Such a community of unbelievable strength...

First and foremost, I want to let everyone know that I’ve never been involved in Scientology, so my viewpoints are from an outsider looking in. However, looking back, I see a time in my life when I could have very easily been influenced by the principles of Scientology; and I chalk not getting involved up more to luck and good fortune than to sound decisions on my part. The reason I’m writing this post is to tell you how I came to know of Scientology, how I found this message board, and my thoughts on Scientology as a psychologist.

I know that I can never fully empathize with someone who is now an ex-Scientologist, having never been there myself. While reading many of these posts and stories, I realized how strong you have to be to get out; my heart just aches when I read of the abuses that many of you endured; and I am angered on many levels. I deeply commend each and every one of you for not only getting out, but for telling your stories and sharing your experiences so that others may learn. I want you to understand that this post is written from my heart as well as through the lens with which I see the world, which is obviously colored by my training as a psychologist. Please know that my goal here is in no way to try to shift anyone’s thinking about psychology or psychiatry, but rather to share my feelings and voice how appalled I am at the practices and tenets of the Church of Scientology.

I grew up in central Florida, not far from Flag. I was raised in a non religious family environment, and religion in general did not have much of a place in my life. I knew little of Scientology, but learned bits and pieces along the way, beginning in my college years. I attended a college close to Flag. This meant that it was not at all unusual for me to see “Dianetics” tables set up in the breezeways of various buildings on campus. The tables were staffed by two or three people; there were always a few students who had stopped to talk to them. I never stopped to see what they were about; I was approached a few times to take the “personality test”, but never did—I was always running late to class, or just not interested. I also used to frequent a flea market not far from campus, where there was always a Dianetics booth that was similarly staffed. Again, by pure luck, Karma, or grace, I never stopped to talk to them. At that time, I had no preconceived notions of Scientology. Because I consider myself no more or less impressionable than the average person, I have no doubt that had I stopped to talk to them, I might very well have gotten involved.

My junior year of college was a difficult one. To make a very long story short, a family member of mine had some very serious psychological difficulties. It was at this time that I feel I would have probably been most vulnerable to Scientology, but again, it was just luck that kept me from stumbling across it. Instead, I completed the requisite courses for the major I had been studying, and then took an intro to psychology class to see if I could find some answers. A long story for another post is how I eventually changed my major to psychology, completed my Bachelor’s degree, and went on to graduate education.

My senior year, I again came into contact with Scientology. I was part of a program which required a senior year project. I worked with part of a group that decided to do a critical review and exploration of non-mainstream religions. I chose Scientology, because it was something I knew little about, and also because I was intrigued by the fact that Flag was located so close to campus. I read popular media articles and books (at this time, the internet was in its infancy). I also spoke to a few people who I knew to be involved in Scientology. I came away thinking that the beliefs (those which I became aware of, and I now realize I knew very little of Scientology’s actual beliefs) were interesting, but more saliently, I was shocked to learn that in essence, you had to “pay to believe”. I see now that I was giving Scientology the benefit of the doubt in a big way, and assuming that it was in fact a legitimate religious organization. The biggest issue I had was one of the financial outlay expected of church members. Little did I know that there was a far bigger picture involved. I wrote up my part of the project, took the grade of A we had earned, and didn’t give Scientology much thought after that.

My understanding of Scientology as a layperson remained pretty static until recently. I suppose my beliefs could have been summed up easily—I thought Scientologists were a bit wacky, and it was a bit cultish—but I’m also open-minded and I am all for freedom of choice, so my attitude was, “whatever works for them”. In no way did I understand that it was dangerous on many levels. Believe it or not, even with a degree in psychology, I wasn’t aware that Scientologists considered psychology/psychiatry to be the enemy. It wasn’t until Tom Cruise spoke out against mental health care as provided by my field that I understood this viewpoint of Scientologists.

Since graduating, I had moved to another part of Florida, which is where I reside now. Fast forward to recent history. I was reading on another (non-Scientology related) message board, and one of the things mentioned on that board was the fact that there are many professionals (mostly chiropractors, dentists, and veterinarians) that use practice-building/management companies that are Scientology-based. I visit practitioners in all three of those professions, so I was curious whether or not any of the practitioners I used were using those management companies. In the process of looking into this, I began to read information about Scientology’s history, beliefs, and current state of affairs. I found this message board, I found xenu.net, and I found other websites like whyaretheydead.net.

To say that I was appalled on many levels would be a gross understatement. Even today, I’m not sure where to start. Where do I start? The LRH quotes about “starting a religion for money”? The difficult-to-swallow beliefs about Xenu, the horrific treatment of staff members, the infiltration of the IRS? The deaths of church members, the extremely damaging psychological techniques employed by the church, the financial ruin of church members, the disconnections from family and friends? The completely ridiculous granting of 501c3 status, the grossly inaccurate portrayal of psychology/psychiatry, the harassment and threats to those who leave? The insidious nature of WISE, Study Tech, etc.? I could spend another paragraph going on like that. On every level, I find it offensive.

Maybe I should start with what I know best and go from there. I was shocked to learn about the techniques employed by the church that I know to be very psychologically damaging. I’m not even speaking about people being taken off of psychiatric medication, or about the belief that psychology and psychiatry are evil. The choice to go off of medication, or to have a certain belief set are very personal decisions, and are decisions that are valid, if made of free will. What I am speaking about are the techniques employed that do tremendous damage to self-esteem, techniques that break down trust, and practices that invalidate valuable emotions.

I would like to speak more here about these things, but it occurred to me as I write this that people may not want to read what I have to say, or may be offended by my opinions. That is not my intent at all. So I am going to post this as it stands now, and let you as the caretakers of this community let me know if these are things you are interested in hearing. If not, then I will appreciate your reading of this post and your honest reply, and I will not continue. If you are interested, I will continue on.

Either way, I thank you for allowing me to post this much, and allowing me access to your community.

I commend you all.
 

Tiger Lily

Gold Meritorious Patron
What I am speaking about are the techniques employed that do tremendous damage to self-esteem, techniques that break down trust, and practices that invalidate valuable emotions.

It looks like you understand pretty well, FullOfEmpathy. You got it!! That's their MO!!

:welcome: to ESMB.

Your opinions and viewpoints are welcome here. Of course. It's interesting to see what it looked like from the outside and how it's percieved. Thanks for your kind words.

:)TL
 

Alanzo

Bardo Tulpa
Let me be one of the first to welcome you to ESMB, FOE!

Maybe I should start with what I know best and go from there. I was shocked to learn about the techniques employed by the church that I know to be very psychologically damaging. I’m not even speaking about people being taken off of psychiatric medication, or about the belief that psychology and psychiatry are evil. The choice to go off of medication, or to have a certain belief set are very personal decisions, and are decisions that are valid, if made of free will. What I am speaking about are the techniques employed that do tremendous damage to self-esteem, techniques that break down trust, and practices that invalidate valuable emotions.

I am fascinated to see what you have to say here. I have spent the last 9 years trying to figure out how Hubbard did what he did, and why my life was derailed by Scientology to the degree I let it be.

Please, CONTINUE!!!
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
Maybe I should start with what I know best and go from there. I was shocked to learn about the techniques employed by the church that I know to be very psychologically damaging... What I am speaking about are the techniques employed that do tremendous damage to self-esteem, techniques that break down trust, and practices that invalidate valuable emotions.

Yes, I'm very interested too. Are you talking about techniques used in session, auditing techniques; or about administrative ones like yelling at staff by seniors or extorting "donations" from the faithful?

Paul
 

Div6

Crusader
We welcome your contributions and feedback. Diversity of viewpoint enriches us all.

Welcome to ESMB. For better or worse.....:duh:
 

Wisened One

Crusader
:welcome: FullofEmpathy!

And I thank you for posting here!

Ya know, even when I was in, I never believed that automatically every single psych was evil, out to harm, used psych drugs irresponsibly, used shock therapy, etc. :eyeroll:

Sounds like you may be one of those 'nice' ones. :)

I was helped tremendously by a kind psychologist when I was a teenager. :yes:

Please continue! :yes:
 
Last edited:

HappyGirl

Gold Meritorious Patron
:welcome: FOE! Your post from the outsider's perspective was really fascinating.
To say that I was appalled on many levels would be a gross understatement. Even today, I’m not sure where to start. Where do I start? The LRH quotes about “starting a religion for money”? The difficult-to-swallow beliefs about Xenu, the horrific treatment of staff members, the infiltration of the IRS? The deaths of church members, the extremely damaging psychological techniques employed by the church, the financial ruin of church members, the disconnections from family and friends? The completely ridiculous granting of 501c3 status, the grossly inaccurate portrayal of psychology/psychiatry, the harassment and threats to those who leave? The insidious nature of WISE, Study Tech, etc.? I could spend another paragraph going on like that. On every level, I find it offensive.
Oh yeah. Those things aren't normal life experiences for everybody else, are they? :duh:
Welcome to our community. You seem to be full of empathy. :)
 

slimjim

Patron with Honors
Hi FOE!
Thanks for the validation. Sometimes I do feel really ashamed and embarassed that I got suckered in. But like you say, it did take some doing to "get out" and for that I'm pleased. I'm REALLY INTERESTED in what you have to say, so from my point of view, you are incredibly welcome and I'm really looking forward to your next post! I have a feeling it might make me feel a bit better about getting pulled in and staying as long as I did.
slim
 
Wow....thank you all for such a warm welcome!

I must admit,after having read that many ex-Scientologists continue to doubt the methods and practices of psychology/psychiatry, that I was even reluctant to post as much as I did. Not for fear of confrontation, but because I understand how challenging someone's deeply held beliefs can be incredibly painful for the person whose beliefs are being challenged. All of you have been through enough and managed to come out the other side, so the idea that I might inadvertently add to that was troubling. I'm really pleased that everyone so far is receptive to me continuing to post my points of view.

I wanted to continue by talking about why I really find the techniques Scientology uses (both in auditing sessions, and verbal abuse to staff members) to be damaging and reprehensible from a psychological perspective. I realized that one of the things that might require is an understanding of the perspective I'm coming from. So at risk of sounding like a broken record by asking permission again, would anyone mind if I gave a very brief history of psychology and it's beliefs, so that you can understand the way I conceptualize things?

I promise not to try to "sell" you on the profession and its beliefs, but rather to explain the underpinnings and dispel some myths, and show you why I see things the way I do.

Thanks again for welcoming me!
 

Alanzo

Bardo Tulpa
Wow....thank you all for such a warm welcome!

I must admit,after having read that many ex-Scientologists continue to doubt the methods and practices of psychology/psychiatry, that I was even reluctant to post as much as I did. Not for fear of confrontation, but because I understand how challenging someone's deeply held beliefs can be incredibly painful for the person whose beliefs are being challenged. All of you have been through enough and managed to come out the other side, so the idea that I might inadvertently add to that was troubling. I'm really pleased that everyone so far is receptive to me continuing to post my points of view.

I wanted to continue by talking about why I really find the techniques Scientology uses (both in auditing sessions, and verbal abuse to staff members) to be damaging and reprehensible from a psychological perspective. I realized that one of the things that might require is an understanding of the perspective I'm coming from. So at risk of sounding like a broken record by asking permission again, would anyone mind if I gave a very brief history of psychology and it's beliefs, so that you can understand the way I conceptualize things?

I promise not to try to "sell" you on the profession and its beliefs, but rather to explain the underpinnings and dispel some myths, and show you why I see things the way I do.

Thanks again for welcoming me!

FFS!

Out with it! :)
 

Tiger Lily

Gold Meritorious Patron
FOE -- an overview of psychology could be very therapeutic for exes -- all we ever heard was how evil it is. It's a tough viewpoint to get rid of -- many exes are still wary of psychology and psychiatry. It might help to have the information out there so that it can be consciously evaluated. Go for it!!

There's no requirement to read every thread. If people aren't interested they just won't read it. Some may question you or ask for clarification on things. You'll find many viewpoints here -- it's a very diverse group.

-TL
 

lionheart

Gold Meritorious Patron
I think an outline of psychology from your perspective would be very interesting and an analysis of scientology from a psychological perspective could give many of us a refreshing angle.

I'm very keen to hear what you have to say. Don't worry about treading on too many toes here.
 
Thanks, everyone!

Like many other professions, psychology has had its ups and downs. Overwhelmingly, the downs are historical in nature, but that doesn’t erase them, so people have an absolute right to question and examine psychology as a profession. While I personally don’t feel it is my duty to "own" the mistakes of my profession’s past, I most certainly acknowledge them and will talk freely about them.

Perhaps our most egregious mistakes were a result of ignorance. Several studies come to mind, which I will mention here (but not take the time to discuss in detail—that could take a book. If you Google these studies and practices –and I encourage you to, you will find a wealth of information).

Generally speaking, psychology has multiple schools of thought. Some have fallen mostly out of favor, and others have gained immense followings as sound empirical research has shown their techniques to be safe and effective. New techniques are constantly being developed and empirically tested, so it is also a dynamic and constantly changing field of study.

I have been trained in and follow the broad principles of the cognitive-behavioral orientation. Other orientations, like psychoanalytic (i.e. Freudian), are still followed and practiced, but the number of psychologists who use traditional Freudian analysis continues to dwindle as time passes.

Some errors of the past that come to mind are the crude techniques of early frontal lobotomies (Google “Phineas Gage” for the genesis of such experiments), the Milgram obedience study, the Stanford prison experiment, and Bandura’s work on classical conditioning (the “Little Albert” study). Additionally, our methods of understanding and caring for those with serious mental illness (i.e. schizophrenia, psychosis) has a somewhat rocky history (sanitariums, and the practices that occurred therein). And then there are electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and psychopharmacology, both which I will discuss in more detail in another post.

All of the practices I mentioned undoubtedly had unethical components—I don’t think you will find a psychologist who will argue otherwise. And because of those errors, people were harmed. As a result of advances in anatomy, better education, developing technology, empirical studies, and a better understanding of the mind/body connection, psychology (and psychiatry as well) has changed dramatically. In addition, the processes by which treatments can be tested (and ultimately applied) has drastically changed. I will spare you the details (you can Google psychology + consent + ethics), but suffice to say that the protection of human rights (physical and emotional) is now paramount in our field.

The domain of psychology is primarily the assessment and treatment of mental illness via a wide array of therapeutic techniques (“talk therapy”). Often pharmacological treatments are used as an adjunct to therapy. Pharmacology is the domain of psychiatry, as they are physicians (MD’s or DO’s) and psychologists are Ph.D.’s and thus cannot prescribe. This is beginning to change in a very limited way, but that’s a whole different post.

Cognitive behaviorally oriented therapists believe a few things:

1) Everyone (with the exception of minors, who need parental consent) has free will and can choose to refuse or accept any treatment offered, with one limited exception. The implications of this can be staggering. The only way I can admit someone for psychiatric treatment against their will is if I am explicitly told, by the patient, that he or she is planning to harm themselves (suicide) or another person (homicide). Then I am ethically bound to protect the person from harming themselves or another. It actually requires even more than just disclosure of the desire to harm—it takes intent, a plan, and means for me to be able to act.

2) We believe that certain types of thoughts (Google “Aaron Beck triad”) lead to specific moods/behaviors, and that with techniques like cognitive reframing, we can teach someone to change they way they think for the better, to improve mood and decrease unwanted or self-destructive behaviors.

3) We believe that there are some mental illnesses that do not respond well (or at all) to CBT (cognitive behavioral therapy). These are things like schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and other disorders that we think have strong developmental, neurological, or genetic components. There are also disorders that we know respond particularly well to CBT, like depression and anxiety.

4) We approach therapy as a collaborative effort; the gains made by our clients are not attributable to the therapist, or even solely to the technique, but to the working relationship that exists, and to the client’s willingness and motivation to apply these techniques and succeed. The credit for “making someone feel better” isn’t mine to own; it belongs to the client.

5) All of the techniques we use have been rigorously tested using the scientific method, with randomized controlled trials (Google “evidence-based psychology”) as the gold standard. If the treatment is not efficacious and safe as shown by sound research published in peer-reviewed journals, I don’t use it.

There’s a bit more (not too much, I promise), but I am off to a meeting. I should be able to post up a continuation tonight.
 

Zephyr

Patron with Honors
Wow....thank you all for such a warm welcome!

So at risk of sounding like a broken record by asking permission again, would anyone mind if I gave a very brief history of psychology and it's beliefs, so that you can understand the way I conceptualize things?

I promise not to try to "sell" you on the profession and its beliefs, but rather to explain the underpinnings and dispel some myths, and show you why I see things the way I do.

Thanks again for welcoming me!

Hey, Doc :)

You get to say what you want and I'm sure it'll be interesting.

Hubbard and "SCN" propose that Psychologists are evil implanters who have existed for eons, life time after life time, practicing their trade of brain washing and promting drugs. IMHO, most ex Scientologists haven't taken the time to study the true history or psychology's motives, so po-lease, tell us all about it.

Glad you're here.

Incidentally, Hubbard's "Reactive Mind" was a plagerized "SNake Brain (which can never be "cleared").

Rob
 

RogerB

Crusader
FOE Welcome! And Thank You.

FullOfEmpathy,

Thank you for visiting and adding to our wealth of knowledge. You are welcome.

Your point that psychology has seen a lot of change in its practice is well taken, and of course correct.

Below is cited an article that appeared in the New York Times, Science Section some years back.

The original is a very insightful article for those who wish to google it and get the full piece.

I used it in a section of my website, which page I copy below, not to compete with the input you are making, but to give the context to how it applied to what I had to say and to validate your statement as to changes in the practice and sentiments of psychology.

RogerB.
___________________________________________

ABILITY CONSULTANTS, INC.

PRACTITIONERS OF KNOWLEDGISM®


A TRANSITION OF KNOWLEDGE AND AWARENESS
INTO THE PRESENT


Thirty plus years ago, when the services of ABILITY CONSULTANTS, INC. began as MANAGEMENT SCIENCE ASSOCIATES, it was not common currency to mention the notion of any individual spiritual presence or ability in connection with management, corporate affairs, or science. We in the western Judeo-Christian culture were spiritually illiterate.

By comparison, in 1965, in Bombay, India, I had occasion to ask a business associate where it might be a good place for me to lunch. He asked what kind of food I liked, to which I replied I was a vegetarian (at the time I was engaged in research on nutritional aspects of athletic performance). “Ah,” he replied, “An Englishman (white Australians look like Englishmen, I suppose) who is a vegetarian! What is your religion?” I informed him that I am Christian. “Ah,” he said, “That quaint religion that does not believe in reincarnation!” And he was right — of all the cultures on Earth, the one that was most ignorant of individual spiritual capacity and truth was the western Christian culture. Yet the historic truth is that Christ and the early Christians were well versed on the subject of individual spiritual capacity and ability, and taught reincarnation.

Today, the notion that the actual, true you is really spiritual in nature, and that we have faculties and enormous capacity that can be developed to recover our full, real operating potential and ability levels is common currency. Past lives, spiritual existence outside of the body, and supra-human abilities are the stuff of Primetime TV documentaries and real-life experience books.

At ABILITY CONSULTANTS, INC., we have taken these truths a step further. With scientific precision and rigor, the precise faculties and abilities that are natively yours have been delineated. In addition we have the processes, techniques, and procedures to address and expand these abilities.

The work began in the late nineteen-fifties. Alan C. Walter, the founder of KNOWLEDGISM®, and I were champion athletes in Australia (he a professional football player, and I a swimmer). We were independently in search of ways to enhance athletic, and then subsequently human, performance. Our focus was on ability, and the capacity to perform.

We first met in 1962, formed a high regard for each others’ achievements, but continued our individual paths while staying in touch over the years. In continuing our separate research, it turned out, we each had a slightly different emphasis. While I studied ability; its nature, its impairment, ways to restore and enhance it; Alan was studying an additional factor — success. Alan did a study of successful people versus unsuccessful people, and a comparison between what each did and how they did it — I missed that.

Alan C. Walter’s work led to the development of KNOWLEDGISM®; while mine led to the techniques employed by MANAGEMENT SCIENCE ASSOCIATES when it was founded by me in London, England, in 1968.

In 1994, I saw that Alan had made the definitive breakthroughs on the subjects of human ability, human activity and performance, and their enhancement; and I embraced it as the core discipline of ABILITY CONSULTANTS, INC.

There is demonstrably nothing in any of the sciences, religions, or “new age” endeavors that compares to what has been discovered and is contained in KNOWLEDGISM®. And I say this after having studied, in-depth, these alternatives; and observing what they produce as outcomes.

Both Alan and I traveled the world and studied the wisdoms of many cultures. I have studied the teachings of the Shamans of India and America, the Balirahns of Asia, the Kahunas of Polynesia, the Ifa Priests and Priestesses of Africa, and both Hinduism and Buddhism; and while each contained some great insights and truths compared to western beliefs; and their adepts appeared to attain serenity or great powers in western eyes; these belief systems and practices proved to be quite limited and even to contain some booby-traps. None contain a codified, easily learnable set of processes that can routinely be used by anyone to increase his or her power and ability to confront and deal with the travails of life so he or she is no longer effect of unwanted situations. The conditions of their societies attest to that; as does the fact that attainment of their envisioned ideal requires a retreat from life, not a dealing with and a raising of one’s power to be at cause over life.

In the West I studied various “new age” endeavors, the spiritual science of Anthroposophy developed by the great Rudolf Steiner at the turn of this century (the 19th to the 20th, Ed.), and the new twentieth-century religion of Scientology. All contain some insights and useable techniques, and in the case of Rudolf Steiner’s Biodynamic agricultural and farming techniques it must be said they are superior to anything else; but in the context of the capacity to restore or enhance ability, these endeavors also proved to be somewhat superficial, to have limited workability, and to contain some spiritual booby-traps. Both the limited acceptance of these endeavors; and in the case of Scientology, its contentiousness, proven belligerency toward those who disagree with it, its vast loss of adherents in the last two decades, and repeated law suits from former members, attest to this.

None are as exact, as complete, or as routinely and totally workable as is KNOWLEDGISM®.

In the realm of science, the “hot new endeavor” begun during 1997-98 in university research departments was that of the search for and analysis of “consciousness” — yet this has been very known territory in KNOWLEDGISM® for more than two decades, as has been exact and workable processes for its enhancement.

An even more striking example of the workability of the approach by KNOWLEDGISM® and ABILITY CONSULTANTS, INC., as compared to the conventional scientific community, was revealed in the April 28, 1998 edition of The New York Times, Science News Section. The article begins:

“Psychologists rarely think much about what makes people happy. They focus on what makes them sad, on what makes them anxious. That is why psychology journals have published 45,000 articles in the last 30 years on depression, but only 400 on joy. . . . .
“It was not always like that. When psychology began developing as a profession, it had three goals: to identify genius, to heal the sick and to help people live better, happier lives. Over the last half century, however, it has focused almost entirely on pathology, taking the science of medicine, itself structured around disease, as its model. . . .
“That is an imbalance, says Martin E.P. Seligman, the new president of the American Psychological Association, and one that he is determined to change. Dr. Seligman, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania . . . has a strategy for reforming a profession he thinks has gone awry. . . .
“Psychology, he said, has been negative ‘essentially for 100 years.’ Theories have generally focused on damage, as have techniques for intervention. ‘Social science has believed negative things were authentic and strengths were coping mechanisms,’ he said. . . .
“But what he sees in his (own) children are ‘pure, unadulterated strengths’ that are not compensations for trauma, but intrinsic. ‘I find myself beginning to believe psychology needs to ask, What are the virtues? We need to delineate them, assess them, ask causal questions. What are the interactions? How does it grow? Let’s talk of growth and questions of strength. . . .
“Rather than spending $10 million on, say, phobias and fears, he says, study courage.”​

We practitioners of KNOWLEDGISM® couldn’t agree more. We welcome Dr. Seligman to the world of looking at what is actually there to be seen and appreciated, rather than the pursuit of the arbitrary opinions and pet theories that psychology has indulged to date. (For a fuller appreciation of this, I recommend the above news article as being most instructive.)

KNOWLEDGISM®, as it happens, always has been ahead of this new thinking within psychology — and we have taken it several steps further. KNOWLEDGISM® did not stop at “studying” the arbitrarily designated “obvious” (but actually superficial) items of the human condition (genius, love, work, play, virtues, interactions, and courage) cited in the above news item — we sought to find not only what the basic abilities of humankind were that we wished to enhance and strengthen, but what was the source of those abilities; what was the font of the volition and power at the source of human endeavor.

What we found, and are able to demonstrate to any honest, unprejudiced individual, is more in common with the wisdoms and knowledge of the ancients and of our “native” cultures than the opinions and theories of prevailing “materialistic” science. We found that the source in which resides all of the faculties that are expressed as human ability and activity is a spiritual essence, the real, individual you. It is the spiritual you that is endowed with the volition you exercise, and which directs and implements the abilities you have. And further, we delineated the basic faculties and natural abilities you employ in human activity — capacities such as: the ability to maintain a dynamic presence, the ability to direct one’s awareness, the ability to perceive, to evaluate and compare, choose and want, to intend, envision, project such visions (communication), plan, to act and implement such plans; to create and predict futures, and many more.

Knowing these elemental truths, KNOWLEDGISM® developed the processes and procedures that are able to address and expand the essential abilities any client wants to perform better with, whether the client is an individual, a business enterprise, or a corporate function.

And this has two important applications: one for the individual, and the other for the corporate endeavor, the business enterprise, or any other group dynamic that needs proper organization, structure and function. For the basic abilities you have as a spiritual Being, and their relationship to abundance and survival, are the same as apply in attaining any successful outcome in human affairs: that of a powerful dynamic presence, proper perception, proper evaluation, proper intending, proper envisioning, proper planning, proper action and implementation of the plan, and proper appreciation of results. And it is this set of acts and abilities that is the imperative sequence one must accomplish if one is to properly attain one’s wanted outcomes, and upon which all endeavor, whether personal or corporate, should be organized — for to not do so is to have difficulty and be ever wondering why.

And we found another important truth; that with abilities restored and enhanced a Being can rise above being affected by, and effect of, the chaos, the stress, the emotional impacts and turmoil, the uncertainties, and the failures of everyday life that afflict many. One can rise above unwanted conditions, personally as an individual, or in terms of one’s corporate endeavors or as a business enterprise.

The knowledge you need for making your better future is available now, if you reach for it; for making your future the way you want it to be is one of the abilities KNOWLEDGISM® found we really have. It is not karma, fate, or the will of something outside of you that determines your future; but you, by the exercise of your volition.

The future is yours now if you know this, and, if you are powerful enough with your abilities to implement it.



Roger E. Boswarva
Chairman and Founding Partner
ABILITY CONSULTANTS, INC.
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE ASSOCIATES


COPYRIGHT © 1997
Roger E. Boswarva
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

 

CornPie

Patron Meritorious
Dear Dr. FullOfEmpathy:

You stated:

1) ...that many ex-Scientologists continue to doubt the methods and practices of psychology/psychiatry...

2) ...many professionals (mostly chiropractors, dentists, and veterinarians) that use practice-building/management companies that are Scientology-based...

3) ...Some [psychs] errors of the past that come to mind are the crude techniques of early frontal lobotomies...

4) ...the processes by which [lobotomies and shock treatment] can be tested...applied...has drastically changed...

My replies:

I really appreciate your honesty about being a psych in your first paragraph. It probably says so on your business card, and your office door. On the contrary, the "openly" disclosed dianetics booths you mentioned are rare in my experience. More often scientologists try to dupe people in without being honest about it.

1 -- I am really tired of being told it's because of scientology that I have an attitude about psychs. A lot of people I know, have been joking about psychs all their lives, before they'd ever heard of scn. In my opinion, your profession has made itself a sitting duck by deploying non-reversible lobotomies and shock treatment. All scn had to do was point out the obvious.

2 -- I wish I knew of a sure fire way to determine if a (chiropractor, dentist, and veterinarian) was a scilon or not. So I could avoid them as a patient, and maybe let them "get the feel" of being on the receiving end of some black PR that their so-called "church" promotes. However, any PR I would dish out would be "open", I would simply mention "scientology", a 100 times. If they want to sleep with the scientologists, they should defend it.

3 and 4 -- As you stated, psychs still employ shock treatment and lobotomies, a situation where it's the sickest "treating/punishing" the sickest, and I'm not going to change my mind. In my opinion, stopping these practices 100% industry-wide, is the only thing that's standing in the way of legitimizing your industry, and stopping most of the giggling. Because as long as it happens in 1 case, the stigma will continue. At least scientology admits that their RPF is punishment, their pole running may screw people up in the head, but at least it does not create a permanent physical condition.
 
Last edited:

DCAnon

Silver Meritorious Patron
Cornpie, if the situation is absolutely dire and the patient chooses to undergo these extreme treatements rather than suffer anymore...what other alternatives could you offer them? It's a last ditch effort after everything else has been tried and failed. :< And as extreme as it is, it does work. Why can't a patient choose their own treatment?
 

lionheart

Gold Meritorious Patron
Cornpie, I'm looking forward to a psychologist's critique of scientology.

I am familiar with the criticism of psychiatry already. Is it necessary to replay criticisms of psychiatry on this thread? - we are already familiar with them and with Ron's campaign against psychiatry re PR series 12.

I vote for giving the psychologist, FullOfEmpathy, the space to forward his critique of Scn rather than bashing psychiatrists on his thread. :)

This is a rare opportunity to hear a professional's analysis of scientology. Let's give him the space to speak. Maybe that way we can learn more about what Scientology actually is by viewing it from an external point of view and maybe FullOfEmpathy can learn more about the subject of Scientology from us in return.
 
Top