avoid Gibby...

Hubbard conveyed much truth; most of the written academy materials are simple direct truth. The tapes are...

entertaining, shall we say?

And fiction can be an instrument of truth.

Did Hubbard tell some outright LIES?!?

O! My! NO!!! Not L. Ron Hubbard!

(after those three plumbers get your tongue out of your cheek have them pull the backhoe around my way)

 

[Clay Pigeon]

I'd be so glad to be introduced to the french court


Manifest please!

Although Birdie you may CSW To be part of my contingent if you wish. The only pre-requisite is To read LRH's affirmations till you cognite. Then you can be my follower.

The French courts ruled that CoS was committing fraud even when selling and delivering training and auditing.

????????????????????


I've examined the "Affirmations" and will again.

These are not published CoS materials

 

[Gib]

It appears to be tough enough for you to avoid Gibby...

Hubbard conveyed much truth; most of the written academy materials are simple direct truth. The tapes are...

entertaining, shall we say?

And fiction can be an instrument of truth.

Did Hubbard tell some outright LIES?!?

O! My! NO!!! Not L. Ron Hubbard!

(after those three plumbers get your tongue out of your cheek have them pull the backhoe around my way)

Hubbard's conveyance of truth is bullshit.

For in the beginning, that would be the book dianetics, why any two people could clear themselves.

Do you know of any two people that cleared themselves using the processes in dianetics?

 

[lotus]

The French courts ruled that CoS was committing fraud even when selling and delivering training and auditing.

????????????????????


I've examined the "Affirmations" and will again.

These are not published CoS materials

Birdie,

Many court in many countries ruled that COS was committing fraud and also spying a d other criminal stuff per LRH intelligence orders.

Anyways, the affirmations have been found written by LRH and this is actually the reason Gerry Armstrong got into that much problems...COS didn't want Scientology and pic to discover the "real" personality and deeds of LRH.

This has been a major cause of many people withdrawing their belief in LRH as being a humanitarian. It has been an eye opener, that all the abuses in the cult, in making us slaves and to get our money, using lies and manipulation, was in fact postulated and wanted by LRH.

But when we discover his affirmations, after decades of believing and loyalty, it takes courage to admit we were fooled and we were part of an abusive system designed by an abusive greed guru...Although, we can also decided it doesn't matter and the man , as a normal man, had some flaws.....

No matter if some pieces of tech, here and there, may have seemed to work for some people,
because almost all those pieces of tech were organized as something applicable by devoted people, who were later declared and discarded without sorrow..by LRH!

You will read the "affirmations" and make your own mind, depending on your own core values and how you can make sense of the whole thing..that is how it works; and that is why Gerry Armstrong woke up and escaped upon such discovery!

 

[mockingbird]

It appears to be tough enough for you to avoid Gibby...

Hubbard conveyed much truth; most of the written academy materials are simple direct truth. The tapes are...

entertaining, shall we say?

And fiction can be an instrument of truth.

Did Hubbard tell some outright LIES?!?

O! My! NO!!! Not L. Ron Hubbard!

(after those three plumbers get your tongue out of your cheek have them pull the backhoe around my way)

Please tell me any true claims Hubbard made and any false ones.

 

[mockingbird]

It appears to be tough enough for you to avoid Gibby...

Hubbard conveyed much truth; most of the written academy materials are simple direct truth. The tapes are...

entertaining, shall we say?

And fiction can be an instrument of truth.

Did Hubbard tell some outright LIES?!?

O! My! NO!!! Not L. Ron Hubbard!

(after those three plumbers get your tongue out of your cheek have them pull the backhoe around my way)

Hubbard had intentions. He told us what they were. And how he wanted to fulfill them.

A Psychiatric View With Comments On The Admissions By Lafayette Ronald Hubbard (1947)
I will put a few excerpts here to highlight Hubbard's intention regarding hypnosis and in general. To understand Scientology I absolutely recommend reading the post in full. These excerpts are just for this post on his intentions.

LRH is obviously L Ron Hubbard

LRH:Your psychology is good. You worked to darken your own children. This failure, with them, was only apparent. The evident lack of effectiveness was "ordered." The same psychology works perfectly on everyone else. You use it with great confidence.

LRH: Material things are yours for the asking. Men are your slaves. Elemental spirits are your slaves. You are power among powers, light in the darkness, beauty in all.

LRH : Your psychology is advanced and true and wonderful. It hypnotizes people. It predicts their emotions, for you are their ruler.

LRH: No matter what lies you may tell others they have no physical effect on you of any kind.
LRH: Lord help women when you begin to fondle them. You are master of their bodies, master of their souls as you may consciously wish. You have no karma to pay for these acts.

LRH: You can tell all the romantic tales you wish. You will remember them, you do remember them. But you know which ones were lies. You are so logical you will tell nothing which cannot be believed.

LRH: You use the minds of men. They do not use your mind or affect it in any way.
So, Hubbard in his private affirmations clearly described his "psychology" as such that it "hypnotizes" people and that men are his slaves and regarding women that he was master of their bodies and souls. He described himself as being able to lie and be both believed and he was immune to physical effects from his lies. He described himself as the ruler of people who uses the minds of men but they do not use or affect his mind.

Imagine having these goals and using self-hypnosis commands repeatedly for years to bring these things into your mind.


To gain more insight into Hubbard's intention I want to quote a letter he wrote to his wife Polly, who he called Skipper and it has come to be known as "The Skipper Letter" among Scientology watchers. It was written in 1938 after Hubbard allegedly wrote a manuscript entitled Excalibur that he hoped would give him fame.

"Living is a pretty grim joke, but a joke just the same. The entire function of man is to survive. The outermost limit of endeavour is creative work. Anything less is too close to simple survival until death happens along. So I am engaged in striving to maintain equilibrium sufficient to at least realize survival in a way to astound the gods. I turned the thing up so it's up to me to survive in a big way . . . Foolishly perhaps, but determined none the less, I have high hopes of smashing my name into history so violently that it will take a legendary form even if all books are destroyed. That goal is the real goal as far as I am concerned. Things which stand too consistently in its way make me nervous. It’s a pretty big job. In a hundred years Roosevelt will have been forgotten — which gives some idea of the magnitude of my attempt. And all this boils and froths inside my head and I’m miserable when I am blocked.”

Here is a small excerpt from the article What Motivated L. Ron Hubbard? Historian Jon Atack Follows the Clues (posted at The Underground Bunker blog on August 26, 2013
Hubbard added that he was going to “make Napoleon look like a punk” in comparison to the fame he would come to enjoy.


So, “Excalibur” was not about spiritual immortality, or spiritual anything. Hubbard felt that he had made contact with some underlying force in the universe, and that he was the only person ever so to do, but he wanted to exploit that force not for the good of the world (which finds no mention anywhere in this five-page letter), but to “smash” his name into history.


Believers will say that Hubbard changed his mind, but at the very end of his life, there is a telling confirmation of his “only goal.” When Hubbard dropped his body, almost fifty years later, he had failed to spend $648 million of the monies he’d extracted from the Dev-OTs. A paltry million went to the wife who had endured prison to protect him, far less to his surviving children. But half a billion dollars went to the Church of Spiritual Technology, which lists as its corporate purpose, “To perpetuate the name L. Ron Hubbard.” Not the “technology,” just the name, please note. end quote Jon Atack


Okay, it seems pretty clear to me that Hubbard wanted to control people by enslaving men via his lies, psychology and hypnosis and to control the souls and bodies of women by similar means.


He gave us strong evidence in word and deeds that he sought these goals in life and fame in death.


But I can add a bit more from his vast collection of statements in Scientology doctrine.
Regarding wanting to control people with his lies and psychology that hypnotizes people:


Quotes from Ron Hubbard on the Confusion Technique:

Now, if it comes to a pass where it's very important whether or not this person acts or inacts as you wish, in interpersonal relations one of the dirtier tricks is to hang the person up on a maybe and create a confusion. And then create the confusion to the degree that your decision actually is implanted hypnotically.
The way you do this is very simple. When the person advances an argument against your decision, you never confront his argument but confront the premise on which his argument is based. That is the rule. He says, "But my professor always said that water boiled at 212 degrees."
You say, "Your professor of what?"
"My professor of physics."
"What school? How did he know?" Completely off track! You're no longer arguing about whether or not water boils at 212 degrees, but you're arguing about professors. And he will become very annoyed, but he won't know quite what he is annoyed about. You can do this so adroitly and so artfully that you can actually produce a confusion of the depth of hypnosis. The person simply goes down tone scale to a point where they're not sure of their own name.
And at that point you say, "Now, you do agree to go out and draw the water out of the well, don't you?"
"Yes-anything!" And he'll go out and draw the water out of the well.
[End Quote]
Ron Hubbard Lecture, 20 May 1952 "Decision."
source Lermanet.com


Also, even earlier, in 1950:

One error, however, must be remarked upon. The examination system employed is not much different from a certain hypnotic technique. One induces a state of confusion in the subject by raising his anxieties of what may happen if he does not pass. One then "teaches" at a mind which is anxious and confused. That mind does not then rationalize, it merely records and makes a pattern. If the pattern is sufficiently strong to be regurgitated verbatim on an examination paper, the student is then given a good grade and passed.
[End Quote]
Ron Hubbard lecture 29 August 1950, "Educational Dianetics."
source Lermanet.com

let's look at some of the things Hubbard said:
"If you can produce enough chaos — it says in a textbook on this subject — if you can produce enough chaos you can assume the total management of a psyche — if you can produce enough chaos.

The way you hypnotize people is to misalign them in their own control and realign them under your control, which necessitates a certain amount of chaos, don’t you see?

Now, the way to win through all of this is simply to let the guy have his stable data, if they are stable data and if they aren’t, let him have some more that are stable data and he’ll win and you’ll win.

In other words, you can take any sphere — any sphere which is relatively chaotic and throw almost any stable datum into it with enough of a statement and you will get an alignment of data on that stable datum. You see this clearly?

The whole society is liable to seize upon some stupid stable datum and thereafter this becomes a custom of some sort and you have the whole field of morals and mores and so forth stretching out before your view."

Hubbard, L. R. (1955, 23 August). Axiom 53: The Axiom Of The Stable Datum. Academy Lecture Series/Conquest of Chaos, (CofC-2). Lecture conducted from Washington, DC.


"Another way to hypnotize somebody would be to put him in the middle of chaos, everything going in all directions, everybody shooting at him and suddenly throw him a stable datum, and make it a successful stable datum so that it’s all called off once — the moment he grabs this.

And this gives you the entire formula of brainwashing: interrogate, question, lights, pain, upset, accusation, duress, fear, privation and we throw him the stable datum. We say, “If you’ll just adopt ‘Ughism’ which is the most wonderful thing in the world, all this will cease,” and finally the fellow says, “All right, I’m an ‘Ugh.’ ” Immediately you stop torturing him and pat him on the head and he’s all set.Ever after he would believe that the moment he deserted “Ughism,” he would be drowned in chaos and that “Ughism” alone was the thing which kept the world stable; and he would sell his life or his grandmother to keep “Ughism” going. And there we have to do with the whole subject of loyalty, except — except that we haven’t dealt with loyalty at all on an analytical level but the whole subject of loyalty is a reactive subject we have dealt with. "

Author: Hubbard, L. R.
Document date: 1955, 21 September, 1955, 21 September
Document title: Postulates 1,2,3,4 In Processing - New Understanding of Axiom 36, Postulates 1,2,3,4 In Processing - New Understanding of Axiom 36

“A confusion can be defined as any set of factors or circumstances which do not seem to have any immediate solution. More broadly, a confusion is random motion.”
“Until one selects one datum, one factor, one particular in a confusion of particles, the confusion continues. The one thing selected and used becomes the stable datum for the remainder. "

“Any body of knowledge, more particularly and exactly, is built from one datum. That is its stable datum. Invalidate it and the entire body of knowledge falls apart. A stable datum does not have to be the correct one. It is simply the one that keeps things from being in a confusion and on which others are aligned.” – Ron Hubbard [ref]


From a tape on the Philadelphia Doctorate Course lectures in 1952 entitled Structure/Function we get this:

RON THE HYPNOTIST
Structure/Function: 11 December 1952 page 1
"All processes are based upon the original observation
that an individual could have implanted in him by hypnosis
and removed at will any obsession or aberration,
compulsion, desire, inhibition which you could think of – by hypnosis.“
Hypnosis, then, was the wild variable;
sometimes it worked,
sometimes it didn’t work.
It worked on some people; it didn’t work on other people.
Any time you have a variable that is as wild as this, study it.
Well, I had a high certainty already –
I had survival. Got that in 1938 or before that. And uh…"Ron Hubbard

From the Saint Hill Special Briefing Course lectures we have a couple extremely relevant quotes. The tapes are listed by their number:

SHSBC-402
Of course, we go on a tradition "if you learn anything about man that will help him,
you help him with it." ...
"If you learn anything about man that you can manipulate him
You're going to manipulate men,
you've got to change their definitions
and change their goals
and enslave them and do this and do that."


SHSBC-447
"Now, brainwashing simply is the trick of mixing up certainties.
All you have to do if you want to know and develop the entire field
of brainwashing as developed by Pavlov,
is simply to make somebody ..... into a confused or hypnotic state in which he can believe anything". Ron Hubbard


Complimenting this is a quote from Philadelphia Doctorate Course lecture tape numbered 39 from 1952 - known as the games maker tape or lecture

"Now here’s a process that has to do with the making of games, and all this process adds up to, is you just address to those factors which I just gave you, oh, run and change postulates and any creative process that you can think of and shift postulates around, you get a whole process." End quote

THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN CONTROL PEOPLE IS TO LIE TO THEM. You can write that down in your book in great big letters. The only way you can control anybody is to lie to them.
Lecture: "Off the Time Track" (June 1952) as quoted in Journal of Scientology issue 18-G, reprinted in Technical Volumes of Dianetics & Scientology Vol. 1, p. 418. Ron Hubbard

Conclusion:
Hubbard plainly defined "postulates" broadly as decisions, conclusions and this can be called beliefs. Changing postulates in a person is changing their beliefs.


So, he called brainwashing the trick of mixing up certainties. Putting a person into a confused state in which he would believe anything was how he phrased it. He said if you can manipulate men you WILL, not leaving any exceptions for himself ! And he said you will change their definitions and their goals which were their certainties and you will enslave them !




He said he started with hypnosis which could "implant or remove any inhibition, compulsion, aberration or desire you could think of BUT it has the wild variable that it works on the some people but not others and it works sometimes but not others."

So, he was trying to see who it worked on and when and likely how to get it to work as often as possible on as many people as possible. He wanted people in Scientology to shift around the certainties, the postulates, the decisions and beliefs of people to change their definitions and goals, to definitions he wanted them to believe and goals that benefited Hubbard.This all aligns with the "game" he wanted.


His private communication to himself and to his wife Polly make it clear that his ideas regarding "you" using psychology, hypnosis and brainwashing and lying to control people as he described in Scientology doctrine was really him describing his own intention. The evidence is overwhelming.

 

[mockingbird]

It appears to be tough enough for you to avoid Gibby...

Hubbard conveyed much truth; most of the written academy materials are simple direct truth. The tapes are...

entertaining, shall we say?

And fiction can be an instrument of truth.

Did Hubbard tell some outright LIES?!?

O! My! NO!!! Not L. Ron Hubbard!

(after those three plumbers get your tongue out of your cheek have them pull the backhoe around my way)

If you seriously believe Hubbard didn't lie..um..uh...okay...

I think the vast, vast, vast majority of evidence overwhelmingly supports the idea that Hubbard was a pathological liar of unrivalled proportion.

I think the Anderson Report and a detailed examination of the techniques used in Dianetics and Scientology auditing and indoctrination compared against detailed analysis of the step by step methods in hypnosis and the major induction techniques and their phenomena against the phenomena expected and experienced in Scientology auditing and indoctrination strongly supports the idea that much of Dianetics and Scientology is based off the hypnosis Hubbard studied as well as propaganda techniques he took from every source he could find including occult sources and even Nazis techniques.An examination of records and details of Hubbard's contradictory biographies and the very different image other sources portray shows Hubbard was entirely dishonest about his past and accomplishments.

 

[strativarius]

Please tell me any true claims Hubbard made and any false ones.

You're wasting your time @mockingbird, you'll just get sucked into the swamp the same as everybody else. Do some more research, write some more stuff, you're talking to a zombie parrot who seems to speak English but cannot really think and modify his considerations when confronted with the truth.

 

[Dotey OT]

I see this everyday, super smart people getting sucked into discussion that, well, is not super smart.

@mockingbird, keep writing for the rest of us PLEASE!

 

[Clay Pigeon]

I see this everyday, super smart people getting sucked into discussion that, well, is not super smart.

@mockingbird, keep writing for the rest of us PLEASE!

By all means, Mockingbird, keep writing.

You do all service by accumulating a variety of writings in one place

You're wasting your time @mockingbird, you'll just get sucked into the swamp the same as everybody else. Do some more research, write some more stuff, you're talking to a zombie parrot who seems to speak English but cannot really think and modify his considerations when confronted with the truth.

My opinions are subject to change Stratsie

Having been twice butchered by the shrinks I will not buy their atheist, materialist, behaviourist beliefs or practices.

Having produced many good, excellent and occaisionally extraordinary results with auditing I can't imagine what "truth" would change my opinion of it.

Please tell me any true claims Hubbard made and any false ones.

The reply would be too long for the moment but certainly the claim that auditing can relieve psycjhosomatic illness, raise "tone level" and expand spiritual awareness are quite true.

Birdie,

Many court in many countries ruled that COS was committing fraud and also spying a d other criminal stuff per LRH intelligence orders.

Anyways, the affirmations have been found written by LRH and this is actually the reason Gerry Armstrong got into that much problems...COS didn't want Scientology and pic to discover the "real" personality and deeds of LRH.

This has been a major cause of many people withdrawing their belief in LRH as being a humanitarian. It has been an eye opener, that all the abuses in the cult, in making us slaves and to get our money, using lies and manipulation, was in fact postulated and wanted by LRH.

But when we discover his affirmations, after decades of believing and loyalty, it takes courage to admit we were fooled and we were part of an abusive system designed by an abusive greed guru...Although, we can also decided it doesn't matter and the man , as a normal man, had some flaws.....

No matter if some pieces of tech, here and there, may have seemed to work for some people,
because almost all those pieces of tech were organized as something applicable by devoted people, who were later declared and discarded without sorrow..by LRH!

You will read the "affirmations" and make your own mind, depending on your own core values and how you can make sense of the whole thing..that is how it works; and that is why Gerry Armstrong woke up and escaped upon such discovery!

The affirmations were found in a long forgotten box and of course made CoS shit hemmorhage but I am unfazed by them.

I certainly don't affirm them but why should they in any way influence m opinion of auditing?

I am well aware of CoS criminal activity and grateful to those who keep informed of it.

I DO NOT COMMIT THOSE CRIMES.

Hubbard's conveyance of truth is bullshit.

For in the beginning, that would be the book dianetics, why any two people could clear themselves.

Do you know of any two people that cleared themselves using the processes in dianetics?

I was in diapers when DMSMH was published Gibby

Now back to the quustion you are sidestepping


You insist Hubbard's work is nothing but rhetoric

Do you also believe Christianity is rhetoric?

 

[Bill]

You insist Hubbard's work is nothing but rhetoric

Do you also believe Christianity is rhetoric?

You need to clarify: What do you mean by "Christianity"? Preachers? The New Testament? The Old Testament? Your personal beliefs? The Judeo-Christian society? What?

 

[Me and My Self]

A Psychiatric View With Comments On The Admissions By Lafayette Ronald Hubbard (1947)
I will put a few excerpts here to highlight Hubbard's intention regarding hypnosis and in general. To understand Scientology I absolutely recommend reading the post in full. These excerpts are just for this post on his intentions.
[bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)][bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)][bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)][bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)][bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)][bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)][bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)][bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)][bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)][bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)][bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)][bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)][bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)][bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)][bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)][bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)][bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)][bcolor=rgb(255, 255, 255)]:

[/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor]

Is the full post on your blog? Or elsewhere? Thanks in advance!

 

[mockingbird]

[/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor][/bcolor]

Is the full post on your blog? Or elsewhere? Thanks in advance!

Yes it is at Mockingbird's nest blog on Scientology.

 

[mockingbird]

By all means, Mockingbird, keep writing.

You do all service by accumulating a variety of writings in one place


My opinions are subject to change Stratsie

Having been twice butchered by the shrinks I will not buy their atheist, materialist, behaviourist beliefs or practices.

Having produced many good, excellent and occaisionally extraordinary results with auditing I can't imagine what "truth" would change my opinion of it.

The reply would be too long for the moment but certainly the claim that auditing can relieve psycjhosomatic illness, raise "tone level" and expand spiritual awareness are quite true.

The affirmations were found in a long forgotten box and of course made CoS shit hemmorhage but I am unfazed by them.

I certainly don't affirm them but why should they in any way influence m opinion of auditing?

I am well aware of CoS criminal activity and grateful to those who keep informed of it.

I DO NOT COMMIT THOSE CRIMES.

I was in diapers when DMSMH was published Gibby

Now back to the quustion you are sidestepping


You insist Hubbard's work is nothing but rhetoric

Do you also believe Christianity is rhetoric?

Okay, what ills are psychosomatic ? What evidence is there to support that claim ? What evidence exists that auditing relieves them ?​

Regarding tone level, what evidence is there that the tone scale exists ? The claims accompanying the tone scale in Science of Survival are deeply tied to statements about tone going up and down as we age and accompanying medical conditions corresponding to various tone levels. For such claims to be scientifically validated one would have to examine thousands and thousands of people over their lifetimes and have enough records from doctors and nurses to fill a warehouse. Where are all these doctors and nurses and where are all the medical records ?

 

[Gib]

By all means, Mockingbird, keep writing.

You do all service by accumulating a variety of writings in one place


My opinions are subject to change Stratsie

Having been twice butchered by the shrinks I will not buy their atheist, materialist, behaviourist beliefs or practices.

Having produced many good, excellent and occaisionally extraordinary results with auditing I can't imagine what "truth" would change my opinion of it.

The reply would be too long for the moment but certainly the claim that auditing can relieve psycjhosomatic illness, raise "tone level" and expand spiritual awareness are quite true.

The affirmations were found in a long forgotten box and of course made CoS shit hemmorhage but I am unfazed by them.

I certainly don't affirm them but why should they in any way influence m opinion of auditing?

I am well aware of CoS criminal activity and grateful to those who keep informed of it.

I DO NOT COMMIT THOSE CRIMES.

I was in diapers when DMSMH was published Gibby

Now back to the quustion you are sidestepping


You insist Hubbard's work is nothing but rhetoric

Do you also believe Christianity is rhetoric?

to answer your question "Do you also believe Christianity is rhetoric" ?

yep, I do.

And so do others:

https://blog.emergingscholars.org/2...ication-the-rhetoric-of-christian-persuasion/

"One of the unexpected resources that Guinness holds up as a model for Christians who want to communicate winsomely is the tradition of classical rhetoric formulated by Greek and Roman writers such as Aristotle and Cicero. Though not the central focus of Fool’s Talk, this strand jumped out to me since I am in the process of writing a book on the use of rhetoric in English puritan writing of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. While my research is largely historical in focus, it touches on some of the same questions that Guinness raises as relevant to Christian communicators today."

"Aristotle’s Art of Rhetoric identifies three key dimensions of persuasion—logos (appeal to reason), pathos (appeal to emotion), and ethos (the perceived credibility of the speaker). For some classical rhetoricians (though not all), the true orator had to be sincere in order to present a credible ethos, and Guinness references this understanding of rhetorical ethos: “The first and indispensable requirement for classical rhetoric had always been ethos, the moral character of a speaker that supported the power of his logos, his rational argument.”[3] For Guinness, this underlines the need for those who represent Christ to have an integrity that gives credibility to their words, a credibility that the Church in its various expressions has sometimes sadly lacked."