The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

[lkwdblds]

Demonstration Given me by Paul

Carl Rogers came up with it before Hubbard, and probably is where he stole it from.

Excerpt from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person-centered_therapy:

Person-centered therapy (PCT) is also known as person-centered psychotherapy, client-centered therapy and Rogerian psychotherapy. PCT is a form of talk-psychotherapy developed by psychologist Carl Rogers in the 1940s and 1950s. It's one of the most widely used models in mental health and psychotherapy. In this technique, therapists create a comfortable, non-judgmental environment by demonstrating congruence (genuineness), empathy, and unconditional positive regard toward their patients while using a non-directive approach. This aids patients in finding their own solutions to their problems.​

Rogerian therapy is one of my (free) RoboCounsellor modules. I've made it as close to the original as I can get it within the Robot counselling paradigm. It works fairly well, but like the version using a more expensive live practitioner it works better on relatively heavily charged items.

Paul

I got my computer fixed and returned to me yesterday. I was able to Skype Paul and he walked me through his Robo Counsellor program. Its funny, he mentioned Rogers and Rogerian Therapy to me yesterday. They were featured in the demonstration walk through which he gave me. Then the next day, comments on such a therapy are made by Ted and Paul responds to them. It is funny how that happens. A new concept is discussed with you and very shortly mention of it pops up in different places in your life.

Paul has put in an awful lot of work on his Robo Counsellor program. A session can be done by computer using his rub and yawn method. You can receive a session on the topic of your choosing any time you want by logging on. You have got to be fairly computer savy to run with this thing. I am not so Paul had to guide me through several steps using my browser tool bar and things of that nature. He was kind enough to do this for me.

CASE CHANGE FROM A MIDDLE CLASS PERSPECTIVE - I went onto Face Book and met dozens of ex Scientologists over there. I ran into a couple of people similar to the types I met at CCLA in the 1970's. They are basically good people, with artistic ability and flair and they speak of "dreams of grandeur", becoming multi millionaires in two or three short years using some kind of method or edge which they show you which makes sense. These types of people have wide circles of friends and are very active and busy, always, going, going, with their many projects. I met such a person about 10 days ago and spent 5 hours talking to them at their house. They then dropped off my lines for about a week and then called and spent another hour and a half on the phone with me. I finally had to end the call. All these dreams of grandeur through a business partnership were again discussed. When I ended the call, I knew the person would be at Aida's 4th of July party and mentioned that we could continue our conversation there. At the party, the person saw me and looked away. The person was very busy with other people and after nearly an hour came over and spent about one minute with me. A couple of hours later our paths crossed and we talked for maybe two minutes and then the person had to run off and see other friends.

Back in my CC days, I would have felt snubbed and hurt by this person and would have considered them a phoney. Not any longer, I think this person is kind and sincere and very energetic and just has to go, go , go, always being in a hurry and busy at a social event. There is unpredictablity, erratic behavior and inconsistency which I feel prohibits us from being friends let alone business associates. My take is to just stay away from such people, doing good roads, good weather as required. This is a positive change for me and a nice win.
Lakey
P.S. - At this moment we have 8 ESMB Members and 2 guest viewing the thread or 10 of the total of 14 viewing the entire "personal stories from inside Scientology" category

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

Judging from some of the replies which you have been getting from some of our top posters, you have been one of those lamp lights, perhaps fireflies would be a more apporpriate term, in fact you have been one of the most influential of the lot of us.
Lakey

Nah...I'm just a gadfly, under the influence.

Face

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

Excellent, Ted, just simply excellent.

I have been aware of NPD for years but this is the best thing I’ve ever read about it.

You see, my parents were NPD and my father was NPD plus ultra and, IMO, El Ron was NPD ne plus ultra.

To the outside world my parents were devout fundamentalist Christians, highly respected, paragons of virtue. Two us, their children, they were verbally, emotionally and physically abusive and violent. We were not “real” to them…we were characters on their stage, props for their dramas. I’m not going to self indulge and tell all about it here but, believe me, it was hell and the only way we survived and led good, decent lives, was banding together to take care of and watch out for each other, education, determination and moving far away as soon as we could. My oldest brother left at 16, my deceased brother left at 19 or 20, my sister at 19 and I walked away 2 weeks after my high school graduation. It was truly a house of horrors…and I am so proud that all of us kids ended the circle of violence with our own families. We share a bond that is singular and unique, a bond that only those that know our “family secret” truly understand the depth of. One thing that was so valuable is I learned, first hand, how not to treat a child or another human being.

Perhaps this is why I could function and not become cold and vicious in the rough, tough, cruel environment on the Apollo and “inner circle”…I don’t know.:confused2:

What I do know is that, over the years in El Ron’s personal service, I learned that the El Ron of the Tapes was not the El Ron of the Flesh; that the El Ron of the Flesh was very, very similar to my Father; That the “skills” I learned dealing with my Father and Mother were the “skills” that worked best for dealing with El Ron and the SO. In my final days in the SO I came to privately ponder the fact that El Ron knew so much about the Anti-Social, criminal and “deviant” personality because El Ron was describing Hisself…and, perhaps, didn’t even know it.

My “take” on El Ron is nothing more than my “take”. I think “running out El Ron” is a “cooperative composite process”…if there is such a thing. It’s being run all over this board, other boards, many places, many ways. I am very comfortable here, with yall, and like what’s going on here on ESMB…and this thread in particular.

Thank you so much for your two posts and link, my friend.

Face

PS: I had one of those coin collections, too!

 

[Ted]

Back At Ya, Facey

Excellent, Ted, just simply excellent.

I have been aware of NPD for years but this is the best thing I’ve ever read about it.

You see, my parents were NPD and my father was NPD plus ultra and, IMO, El Ron was NPD ne plus ultra.

To the outside world my parents were devout fundamentalist Christians, highly respected, paragons of virtue. Two us, their children, they were verbally, emotionally and physically abusive and violent. We were not “real” to them…we were characters on their stage, props for their dramas. I’m not going to self indulge and tell all about it here but, believe me, it was hell and the only way we survived and led good, decent lives, was banding together to take care of and watch out for each other, education, determination and moving far away as soon as we could. My oldest brother left at 16, my deceased brother left at 19 or 20, my sister at 19 and I walked away 2 weeks after my high school graduation. It was truly a house of horrors…and I am so proud that all of us kids ended the circle of violence with our own families. We share a bond that is singular and unique, a bond that only those that know our “family secret” truly understand the depth of. One thing that was so valuable is I learned, first hand, how not to treat a child or another human being.

Perhaps this is why I could function and not become cold and vicious in the rough, tough, cruel environment on the Apollo and “inner circle”…I don’t know.:confused2:

What I do know is that, over the years in El Ron’s personal service, I learned that the El Ron of the Tapes was not the El Ron of the Fesh; that the El Ron of the Flesh was very, very similar to my Father; That the “skills” I learned dealing with my Father and Mother were the “skills” that worked best for dealing with El Ron and the SO. In my final days in the SO I came to privately ponder the fact that El Ron knew so much about the Anti-Social, criminal and “deviant” personality because El Ron was describing Hisself…and, perhaps, didn’t even know it.

My “take” on El Ron is nothing more than my “take”. I think “running out El Ron” is a “cooperative composite process”…if there is such a thing. It’s being run all over this board, other boards, many places, many ways. I am very comfortable here, with yall, and like what’s going on here on ESMB…and this thread in particular.

Thank you so much for your post and link, my friend.

Face

Facey, I can certainly relate to your comments.

After my mother died I was conversing with my brother about her and our dad. By then Dad had been gone a few years. Putting the relationships in my own perspective, I told my brother that I did not understand what their lives were all about but I was certain that their performance was exactly what it was supposed to be. And, I am certain that they are doing just fine in whatever afterlife there may be for them having completed their mission and performance. You see, we learned to be opposite. My dad taught me exactly how I did not want to be. For that I thank him very much even though he was impossible to live with.

As for Hubbard, he went ga-ga over the book by marketeers Ries and Trout, Positioning: The Battle For Your Mind. Hubbard had been positioning for years, always making himself and his alter egos, dianetics and scientology, better than, bigger than. Jesus and Buddha were referred to as being maybe Clear or OT-1. Homo novis, a hubbard creation, was far above lowly human beings, and so on.

Then he positioned the anti-social personality synonymous with being anti-scientology, yet scientology has proven itself to be extremely anti-social once a person leaves the sanctity of the auditing session.

I have come to believe that the narcissistic personality was the "SP" hubbard was looking for and attempting to define. He got close, but close is not good enough to run it out. Notice there is nothing in dn or scn processing designed to address that phenomena. This is consistent with the theory that a person's most aberrated areas of case won't even be considered or viewed as areas of difficulty that should be addressed.

I agree about running out el rum and scio. The group discussion is a marvelous adjunct to the Grades processes. I say that because sooner or later a being has to get outside of its own mind, outside of its own experience, observations, and evaluations in order to continue to make a gain.

And, while I hate to do it, I will refer to something el rum wrote, because he wasn't ALL wrong: Education is a valid process.

 

[lkwdblds]

Facey, I can certainly relate to your comments.

After my mother died I was conversing with my brother about her and our dad. By then Dad had been gone a few years. Putting the relationships in my own perspective, I told my brother that I did not understand what their lives were all about but I was certain that their performance was exactly what it was supposed to be. And, I am certain that they are doing just fine in whatever afterlife there may be for them having completed their mission and performance. You see, we learned to be opposite. My dad taught me exactly how I did not want to be. For that I thank him very much even though he was impossible to live with.

As for Hubbard, he went ga-ga over the book by marketeers Ries and Trout, Positioning: The Battle For Your Mind. Hubbard had been positioning for years, always making himself and his alter egos, dianetics and scientology, better than, bigger than. Jesus and Buddha were referred to as being maybe Clear or OT-1. Homo novis, a hubbard creation, was far above lowly human beings, and so on.
Then he positioned the anti-social personality synonymous with being anti-scientology, yet scientology has proven itself to be extremely anti-social once a person leaves the sanctity of the auditing session.

I have come to believe that the narcissistic personality was the "SP" hubbard was looking for and attempting to define. He got close, but close is not good enough to run it out. Notice there is nothing in dn or scn processing designed to address that phenomena. This is consistent with the theory that a person's most aberrated areas of case won't even be considered or viewed as areas of difficulty that should be addressed.

I agree about running out el rum and scio. The group discussion is a marvelous adjunct to the Grades processes. I say that because sooner or later a being has to get outside of its own mind, outside of its own experience, observations, and evaluations in order to continue to make a gain.

And, while I hate to do it, I will refer to something el rum wrote, because he wasn't ALL wrong: Education is a valid process.

You've been on a roll lately, some very good posting! I never heard of the book, "The Battle for Your Mind". It is interesting what you say, if Buddha was only OTI and LRH claimed he was Buddha, that poses some interesting questions. He seemed ticked off that Christianity was so much bigger and widely respected than Scientology. He was all over the map about Jesus, all the way from praising him as an OT I to saying he was gay and /or that he did not ever live. I was surprised that the Jews were almost totally left out of the footnotes of Scientology. To my knowledge no mention whatsoever is ever made of Moses or of the Torah or any of that. Einstein was thought of so highly and was respected as being a great scientist and having great intelligence so LRH took every opportunity to bash Einstein and his theories. He also liked to belittle President Franklin Roosevelt. I believe he never mentions Winston Churchill, Abraham Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt, Leonardo Da Vinci, Beethoven, various great historic people who were highly respected and widely acclaimed. He did not like it that people other than himself were venerated and adored and had the acclaim that he so desparately desired.

On the topic of SP's, he was fond of saying that they were unknowingly stuck in an incident back on their time track where they were fighting a powerful enemy. He would say that their time track was so balled up that they took every person who they met to be the person who they were fighting in the garbled up back track incident. The given technical reason they could not be helped was that they were not properly located in present time so that they could not as-is anything.

As the years rolled by, I believe he made announcements from time to time that SP's could now be handled but that they were not worth the effort and that making the able more able took precendence. He often would say that he would pick up the Phycotics and the SP's at the very end when the last people on the planet were finally cleared.
Lakey

 

[Ted]

You've been on a roll lately, some very good posting! I never heard of the book, "The Battle for Your Mind". It is interesting what you say, if Buddha was only OTI and LRH claimed he was Buddha, that poses some interesting questions. He seemed ticked off that Christianity was so much bigger and widely respected than Scientology. He was all over the map about Jesus, all the way from praising him as an OT I to saying he was gay and /or that he did not ever live. I was surprised that the Jews were almost totally left out of the footnotes of Scientology. To my knowledge no mention whatsoever is ever made of Moses or of the Torah or any of that. Einstein was thought of so highly and was respected as being a great scientist and having great intelligence so LRH took every opportunity to bash Einstein and his theories. He also liked to belittle President Franklin Roosevelt. I believe he never mentions Winston Churchill, Abraham Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt, Leonardo Da Vinci, Beethoven, various great historic people who were highly respected and widely acclaimed. He did not like it that people other than himself were venerated and adored and had the acclaim that he so desparately desired.

On the topic of SP's, he was fond of saying that they were unknowingly stuck in an incident back on their time track where they were fighting a powerful enemy. He would say the their time track was so balled up that they took every person who they met to be the person who they were fighting in the garbled up back track incident. The given technical reason they could not be helped was that they were not properly located in present time so that they could not as-is anything.

As the years rolled by, I believe he made announcements from time to time that SP's could now be handled but that they were not worth the effort and that making the able more able took precendence. He often would say that he would pick up the Phycotics and the SP's at the very end when the last people on the planet were finally cleared.
Lakey

If, and that's a big if, scientology were able to "handle" these people, it would be a huge mistake to handle them at the end of the line as all too often these nut-jobs rise to positions of prominence where their influence brings maximum destruction for the rest of us. Witness DM's reign in CoS and the current POTUS who is a complete ideologue nut-job gone amok with the power of his position.

 

[Dulloldfart]

As the years rolled by, I believe he made announcements from time to time that SP's could now be handled but that they were not worth the effort and that making the able more able took precedence.

I have finally come around to the idea that absolutely *nothing* Hubbard said can be taken at face value. Nothing whatsoever. Maybe it's true and maybe it isn't, but face value isn't ever an appropriate starting point for him other than the fact that a particular version of "HCOB XXXXX" or "Document ____" says "blah blah blah."

Paul

 

[Ted]

I have finally come around to the idea that absolutely *nothing* Hubbard said can be taken at face value. Nothing whatsoever. Maybe it's true and maybe it isn't, but face value isn't ever an appropriate starting point for him other than the fact that a particular version of "HCOB XXXXX" or "Document ____" says "blah blah blah."

Paul

I concur.

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

Facey, I can certainly relate to your comments.

After my mother died I was conversing with my brother about her and our dad. By then Dad had been gone a few years. Putting the relationships in my own perspective, I told my brother that I did not understand what their lives were all about but I was certain that their performance was exactly what it was supposed to be. And, I am certain that they are doing just fine in whatever afterlife there may be for them having completed their mission and performance. You see, we learned to be opposite. My dad taught me exactly how I did not want to be. For that I thank him very much even though he was impossible to live with.

As for Hubbard, he went ga-ga over the book by marketeers Ries and Trout, Positioning: The Battle For Your Mind. Hubbard had been positioning for years, always making himself and his alter egos, dianetics and scientology, better than, bigger than. Jesus and Buddha were referred to as being maybe Clear or OT-1. Homo novis, a hubbard creation, was far above lowly human beings, and so on.

Then he positioned the anti-social personality synonymous with being anti-scientology, yet scientology has proven itself to be extremely anti-social once a person leaves the sanctity of the auditing session.

I have come to believe that the narcissistic personality was the "SP" hubbard was looking for and attempting to define. He got close, but close is not good enough to run it out. Notice there is nothing in dn or scn processing designed to address that phenomena. This is consistent with the theory that a person's most aberrated areas of case won't even be considered or viewed as areas of difficulty that should be addressed.

I agree about running out el rum and scio. The group discussion is a marvelous adjunct to the Grades processes. I say that because sooner or later a being has to get outside of its own mind, outside of its own experience, observations, and evaluations in order to continue to make a gain.

And, while I hate to do it, I will refer to something el rum wrote, because he wasn't ALL wrong: Education is a valid process.

Yes!

I was around El Ron when he went Ga-Ga over BLS and Positioning.

With BLS I was going “WTF?” do we need this for when we’ve got TWC, ARCU, BDH, SCS, 8-8008, etc., etc...that's all you need to know to "Reg" someone ethically. Kinda creeped me out.

The Positioning push unnerved me, too. I think the Positioning was part of Hisself’s Driver as El Ron the Director, Producer, Photographer, Musician, etc. It seemed so façade, so disingenuous, so “Wog”. But, as you observed, Hisself had been positioning for years and I’d already bought a lot of it. But the part I bought was that there was something of value here, there were good and enlightened people involved here from all over the world that I liked being with and fascinated me, I had huge “Wins” in my very early auditing and many of the things I read seemed to align with what I “knew” and had studied about philosophy/metaphysics…in short, “White” Scn.

I was never into El Ron, The Galatic Hero…and the more Hisself coalesced to, and/or I realized that was where El Ron was coming from/going, the more I was turned off and worried.

I think you nailed it re: the narcissistic personality being the “SP” El Ron was looking for…however, the one thing an NPD cannot "see" or “get” is that they, themselves, are the “Evil Ones” that they are trying to define, find, subjugate and obliterate.

I seem to recall that part of the “buzz” on 5 and 5A in the late ‘60’s was that it was supposed to “Crack SP’s Cases”.

My Psychotherapist friend told me that “Malignant Narcissism” is a very good and readable book regarding the subject…I’m going to send your link to him as he is interested to read it.

El Ron wasn’t ALL wrong…education is a valid process...and, like your Mom and Dad, my Mom and Dad, we are better off for the experience. It was part of our path, an important part, and I would not trade or change anything I have experienced. After all, if it hadn't have been for my time in Scn and with El Ron I wouldn't be here on ESMB, having such fine chats with such fine folks as Yall, from whom I learn so much of true value and have a very enjoyable time of it.

Face

 

[Mark A. Baker]

In my final days in the SO I came to privately ponder the fact that El Ron knew so much about the Anti-Social, criminal and “deviant” personality because El Ron was describing Hisself…and, perhaps, didn’t even know it.

Or as I often put it, he wasn't consciously aware of it.

One thing that has often struck me about Hubbard's lectures is that so often when he cites the conduct of another as illustrative of an overt or missed withhold the item he mentions is often very similar to one of his own transgressions. It's as if he is inviting his audience to miss his withholds.

What's that old saw about the criminal wanting to be found out for his crimes?


Mark A. Baker

 

[Mark A. Baker]

I concur.

Me three.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Dulloldfart]

Me three.

I guess that makes a concurrum then.

Paul

 

[thetanic]

I think you nailed it re: the narcissistic personality being the “SP” El Ron was looking for…however, the one thing and NPD cannot "see" or “get” is that they, themselves, are the “Evil Ones” that they are trying to define, find, subjugate and obliterate.

Well, the narcissist turns to feed the valence rather than effectively cope with the valence. Sort of a classic service facsimile, seems like.

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

I guess that makes a concurrum then.

Paul

I concur in concurrence re: concurrem.

Face

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

Or as I often put it, he wasn't consciously aware of it.

One thing that has often struck me about Hubbard's lectures is that so often when he cites the conduct of another as illustrative of an overt or missed withhold the item he mentions is often very similar to one of his own transgressions. It's as if he is inviting his audience to miss his withholds.

What's that old saw about the criminal wanting to be found out for his crimes?


Mark A. Baker

Whoa...that's good.

Face

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

Well, the narcissist turns to feed the valence rather than effectively cope with the valence. Sort of a classic service facsimile, seems like.

Whoa...that's good, too.

Face

 

[lkwdblds]

Some interesting videos from July 4th.

Here are some links to some interesting interviews made at the 4th of July event in Los Angeles!

http://freezone-tech.info/?p=1729

http://freezone-tech.info/?p=1714

http://freezone-tech.info/?p=1700

Lakey

 

[Leon]

Or as I often put it, he wasn't consciously aware of it.

One thing that has often struck me about Hubbard's lectures is that so often when he cites the conduct of another as illustrative of an overt or missed withhold the item he mentions is often very similar to one of his own transgressions. It's as if he is inviting his audience to miss his withholds.

What's that old saw about the criminal wanting to be found out for his crimes?


Mark A. Baker

On an earlier thread dealing with the Power Processes - I think initiated by Dart - there was reference to LRH's description of the Total-Source Case and the difficultyty of auditing an extreme one of these. Yet it was a perfect description of himself.

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

On an earlier thread dealing with the Power Processes - I think initiated by Dart - there was reference to LRH's description of the Total-Source Case and the difficultyty of auditing an extreme one of these. Yet it was a perfect description of himself.

Whoa...that's good, three.

Face

 

[thetanic]

Speaking of interesting quotes relating to the last couple of pages on this thread, I found this also possibly relevant:

There is a curious and very subtle paradox in the L's results. It is the realisation that one is oneself the greatest thetan in the universe. The greatest of all. Ever was and ever will be. The GREATEST. And the realisation is correct.

But if you ever assert it, if you ever tell anyone, if you ever present to others that such a thing is true, then you instantly lose it and it will recoil upon you. And then you will soon be stuck in the lower and degraded harmonic of being narcisistic.

It is a very curious state. I'm not going to go into too much description of this because words confuse the issue. One needs to just grasp it. It has to do with the three "univereses > My universe, your universe, and the agreed upon universe. Ultimately one realises that there is only one's own universe, and nothing else.

People on the Ls sometimes get blown to pieces by this realisation. They lose it and start to dramatise it and assume some sort of "status" with regard to others. Then they instantly lose it.

It's very subtle.