Such a community of unbelievable strength...

EP - Ethics Particle

Gold Meritorious Patron
Rising scale processing!

Funny you two brought this up. Even though I spent over thirty years studying and practicing Scientology, I never considered myself much of an expert on the subject. I mean it's kind of a deep well. (more like a bottomless pit)

I was amazed when I got to ESMB and discovered that Zinj had such a complete grasp on Scientology theory after zero standard tech training. Being ex is such a humbling experience. Instead of "knowing how to know" I am now learning how to unknow.

I think the doc might be able to help us sort some things out. But it's hard to get her to stay long enough to keep the dialog going.

GT

Above "Not Know" is "Know" (as I recall) :wink2:

I believe there is both hope and progress here! :yes:

The "Doc" has a bunch of sortin' ta do fer shoor, and I'm lookin forward to the continuing dialog also! :)

(You're awesome too, GT!) :hug: EP
 

Tiger Lily

Gold Meritorious Patron
Oh hell, Darlin' - I know she's gonna "go there" and I both applaud and love her for it! :yes: :clap: (I just want her to feel absolutely confident that she is among friends and that there are real pros here to call on should she run into any difficulties along the way.) :)

You are awesome too TL! :flowers:

Found this, below - which is not mine, but could well be - make sense?


Quote (emphasis added):


used to know a Puerto Rican woman who roared when I used to demonstrate my limited command of the Spanish language, defined by the NYC experience. My favorite was the recitation of a sign which appeared in the subway cars for as long as I can remember. I used to just recite two lines:
"La via del tren subterraneo es peligrosa. .... No salga afuera." This warning alerted passengers to many dangers, including the the electrified third rail. See full wording and translation below.

Note: The original sign in its entirety with translation is as follows:
"La via del tren subterraneo es peligrosa. Si el tren se para entre las estaciones, quedese adentro. No salga afuera. Siga los instrucciones de los operadores del tren o la policia."
"The subway route is dangerous. If the trains stops between stations, do not go outside. Remain inside! Follow the instructions from the operators or the police."

(TL - BTW, wonderful link you posted - very appropo!)

lol EP -- another "literary" analogy of sorts . . ? . . .yep, the route is dangerous. But if ya wanna see great vistas, sometimes ya gotta get on the train ta get there!! :wink2: Being respectful of 3rd rails and landmines and stuff of course.
:) TL
 

Tiger Lily

Gold Meritorious Patron
Funny you two brought this up. Even though I spent over thirty years studying and practicing Scientology, I never considered myself much of an expert on the subject. I mean it's kind of a deep well. (more like a bottomless pit) I was amazed when I got to ESMB and discovered that Zinj had such a complete grasp on Scientology theory after zero standard tech training. Being ex is such a humbling experience. Instead of "knowing how to know" I am now learning how to unknow.

I can SO relate to that.

But was it Socrates that said those who know they don't know are doing OK? It's the ones who think they know that are in big trouble. . .

I think the doc might be able to help us sort some things out. But it's hard to get her to stay long enough to keep the dialog going.

GT

I know. . .FOE where are you?

:)TL
 

Alanzo

Bardo Tulpa
EP you're awesome! You made a good point that is an important one. . . it is a huge subject and very complicated. And our experiences certainly can't be put into a box -- to see that, all you have to do is read on this forum for a while. There is no way to "categorize" that subject and put labels on it and get a full understanding of wtf happened there.

But with that understanding and that caveat; I still would like for FOE to "go there" simply for this reason: It's a new viewpoint. Maybe another piece to the puzzle. Like the 5 blind men who were examining the elephant; each describing it differently because they were examining a different part, and had different information to work with. (http://www.wordinfo.info/words/index/info/view_unit/1/?letter=B&spage=3 )

There has been a lot of research done in the field of psychology and I think that hearing how Scientology looks from the outside, and in particular from that viewpoint will be a valuable angle for us to examine as exes. Especially because it's a subject that we had been told to "stay away" from. . . . just seeing what psychology really has to offer (besides being "whole track SP's"), and breaking apart some of those "implanted" preconceived notions about the field, could be very valuable in the healing process.

Personally I am interested in what FOE has to say. I don't plan to blindly agree or anything, and I'm sure that if she steps on any toes she'll be "set straight", :wink2: but heck, I'm all for an adventure.

:)TL

What TL said, EP.

What TL said.
 

Lynn Fountain Campbell

Silver Meritorious Patron
Sorry I'm late getting to this thread. Welcome FOE. I'm really interested to have you put into words the feeling I've had that there's something harmful about the way scientology gets "installed" into our minds.

It has taken me quite some time to sneak up on this idea, since in scientology being a "victim" automatically makes you a pariah.


I can SO relate to that.

But was it Socrates that said those who know they don't know are doing OK? It's the ones who think they know that are in big trouble. . .



I know. . .FOE where are you?

:)TL

I think it was Yogi Berra too who said "It's not what we don't know that gets us into trouble. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so." :)

Lynn
 

SchwimmelPuckel

Genuine Meatball
Very promising and interesting thread! :)

Hmm.. As to the how's and why's Scientology is damaging to the mind..

I see a lot that looks similar to post traumatic stress syndrome to me. That's the ex'es who was in the 'war' with Hubbard and his crusade. Those who were staff..

Interesting to me is how the doctrine and philosophy aims at replacing what we 'knew' with new data that works much like a 'mind virus'. Using 'authority', fear, shame.. And 'hope'... In Scientology parlance we would call it 'implants'.. Never mind -how- these data, or 'memes' got into our minds.

An impressively prepared and complex scam.. Leaving the 'victim' suspended in a web of lies, that he considers 'truth', and is reminiscent of Hubbards description of the 'Reactive Mind'.

So hypnosis is worth considering. Or mesmerizing..

Here's a fourthnights study of why and how Scientology is hypnosis:
Thread at OCMB / Hubbard's use of hypnosis - Dianetic's true SOURCE revealed

:yes:
 
If I were a university English Literature professor and you were a "post doc" beginning a thesis on the collected works of William Faulkner, I would give you a B+ on your last post (#81).:coolwink:

The subject of Scientology is huge and can't, IMO, be categorized or "put in a box" (or boxes). The study, practice and experience of the subject is profoundly different for each, every and all persons encountering or experiencing it - simply because each person is unique, and thus approaches, rejects, believes, doubts, utilizes, practices and proceeds (or not) in their own peculiar way.

I think Carmel's post above is an excellent example of the differences to which I refer - particularly when juxtaposed with the posting of others such as Alanzo, Feral, scooter, Zinj, and so many others.

What you are attempting here is a potentially herculean task - and insofar as attempting to analyze and/or categorize Scientology...well, my personal advice would be: Don't go there.

Just as a point of reference - I, personally, have far more time, energy, money, study and effort invested/expended in Scientology than in my original university degree and subsequent career in engineering...and I have only "scratched the surface" of Scientology when compared to others such as RogerB, Panda, Alan, Dart, Carmel, GT, TL, LB and others have done. You are truly among scholars, researchers and adventurers here on this forum!

From experience I know full well that researchers and explorers are not easily daunted or dissuaded - and perhaps that is why I love them so completely and unreservedly.

So, my dear, just take care that you do not fall down the "rabbit hole" yourself!

Love,

Mike/EP


WTF? EP I would give you a C for apparently missing the point.


I don't remember FOE saying she(?) was going to write a thesis on Scientology. Post #81 is only a brief outline suggested as a starting point.
FOE has explicitly acknowledged that not having personal experience could be a limiting factor in what she presents. What is to be presented has only been offered so far, as her perspective as a psychologist - on a discussion board. She is not asking anyone to confer grades or degrees for it.
 

Tiger Lily

Gold Meritorious Patron
It has taken me quite some time to sneak up on this idea, since in scientology being a "victim" automatically makes you a pariah.

:yes: You're right! Hadn't thought of it quite that way before. That's another one of those insidious "implants" that you don't even realize is there, but shapes how you think about yourself. Thanks


I think it was Yogi Berra too who said "It's not what we don't know that gets us into trouble. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so." :)

Lynn

Oh, he was a wise man!

:)TL
 
Hi everyone,

Thanks for all the input on my post.

I have a couple of things that I want to respond to and say, and my goal here is to be as honest as possible.

1. It has been noted that I seem to 'disappear' from the board, or that I don't post frequently enough to keep the discussion going.

When I made my very first post, I had no idea that this thread would take off the way it has, and my goal at that time was to give a few insights into why I was so shocked and dismayed when I learned about Scientology's practices. That post has evolved into a discussion with a depth that I didn't really anticipate. I work a full work week (many times I even work *more* than a full work week, hours-wise), as well as having additional family and academic obligations. During the weekends, I generally am not online, as I spend that time with family and friends and attending to other responsibilities. Also, I'm just not one of those people who "lives" online (and I don't mean that in a derogatory way, but rather just as a descriptor/ observation). So in truth, I may not have the time or inclination to post to this thread multiple times per day, or even daily; and it's compounded by the fact that I like my posts to be well thought out, and written only when I have time to sit down and really think.

2. Secondly, I think its fair to tell you that I've been considering whether to continue posting here at all. I've discussed my postings here with someone whose opinion I care about and really value, and they asked me some thought provoking questions about how willing I am to be involved in a situation that could potentially have negative repercussions for me.

The more I have read about Scientology's responses to SP's and other threats to their integrity, the more I shocked I have become. Namely, I've been really unpleasantly surprised to find that even major organizations and companies (most notably the IRS, Google, eBay, CNN and Comedy Central) have capitulated to what I feel have been unreasonable demands from the CoS.

And I'm sure that this community knows very well the threats and harassment that have plagued individuals who have tried to expose/critique Scientology's practices to the general public.

So I'm fence sitting at the moment, despite some reassurance that they wouldn't be that interested in me.

3. Also, as EP so astutely pointed out, there is a wealth of information available online, authored by other mental health professionals, that analyze and critique Scientology's practices. So I'm not really sure that what I am adding to that discussion is really very valuable, since Scientology is merely an interest of mine and not something I have been involved in or have studied extensively. As I have mentioned, my overarching goal in posting was really to congratulate everyone here for having the strength to leave and briefly discussing the reasons I thought it was so damaging.

I've got to run to a meeting; I will check back here later today and try to post some more as I continue to ponder.
 

DCAnon

Silver Meritorious Patron
Psh, who's scared of sad, middle-aged cultists? I doubt they'll try anything, too many eyes on them now. If they're dumb enough to go for it, shout it to the media and expose their tactics to protect and warn other mental health people about it. :coolwink:
 

Zinjifar

Silver Meritorious Sponsor
Something to keep in mind is that Scientology is not *only* the 'MindFuck' of its adherents; it's also a 'movement', and, therefore, *political* in the broadest sense; including the criminal conspiracy.

So, not only does Scientology 'MindFuck' its victims, it also, with some limited success, MindFucks society at large. Many of the same kinds of extortion, the fear, the terror, the threats and actual abuse that Scientology commits on its victims directly parallels what it attempts to do to Society at large, including the intimidation of 'large corporations'.

If we, as wogs, can't face down the empty and sometimes not-so-empty threats of a bug-shit-crazy malevolent Flying Saucer Cult, how can we expect Scientologists, who face the threat on a far more personal and immediate basis, to do so?

Zinj
 

Tiger Lily

Gold Meritorious Patron
Hi everyone,

Thanks for all the input on my post.

I have a couple of things that I want to respond to and say, and my goal here is to be as honest as possible.

1. It has been noted that I seem to 'disappear' from the board, or that I don't post frequently enough to keep the discussion going.

When I made my very first post, I had no idea that this thread would take off the way it has, and my goal at that time was to give a few insights into why I was so shocked and dismayed when I learned about Scientology's practices. That post has evolved into a discussion with a depth that I didn't really anticipate. I work a full work week (many times I even work *more* than a full work week, hours-wise), as well as having additional family and academic obligations. During the weekends, I generally am not online, as I spend that time with family and friends and attending to other responsibilities. Also, I'm just not one of those people who "lives" online (and I don't mean that in a derogatory way, but rather just as a descriptor/ observation). So in truth, I may not have the time or inclination to post to this thread multiple times per day, or even daily; and it's compounded by the fact that I like my posts to be well thought out, and written only when I have time to sit down and really think.

That totally makes sense. Post as often as you can or want to (we do sometimes get demanding when we're interested in something. . don't worry about that -- we're harmless really; take it as a compliment that we're interested)

2. Secondly, I think its fair to tell you that I've been considering whether to continue posting here at all. I've discussed my postings here with someone whose opinion I care about and really value, and they asked me some thought provoking questions about how willing I am to be involved in a situation that could potentially have negative repercussions for me.

The more I have read about Scientology's responses to SP's and other threats to their integrity, the more I shocked I have become. Namely, I've been really unpleasantly surprised to find that even major organizations and companies (most notably the IRS, Google, eBay, CNN and Comedy Central) have capitulated to what I feel have been unreasonable demands from the CoS.

And I'm sure that this community knows very well the threats and harassment that have plagued individuals who have tried to expose/critique Scientology's practices to the general public.

So I'm fence sitting at the moment, despite some reassurance that they wouldn't be that interested in me.

Understandable. It's why many of us are still anonymous too. That has to be your decision. But they don't really have anything to trace you with -- no personal information in their files or anything. I would say that you are relatively safe if you stay anonymous. You could help a lot of people by being here; there are us exes who post; but there are a lot of "lurkers" who are looking for information.

Your posts could be a godsend for someone (and more easily understandable to someone thinking about getting in, because we tend to speak "scientologese" which isn't as easily understandable to the un-indoctrinated.

3. Also, as EP so astutely pointed out, there is a wealth of information available online, authored by other mental health professionals, that analyze and critique Scientology's practices. So I'm not really sure that what I am adding to that discussion is really very valuable, since Scientology is merely an interest of mine and not something I have been involved in or have studied extensively. As I have mentioned, my overarching goal in posting was really to congratulate everyone here for having the strength to leave and briefly discussing the reasons I thought it was so damaging.

I've got to run to a meeting; I will check back here later today and try to post some more as I continue to ponder.

I really want to address this point, because after your initial post, I did some research looking for "Scientology from a psychological perspective". What I found was a big fat nothing, or else articles in journals that were so full of psycho-jargon that I couldn't make sense of it. Despite LRH's assertions about the Suppressive Psychs; it looks like the psychs have left Scientology alone pretty much, at least in their literature. If you know of some references, I'd be interested in them.

Besides that what you're doing seems to be unique. . .and I've been looking forward to it.

Thank you for your validations.

Hope you decide to keep posting. If not, I understand that too. You said you've got your Ph.D. . . bummer, this would have made a great Doctoral thesis!!

Thanks,
TL
 

Tiger Lily

Gold Meritorious Patron
Something to keep in mind is that Scientology is not *only* the 'MindFuck' of its adherents; it's also a 'movement', and, therefore, *political* in the broadest sense; including the criminal conspiracy.

So, not only does Scientology 'MindFuck' its victims, it also, with some limited success, MindFucks society at large. Many of the same kinds of extortion, the fear, the terror, the threats and actual abuse that Scientology commits on its victims directly parallels what it attempts to do to Society at large, including the intimidation of 'large corporations'.

If we, as wogs, can't face down the empty and sometimes not-so-empty threats of a bug-shit-crazy malevolent Flying Saucer Cult, how can we expect Scientologists, who face the threat on a far more personal and immediate basis, to do so?

Zinj

Great post Zinj.

It's amazing that they could have gotten this much power. I think we'll all be surprised how good it feels when this comes crashing down and that worry is no longer there. I think it's more crippling than we realize sometimes.

Zinj I never cease to be amazed by your ability to see it all so clearly.

-TL
 
Hi everyone,

This has been a really bad week for me to find much time to be online. This is a very busy time of year for various reasons, and I'm hoping that my load lightens up a little in the next week or so.

Having said that, I'm still fence-sitting regarding continuing to post. I have continued to read bits and pieces regarding both the mechanics and politics of the CoS, and I continue to be dismayed by their tactics. In fact (as I mentioned in an earlier post) I have talked with someone about the brief and somewhat shallow education I've given myself in Scientology so far, and pointed them to some links.

They were, as I am, particularly troubled by the government's lack of action against the CoS in many spheres. Despite the fact that it's cliche, I've even considered writing to my congressman :D Whether that letter gets read and ultimately acted upon is another matter, but I think that in this economy they might be interested in being reminded that tons of tax dollars are going unpaid because of the granting of a completely bogus 501 3(c) exempt status to the CoS.

Anyway, I just wanted to let folks know that I'm still here (when I can be). And I'm still reading when I can, and still considering continuing to post.

Thanks for allowing me the venue and the space to sort this out.
 

programmer_guy

True Ex-Scientologist
Tiger Lily said:
I really want to address this point, because after your initial post, I did some research looking for "Scientology from a psychological perspective". What I found was a big fat nothing, or else articles in journals that were so full of psycho-jargon that I couldn't make sense of it.


Yeah, all that I have found:

1. "The Anderson Report", 1965
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/anderson/index.html

2. "A Real Experiment Comes Up Dry", 1950
http://www.mystae.com/streams/gnosis/engram.html

3. "Dianetic Therapy: An Experimental Evaluation" by Harvey Jay Fischer, 1953
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/fischer/index.html
 

programmer_guy

True Ex-Scientologist
After PC achieves Dianetics release we'll run a process on the communications grade (Grade 0). - "banana" is not a real item.

After "Start of session." and flying ruds.

Auditor: "From where could you communicate to a banana?"

PC: "From an airplane."

Auditor: "From where could you communicate to a banana?"

PC: "From my chair."

Auditor: "From where could you communicate to a banana?"

PC: "From my front porch."

Auditor: "From where could you communicate to a banana?"

PC: "In my living room."

<continue ad nauseam>

PC finally gets hypno state with production and release of endorphins and consequent cognition <fill in your favourite cog here> and VGIs.

Auditor: "Thank you. Your needle is floating. End of session."

PC is escorted to the Qual examiner.
 
Last edited:

Tiger Lily

Gold Meritorious Patron
Anyway, I just wanted to let folks know that I'm still here (when I can be). And I'm still reading when I can, and still considering continuing to post.

Thanks for allowing me the venue and the space to sort this out.

Lol -- you're welcome to come and sort out anytime :) And your thoughts are always welcome too!

:)TL
 

Tiger Lily

Gold Meritorious Patron
Yeah, all that I have found:

1. "The Anderson Report", 1965
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/anderson/index.html

2. "A Real Experiment Comes Up Dry", 1950
http://www.mystae.com/streams/gnosis/engram.html

3. "Dianetic Therapy: An Experimental Evaluation" by Harvey Jay Fischer, 1953
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/fischer/index.html

Thanks PG! Hadn't seen these. They look interesting, particularly the first.

I remember LRH addressing the other ones (sort of) by saying that Dianetics didn't work for them because they didn't have their TR's in, or the right intention or something to that effect. . . .that the process was off in some way.

Got some reading to do . . .

:study:TL
 

programmer_guy

True Ex-Scientologist
FullOfEmpathy,

In your area of expertise, do you utilize the idea and practice of "cognition" as a group process (i.e. not just regarded as an individual process)?

There are some various reviews on the 'net of Edwin Hutchins' book "Cognition in the Wild" that are interesting.

From:"Cognition in the Wild" - book reviews
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2346/is_n426_v107/ai_20550254/

bold emphasis mine
In chapter three, he presents implementational details of how the fix cycle (through which the position of the ship is plotted) proceeds, arguing that the computational nature of this process is compatible with its being distributed between different members of the ship's crew, as well as across their artifactual environment. Chapter four moves up from these component processes to the overall organization and coordination of a navigational team's performance; Hutchins suggests that we view the whole navigational team (plus artifacts) as a cognitive unit, with its social organization functioning as its cognitive architecture, and the division of labour serving as a form of modular decomposition.

Another review:
http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/refs/Mozilla_Scrapbook/Hutchins, CogniȮ the Wild.html
Hutchins examines a set of phenomena that have fallen in the cracks between the established disciplines of psychology and anthropology, bringing to light a new set of relationships between culture and cognition. The standard view is that culture affects the cognition of individuals. Hutchins argues instead that cultural activity systems have cognitive properties of their own that are different from the cognitive properties of the individuals who participate in them.


I'm curious as to your views on this subject.
(This might also loosely apply to message boards.)
 
Last edited:
Top