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

[Ted]

Run In / Run Out

Warning signs of 'groupthink' in cults or groups... [1]


'An illusion of invulnerability, which creates excessive optimism and
encourages taking extreme risks' Does your organisation, cult or group
suffer from groupthink? Stephen Castro in this book argues that the
Findhorn community in Scotland is a classic example of this dangerous
phenomenon. The behavioural symptoms to watch out for are as follows:

(1) An illusion of invulnerability, shared by most or all the members,
which creates excessive optimism and encourages taking extreme risks.

(2) Collective efforts to rationalise in order to discount warnings
which might lead the members to reconsider their assumptions before
they recommit themselves to their past policy decisions.

(3) An unquestioned belief in the group's inherent morality, inclining
the members to ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their
decisions.

(4) Stereotyped views of rivals and enemies as too evil to warrant
genuine attempts to negotiate, or as too weak and stupid to counter
whatever risky attempts are made to defeat their purposes.

(5) Direct pressure on any member who expresses strong arguments
against any of the group's stereotypes, illusions, or commitments,
making clear that this type of dissent is contrary to what is expected
of all loyal members.

(6) Self-censorship of deviations from the apparent group consensus,
reflecting each member's inclination to minimise to himself the
importance of his doubts and counter-arguments.

(7) A shared illusion of unanimity concerning judgements conforming to
the majority view (partly resulting from self-censorship of deviations,
augmented by the false assumption that silence means consent).

(8) The emergence of self-appointed mindguards - members who protect
the group from adverse information that might shatter their shared
complacency about the effectiveness and morality of their decisions.

Quoted by Castro from J. R. Eiser, Social Psychology (Cambridge
University Press, 1986, pp 38-39).


'When confronted with information that challenges beliefs, the average
New Age person reacts by not wanting to talk to you' Castro also quotes
John Rowan, the author and psychotherapist, who noted that critical
assessment is anathema to the New Age: "The general attitude of the New
Age seems to be undiscriminating, and even to be against the whole idea
of discrimination." When confronted with factual information that
challenges cherished beliefs, "the average New Age person reacts by
simply not wanting to talk to you any more - you have the wrong
attitude and possibly the wrong vibrations."

One ex-Findhorn member, actor Howard Whiteson, is quoted by Castro as
saying: "What is presented to the outside world, and what actually goes
on inside the Foundation, are poles apart. Forget talk of it being the
forerunner to a Brave New World. The regime is more like something from
Orwell's 1984. There are some extremely sinister things going on
there."

The main complaint made by this book is about the way that Findhorn has
expelled people without giving them the right of appeal and then tried
to make them into non-persons, ignoring them whenever confronted by
them.

It would be interesting to read Findhorn's answers to this book's
charges, which do have a slightly obsessive flavour. It may be,
however, that the community is trying to ignore the book, just as it
has tried previously to ignore its author.


[1] Warning signs of 'groupthink' in cults or groups such as Findhorn
Hypocrisy and dissent within the Findhorn Foundation - Towards a
sociology of a New Age community by Stephen J. Castro, published by New
Media Books (PO Box 3, Forres, Morayshire IV36 OWB, Scotland; 1996,
ISBN 0 9526881 0 7, £9-95). Reviewed by Nicholas Albery.

 

[Dulloldfart]

One has to be willing and able to totally BE everything that is "out there", pervade it, participate in its beingness, become it fully and then grow beyond it by expanding even further. The moment you make an "I am not that" decision you abandon your responsibility for it and your havingness will drop.

Nuts. It might sound great on paper, but it's not real to me at all.

You seem to be asserting that if I see a big pile of fly-covered steaming doggy doo in front of me on the pavement, unscooped by the dog-owner responsible, I should assert my responsibility for said pile? I should pervade it and welcome it in all its wonder? And if I instead feel a tinge of distaste that *my havingness drops*?

Again, this might sound fine in theory, but I assure you that my havingess does not drop appreciably at such a sight. Any time I feel a drop in havingess I fix it on the spot with one of my Handy-Andy Rub & Yawn doodits. Glorying in the wholesomeness of fresh dog shit doesn't do it for me.

Paul

 

[lkwdblds]

A concise summary of Characteristics of groupthinking cults!

Warning signs of 'groupthink' in cults or groups... [1]

An illusion of invulnerability, which creates excessive optimism and
encourages taking extreme risks' Does your organisation, cult or group
suffer from groupthink? Stephen Castro in this book argues that the
Findhorn community in Scotland is a classic example of this dangerous
phenomenon. The behavioural symptoms to watch out for are as follows:

(1) An illusion of invulnerability, shared by most or all the members,
which creates excessive optimism and encourages taking extreme risks.

(2) Collective efforts to rationalise in order to discount warnings
which might lead the members to reconsider their assumptions before
they recommit themselves to their past policy decisions.

(3) An unquestioned belief in the group's inherent morality, inclining
the members to ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their
decisions.

(4) Stereotyped views of rivals and enemies as too evil to warrant
genuine attempts to negotiate, or as too weak and stupid to counter
whatever risky attempts are made to defeat their purposes.

(5) Direct pressure on any member who expresses strong arguments
against any of the group's stereotypes, illusions, or commitments,
making clear that this type of dissent is contrary to what is expected
of all loyal members.

(6) Self-censorship of deviations from the apparent group consensus,
reflecting each member's inclination to minimise to himself the
importance of his doubts and counter-arguments.

(7) A shared illusion of unanimity concerning judgements conforming to
the majority view (partly resulting from self-censorship of deviations,
augmented by the false assumption that silence means consent).

(8) The emergence of self-appointed mindguards - members who protect
the group from adverse information that might shatter their shared
complacency about the effectiveness and morality of their decisions.

Quoted by Castro from J. R. Eiser, Social Psychology (Cambridge
University Press, 1986, pp 38-39).


'When confronted with information that challenges beliefs, the average
New Age person reacts by not wanting to talk to you' Castro also quotes
John Rowan, the author and psychotherapist, who noted that critical
assessment is anathema to the New Age: "The general attitude of the New
Age seems to be undiscriminating, and even to be against the whole idea
of discrimination." When confronted with factual information that
challenges cherished beliefs, "the average New Age person reacts by
simply not wanting to talk to you any more - you have the wrong
attitude and possibly the wrong vibrations."

One ex-Findhorn member, actor Howard Whiteson, is quoted by Castro as
saying: "What is presented to the outside world, and what actually goes
on inside the Foundation, are poles apart. Forget talk of it being the
forerunner to a Brave New World. The regime is more like something from
Orwell's 1984. There are some extremely sinister things going on
there."

The main complaint made by this book is about the way that Findhorn has
expelled people without giving them the right of appeal and then tried
to make them into non-persons, ignoring them whenever confronted by
them.

It would be interesting to read Findhorn's answers to this book's
charges, which do have a slightly obsessive flavour. It may be,
however, that the community is trying to ignore the book, just as it
has tried previously to ignore its author.


[1] Warning signs of 'groupthink' in cults or groups such as Findhorn
Hypocrisy and dissent within the Findhorn Foundation - Towards a
sociology of a New Age community by Stephen J. Castro, published by New
Media Books (PO Box 3, Forres, Morayshire IV36 OWB, Scotland; 1996,
ISBN 0 9526881 0 7, £9-95). Reviewed by Nicholas Albery.

Thanks for posting this Ted. This article is a well organized summary of principles a lot of us already see as true and are already acting on.

Point#3 - INHERENT MORALITY - To me, this is the most critical point! Once it starts manifesting itself, the group becomes a real threat to all society. at first only those who disagree strongly with the group, experience the wrath of the "groupthinking" cult but soon enough the entire society feels its wrath.

Point#1` - SENSE OF INVULNERABILITY - Each groupthink cult has some item which they feel protects them. To the Nazi's it was simply being of the Aryan race, for the KKK, it was simply being "White", oh yes, more accurately, "White and Christian" since Jews are not classified as Whites by the KKK. In corporate Scientology, it is "being OT". C of S even had a practice of ordering new OT 8's to come to trials and to sit in the Court Room and postulate victory for the C of S. It is also being well educated in Hubbard's "Scriptures" which are believed to proof you up against the "Wogs" who are operating on "False Data" which can only lead them to failure.

Point#4 - STEREOTYPED VIEW OF RIVALS - Fortunately, this is the one that usually leads the groupthink cult to failure! Probably the greatest instance of this faulty policy being applied was in 1941 during WWII. Hitler decreed that the Russians were "Slavs", a lazy race of farmers and peasants who were not too bright and would quickly fold rather than fight for their Country in the event of a major attack. The Nazi's took a war, 90% won and instead of taking care of business and finishing off the final 10%, they gambled on attacking the Soviet Union. While it was true the German soldiers were of extremely fine fiber as far as being fierce, ruthless, brave and skilled fighters, the Russians matched them fully in all regards. Plus, I think the Russians had an advantage because their bodies were tougher and more designed to withstand extreme climate conditions, etc.

Points#5 pressure against dissenting arguments and #6 self censorship are also critical. POINTS #5 AND #6 ARE INDICATORS TO WATCH FOR. If you start seeing or experiencing these points in any group you are involved with, beware, you are up against a groupthink cult type of faction.

I have experienced it right here on ESMB on a thread I was on less than 2 weeks ago. I matter of factly stated that TR 2 helped me in life and produced a big change for the better in my life immediately during and after I passed the drill. I was bashed up one side and down the other for attributing any gains at all to TR2. Others, who don't know me and have never even talked to me claimed to know more about my life than I did. They fought with their dying breaths to claim that all TR's were very harmful and that I could not have possibly have been helped by TR 2. Their theme was that I was using a sort of Service Fac by unknowingly doing a construct that TR 2 was helpful so I would not feel so bad for unnecessisarily wasting my time and money on it. They claimed that by saying, "Well, at least I got some help from TR 2", I could fall back on that and not feel so bad for wasting all the time and money I did on the OT levels. Actually, I don't feel that my OT Levels were a total waste of time and money either, I believe I got some major wins out of those too but I never revealed that to the guys bashing me.

It is always nice to find out about the existence of a sane book out in society. Containing a nice straightforward recap as it does in Points 1 through 8 is very helpful. It helps to focus one's own thinking into a more consisten whole and can act as a checklist to follow in weighing the merits of new groups and individuals you counter in life in the future. I am sure there is much more to the book than just that.
Lakey

 

[Vinaire]

Vin, I knew there was some method to your perceived "madness" which was not really madness at all. You were going for some goal or understanding but I could not figure out what it could be. Thanks for clearing it up so thoroughly.

Its very helpful to me, when I encounter bashing and illogical responses to posts, I did not have the tech on what was going on but just knew that it was futile to continue. I would employ a 3 strikes and you are out rule. I would debate a basher twice and if they bashed harder, I would just announce that I am ending the debate and giving them the last word and then I would wish them the best and put them on "ignore". I have only done that twice but both experiences achieved the desired result.

Earlier on a recent thread, the OP demanded that someone give an instance where a reader was helped by Scientology and they would point out the my fallacies in my claim. I wrote a true anecdote saying that I benefitted from TR 2 on my first communications course. I said that by just acknowledging at work, everyone started telling me their whole life story and that as a result I was able to date some very attractive young ladies which previously would not date me. Also, my closing ratio on my sales at work markedly improved. The bashers came after me in full force, telling me that I was delusional, that Scientology did not help me but I say it did so for various other reasons than the truth, that whatever help Scientology gave me, I could have gotten that help cheaper from many other sources, etc.

I told the bashers, I lived my life and went through all these experiences and I assure you guys that these things happened exactly as stated and that TR 2 did actually help me enormously. They still insisted it not only did not help me but actually harmed me. I took offence stating that they did not know me, never met me, never spoke to me and yet they claim to know more about my life than I know myself, from having lived it. They rejected that argument as well and bashed even harder with degrading remarks, four letter words and slurs against my character.

At that point, I woulnd up affairs with all the bashers but one particularly odious one I placed on "ignore."

It is frightening that we share the planet with these guys and their ability to look is so miniscule as to be nearly totally missing. Many of them are even claiming to be scientists, engineers and/or scholars. This is an unpleasant state of affairs, to be on the planet and on ESMB with this class of individual. Thank goodness that so far, none of them have been attracted to this thread!
Lakey

I think your win, very specifically, came from ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. An acknowledgement makes one feel that what one said was listened to and understood by another. This is a fact of life which was there even before Scientology, and many people use it naturally without knowing Scientology.

But what is intolerant to a basher is the use of the terminology "TR2" in referring to this principle, and that you accessed this principle through Scientology. They can't seem to have that.

The positive thing that may be stated about Scientology that it made lot of existing knowledge accessible to more people widely, even it did to for its own vested interests. But a basher cannot have this.

A Scientology basher is stuck with unresolved experiences in Scientology. Underlying this stuckness is the expectation they had from Scientology, and Scientology's failure to meet those expectations.

Why Scientology could not meet those expectations has to do with Scientology itself. But Scientology's denial of this responsibility is definitely an aggravating factor.

It is true that it takes LOOKING on the part of the preclear to get any gains out of Scientology processes, but this was not isolated and emphasized in Scientology. At the same time Scientolgy blamed the auditor and the preclear for its failures. That is where Scientology went very very wrong. This shows incompetency on part of Hubbard. If Hubbard had followed the scientific methodology, he would have caught this error, but his incompetency let him overlook it.

Now many of these bashers try to go into Hubbard's motivations to explain this incompetency; but that is neither here nor there. The man was incompetent as a scientist and that is all there is to it.

All that is needed now is to differentiate the positive reorganization of, and increased accessibility to knowledge through Scientology, and the purposes for which that was done.

For the bashers, they need to look at the filters they are looking through and make an effort to resolve the identifications they are making.

.

 

[lkwdblds]

Interesting point Paul!

Nuts. It might sound great on paper, but it's not real to me at all.

You seem to be asserting that if I see a big pile of fly-covered steaming doggy doo in front of me on the pavement, unscooped by the dog-owner responsible, I should assert my responsibility for said pile? I should pervade it and welcome it in all its wonder? And if I instead feel a tinge of distaste that *my havingness drops*?

Again, this might sound fine in theory, but I assure you that my havingess does not drop appreciably at such a sight. Any time I feel a drop in havingess I fix it on the spot with one of my Handy-Andy Rub & Yawn doodits. Glorying in the wholesomeness of fresh dog shit doesn't do it for me.

Paul

Very interesting point, it will be interesting to see how Leon deals with this! My opinion is that if one sees a pile of dog doo, fly covered, the idea would simply be to be able to confront it and take the appropriate action. If you were going to set a a picnic basket out on the ground next to it, you would do what you had to do to clean it up and not have back off in doing so but would do it businesslike and efficiently. If you were out for a walk, you might just walk around it and avoid it.

It is interesting to note that the flies fully reach out to it, embrace it and permeate it. Does that increase their havingness? probably so.

The act of back off or withdrawal from it because you perceive it as foul, dirty and smelly, while seeming totally appropriate in normal human conduct may actually cause you a drop in havingness. You are avoiding a space in the physical universe, and now according to Vin's latest thoughts, a space in the spirittual universe as well since both universes are part of the same system in his paradigm. This avoidance of areas in your physical and spiritual system definitely, by definition, makes your beingness smaller since there are spaces you are unwilling to occupy.

Lets face it, you are not occupying that pile of dog shit and pervading and permeating it. Your back off leaves a hole in you universe system and by the nature of this universe, that hole will be a place where you are open to attack, a spot of a vacuum in your universe's space, and it appears the universe seeks to fill vacuum's as one of its primary constructs so you will end up being vulnerable to attack in the future by not confronting the pile of dog shit when it comes across your path.

To get around this, the postulate of the universe which seeks out and fills vacuums would have to be addressed and changed. If that were done, then airplanes would not be able to fly since their wings create vacuums above them which lift the plane so think twice about changing that universal construct. You definitely want to avoid doing that while you are on a flight.
Lakey

 

[Vinaire]

One has to be willing and able to totally BE everything that is "out there", pervade it, participate in its beingness, become it fully and then grow beyond it by expanding even further. The moment you make an "I am not that" decision you abandon your responsibility for it and your havingness will drop.

What does it mean to "totally BE everything that is "out there", pervade it, ... etc." The truth is that one is the universe. One starts out that way. It is subsequently that one shrinks in one's beingness by identifying with parts of one's universe.

It is validating that shrunken beingness if one is also trying to be what one already is. All one has to do is look at what one is identifying oneself with and let go of that identification.

One then gradually makes a journey back to what one natively is... the whole universe... and beyond that the creator of that universe.

LRH's key error was what he wrote in the section "INDIVIDUALITY VS. IDENTITY" of Scn 8-8008. He believed in that implicitly. Because of that he ended up invalidating Nirvana and went totally off the track into building ego.

.

 

[Vinaire]

Later I will reply to your Philosophical beginings of the Universe, which also contains an error in my opinion.

Now, let me hear what you had in mind here...

.

 

[Vinaire]

Body thetans and spirtual teammates

"Body thetans" of Scientology and "spirtual teammates" of Knowledgism are just considerations; like the consideration of "chair" or the consideration of "dog poop."

These are just vias to "neti, neti."

.

 

[Vinaire]

Many years ago, long before any participation in dianetics or scientology on my part, I had purchased some books to familiarize myself with the subjects. Several of those books, Problems of Work, New Slant On Life, and Fundamentals of Thought I obtained in paperback. I have since lost the copies. I recall reading a line or two where the author used a metaphor of someone such as an evangilist directing a person's attention to god in the sky whilst putting a hand in that person's pocket to relieve him of it contents. It was one of those things that resonated with me as I have seen it happen. I have since searched for that statement in the books I have, but remain unable to locate it.

Now it could have been that Hubbard did not write that. I was reading other things at the time. It could be one of those potentially incendiary statements that have been purged from the scriptures -- like the man was creatively writing away and up pops one of his own overts.

Nevertheless, the idea sticks with me.

The focus of auditing, including much of its marketing, is running things out. That's the metaphor. That's the magician (auditor) directing your attention (to the sky) with a hand in your pocket (bank). I am left wondering what gets run in.

One observation is that a little bit of auditing often begets additional need for auditing. You will hear the registrars and tech personnel say that "Your next level is keying in," "Clears are at risk," and so on. A flow 1 can stimulate the need for a flow 2. This is all positioned as necessary to clearing the bank.

That was the preamble. Here is the issue: People who are susceptible to being authoritarian or know-best or bigoted, are aided and abetted by certain auditing commands/questions.

Here is an example: From where could you communicate to a (butcher, baker, candlestick maker)? No problem. An individual can answer that with a degree of conviction and certainty.

From where could a (butcher, baker, candlestick maker) communicate to you? Or ... communicate to others?

Here's the beef: If the pc is inclined to granting of beingness, granting life and self-determinism to others, granting power of choice, and so on, there's limited liability. But note, it is a supposition when, where, how others might communicate. The appropriate auditing question would be, "From where do you suppose a (butcher, baker, candlestick maker) might communicate to you?"

Additionally, there are processes where flow 0 makes little or no sense. There are processes where flow 0 would be best and in support of the other commands of a process if it were run first. "If you were a (butcher, baker, candlestick maker) from where might you communicate?" Affinity being the opening corner of the ARC triangle, this F-0 process would best come first.

Having seen many people attest to Grade 0 who could not communicate per the EP of the Grade, the word "could" is apt to make a liar of a person when placed in a real life situation. "Might" is a better choice as it provokes possibility thinking and action without making a person wrong if he chooses not to or is afraid to communicate when the life situation arises.

There are other finer points to discuss re: running something in while running something out. Thought I'd take some flak on this one first.

These "finer" points become moot when one simply follows the KHTK approach.

All a process is doing is to get one to look from a certain angle. That is fine.

What is wrong is the expectation of the process that there should be specific answer and one ought to search for it. That is where the whole process goes awry because dub-in from the preclear becomes acceptable.

Against such an expectation, the preclear finds it difficult to hold his position when no answer appears in his mind. An insistence that there must be an answer to an auditing question is very evaluative and seems to be built into the Scientology system. Repetitive processes further force this expectation.

Now there may be an answer, but the fact is that the answer is not immediately available to the pc. Maybe something else needs to be unstacked first.

But insistence on running a single process to some EP has built into it some force to get an answer. And that can have harmful effects that come from dub-ins and overrun.

If Scientology processes are run without any force, and the response "nothing comes up" is immediately accepted with no focus on EP for a single process, then maybe we shall see much faster progress in a case.

.

 

[lkwdblds]

How can I apply this information in my life?

"Body thetans" of Scientology and "spirtual teammates" of Knowlodgy are just considerations; like the consideration of "chair" or the consideration of "dog poop."

These are just vias to "neti, neti."

.

I like to look at pretty girls, beautiful women... I am 70 now and still react to a short skirt, a great butt, some exposure of cleavage, etc. just as when I was 25. I don't like to look at dog poop, detest smelling it and heaven forbid, touching it would cause me to vomit.

I like to listen to music, I rise on the tone scale when hearing certain passages, especially by Mozart, Bach, Haydn and boys from the 18th century. I also love to listen to Van Morrison, the Beatles, Elvis, Simon and Garfunkle and many others.

I never studied Knowledgism but I like having spritiual teammates. I am thrilled when they notify me to turn to classical music when I am driving, I get a signal that a Haydn symphony is just starting, I turn from talk radio to classical and usually a Symphony which I love has just started. I get a notice later to turn back to talk radio, they are talking about Scientology. I turn back and usually either Scientology is being discussed or some other topic which I am very interested in.

Body thetans? I completed many hours of NOTs and attested to the level. I have no further problems with Body Thetans. I once longed to do Solo Nots but now, I would not do it if it was offered free. I have EPed on it. Occasionally things will occur in my space and I can spot them and blow them by inpection 9 times in 10. For the ones which don't blow, I just ignore them and after a few hours they drop away or key out. This phenomena is quite rare now where something comes up that I can not blow by inspection, just a few times a year.

I am still interested in having my identity and wining at this game of being who I am. There are still enough things of interest to me in life to pursue this game. Raising my two children, not starting until the age of 41 was perhaps the most fun and fulfilling experience of my life. I am not ready to give up my kids. Nothing pleases me more than to see them do well, My daughter is a fine pianist, when she plays some Chopin, Ravel, or Debussy, I am in ecstatcy. There is virtually nothing else I would rather be doing. When my Son brings home a 3.8 grade average from the University Of California Irvine in Mathematics and Computer Science, I am in ecstacy. I never got a 3.8 and only went to a State University and he is exceeding my achievments and I am totally thrilled by this. Having the ability to parent and help guide extremely bright and able children is an experience unlike anything else. Just ask Carmelo, he seems to have written the book on the subject!

My question to you Vin, is how do the comments in your post which I quoted help me and how would I apply those to my life, if I am not ready to give up my identity and merge back into being an entire Universe? I have had loss after loss in various lifetimes, trying to realize my full potential as this identity which I am now. I want to fucking win at this game of being myself at least once and reap the fruits of victory before I aim higher and reach to give up the essence of who I am and merge back into Brahma or Nirvana or whatever the optimum goal of existence is.
Lakey

 

[Dulloldfart]

It is interesting to note that the flies fully reach out to it, embrace it and permeate it. Does that increase their havingness?

Of course. They are fulfilling part of their own role in the great scheme of things. There is also maggot therapy in disposing of dead tissue in a wound, more effective than one might think and useful to bear in mind when and Blue Cross isn't paying up.

Paul

 

[Ted]

Run In / Run Out

These "finer" points become moot when one simply follows the KHTK approach.

All a process is doing is to get one to look from a certain angle. That is fine.

What is wrong is the expectation of the process that there should be specific answer and one ought to search for it. That is where the whole process goes awry because dub-in from the preclear becomes acceptable.

Against such an expectation, the preclear finds it difficult to hold his position when no answer appears in his mind. An insistence that there must be an answer to an auditing question is very evaluative and seems to be built into the Scientology system. Repetitive processes further force this expectation.

Now there may be an answer, but the fact is that the answer is not immediately available to the pc. Maybe something else needs to be unstacked first.

But insistence on running a single process to some EP has built into it some force to get an answer. And that can have harmful effects that come from dub-ins and overrun.

If Scientology processes are run without any force, and the response "nothing comes up" is immediately accepted with no focus on EP for a single process, then maybe we shall see much faster progress in a case.

.

The one answer for, "From where could you communicate to____?", is simply "Here."

I would agree with you concerning the non-acceptance of no more answers forthcoming from the pc, and the forced aspect of TR-3 leading to the insistence that there must be an answer, and it must finalize in F/N, cognition, VGI's. That would be something I wished to address in another "Run In / Run Out" post.

Processes are spiritual/mental gymnastics. There is no benefit if the process is never run but intellectualized to its ultimate answer. In practice, "Here," can be the pc's first answer. There can be many other answers. Then cycling back to, "Here," and the end of the process.

Liken this to a runner's marathon. A person can glibly armchair it, "Oh, yeah. I can do that," while munching on junk food. Or a person can activate himself, then run one. That's two very different things.

 

[Ted]

I like to look at pretty girls, beautiful women... I am 70 now and still react to a short skirt, a great butt, some exposure of cleavage, etc. just as when I was 25. I don't like to look at dog poop, detest smelling it and heaven forbid, touching it would cause me to vomit.

I like to listen to music, I rise on the tone scale when hearing certain passages, especially by Mozart, Bach, Haydn and boys from the 18th century. I also love to listen to Van Morrison, the Beatles, Elvis, Simon and Garfunkle and many others.

I never studied Knowledgism but I like having spritiual teammates. I am thrilled when they notify me to turn to classical music when I am driving, I get a signal that a Haydn symphony is just starting, I turn from talk radio to classical and usually a Symphony which I love has just started. I get a notice later to turn back to talk radio, they are talking about Scientology. I turn back and usually either Scientology is being discussed or some other topic which I am very interested in.

Body thetans? I completed many hours of NOTs and attested to the level. I have no further problems with Body Thetans. I once longed to do Solo Nots but now, I would not do it if it was offered free. I have EPed on it. Occasionally things will occur in my space and I can spot them and blow them by inpection 9 times in 10. For the ones which don't blow, I just ignore them and after a few hours they drop away or key out. This phenomena is quite rare now where something comes up that I can not blow by inspection, just a few times a year.

I am still interested in having my identity and wining at this game of being who I am. There are still enough things of interest to me in life to pursue this game. Raising my two children, not starting until the age of 41 was perhaps the most fun and fulfilling experience of my life. I am not ready to give up my kids. Nothing pleases me more than to see them do well, My daughter is a fine pianist, when she plays some Chopin, Ravel, or Debussy, I am in ecstatcy. There is virtually nothing else I would rather be doing. When my Son brings home a 3.8 grade average from the University Of California Irvine in Mathematics and Computer Science, I am in ecstacy. I never got a 3.8 and only went to a State University and he is exceeding my achievments and I am totally thrilled by this. Having the ability to parent and help guide extremely bright and able children is an experience unlike anything else. Just ask Carmelo, he seems to have written the book on the subject!

My question to you Vin, is how do the comments in your post which I quoted help me and how would I apply those to my life, if I am not ready to give up my identity and merge back into being an entire Universe? I have had loss after loss in various lifetimes, trying to realize my full potential as this identity which I am now. I want to fucking win at this game of being myself at least once and reap the fruits of victory before I aim higher and reach to give up the essence of who I am and merge back into Brahma or Nirvana or whatever the optimum goal of existence is.
Lakey

Lakey, while I do not wish to be you, I am nonetheless thrilled to share in your joy. It is written all over the page in this posting. Does that make sense?

Who the hell cares about dog shit? Only the people who step in it.

I'd say Joseph Campbell was right, "Follow your bliss." I will add, every thing else is likely a wrong item.

 

[lkwdblds]

Lakey, while I do not wish to be you, I am nonetheless thrilled to share in your joy. It is written all over the page in this posting. Does that make sense?

Who the hell cares about dog shit? Only the people who step in it.

I'd say Joseph Campbell was right, "Follow your bliss." I will add, every thing else is likely a wrong item.

Ted, thanks for the kind words

Good decision about not wanting to be me!!!! Other than in elementary school, I never fit in. I was always out of step, lacking self confidence, all messed up on my 2D and so it went. I went to my High School 50 year reunion 3 years ago. Those people didn't know anything about me since high school and still perceived me as the shy nerd which I was at that time. The big difference was that when young I craved their friendship and approval and could not achieve it but now I can take them or leave them. I perceived that I was the most aware being in attendance there but that perception was definitely not correct. Many of those class mates were wise and shrewd and had made extremely rewarding lives for themselves. I was in error suffering from one of those points from the Castro article which you cited. I believe point #4 comes the closest - I had a feeling of smugness and arrogance which was not warranted.

Yes, your comments makes sense. I was an underachiever with a lack of confidence throughout much of my life and that is why I am so stoked at what I was able to achieve, such as being a parent to two great kids. Starting this thread on ESMB is a big "feather in my cap". I was shooting to get 10k views total and now we are getting about 12k every month. As psychologists say, that has to help one's self esteem!
Lakey

 

[Vinaire]

I like to look at pretty girls, beautiful women... I am 70 now and still react to a short skirt, a great butt, some exposure of cleavage, etc. just as when I was 25. I don't like to look at dog poop, detest smelling it and heaven forbid, touching it would cause me to vomit.

I like to listen to music, I rise on the tone scale when hearing certain passages, especially by Mozart, Bach, Haydn and boys from the 18th century. I also love to listen to Van Morrison, the Beatles, Elvis, Simon and Garfunkle and many others.

I never studied Knowledgism but I like having spritiual teammates. I am thrilled when they notify me to turn to classical music when I am driving, I get a signal that a Haydn symphony is just starting, I turn from talk radio to classical and usually a Symphony which I love has just started. I get a notice later to turn back to talk radio, they are talking about Scientology. I turn back and usually either Scientology is being discussed or some other topic which I am very interested in.

Body thetans? I completed many hours of NOTs and attested to the level. I have no further problems with Body Thetans. I once longed to do Solo Nots but now, I would not do it if it was offered free. I have EPed on it. Occasionally things will occur in my space and I can spot them and blow them by inpection 9 times in 10. For the ones which don't blow, I just ignore them and after a few hours they drop away or key out. This phenomena is quite rare now where something comes up that I can not blow by inspection, just a few times a year.

I am still interested in having my identity and wining at this game of being who I am. There are still enough things of interest to me in life to pursue this game. Raising my two children, not starting until the age of 41 was perhaps the most fun and fulfilling experience of my life. I am not ready to give up my kids. Nothing pleases me more than to see them do well, My daughter is a fine pianist, when she plays some Chopin, Ravel, or Debussy, I am in ecstatcy. There is virtually nothing else I would rather be doing. When my Son brings home a 3.8 grade average from the University Of California Irvine in Mathematics and Computer Science, I am in ecstacy. I never got a 3.8 and only went to a State University and he is exceeding my achievments and I am totally thrilled by this. Having the ability to parent and help guide extremely bright and able children is an experience unlike anything else. Just ask Carmelo, he seems to have written the book on the subject!

My question to you Vin, is how do the comments in your post which I quoted help me and how would I apply those to my life, if I am not ready to give up my identity and merge back into being an entire Universe? I have had loss after loss in various lifetimes, trying to realize my full potential as this identity which I am now. I want to fucking win at this game of being myself at least once and reap the fruits of victory before I aim higher and reach to give up the essence of who I am and merge back into Brahma or Nirvana or whatever the optimum goal of existence is.
Lakey

Those comments were for Leon. They were not intended for you.

So you may just ignore them. And you should have no difficulty in ignoring them.

.

 

[Terril park]

One observation is that a little bit of auditing often begets additional need for auditing. You will hear the registrars and tech personnel say that "Your next level is keying in," "Clears are at risk," and so on. A flow 1 can stimulate the need for a flow 2. This is all positioned as necessary to clearing the bank.

Interesting comment from a class VI OTVII psychologist, that of the million plus councellors worldwide, none require clients to clear words. The onus of being understood is upon the councellors. Maybe slightly non -sequitur,
but thought I'd put it in there. I have to say I have no problems with word clearing per se.

That was the preamble. Here is the issue: People who are susceptible to being authoritarian or know-best or bigoted, are aided and abetted by certain auditing commands/questions.

Thats the gentle comment. When applied to admin it gets very viscious.

Affinity being the opening corner of the ARC triangle, this F-0 process would best come first.

In classical scn theory communication is the opening corner. Or am I
on the wrong foot or something?

There are other finer points to discuss re: running something in while running something out. Thought I'd take some flak on this one first.

I've in effect gone out of my way to take flak. One of the best decisions
I ever made. Got more case gain from that than almost anything.

Also discarded and abandoned any flak jackets.

 

[lkwdblds]

Okay, they are ignored.

Those comments were for Leon. They were not intended for you.

So you may just ignore them. And you should have no difficulty in ignoring them.

.

Vin - I went back and checked the comments and there was no way anyone could know they were meant for Leon. As they say in basketball, "No harm, no foul" Consider the comments ignored.

My reply was meant for the entire board so I'll just leave it up. Ted already gave a nice reply.
Lakey

 

[Ted]

Interesting comment from a class VI OTVII psychologist, that of the million plus councellors worldwide, none require clients to clear words. The onus of being understood is upon the councellors. Maybe slightly non -sequitur,
but thought I'd put it in there. I have to say I have no problems with word clearing per se.


In classical scn theory communication is the opening corner. Or am I
on the wrong foot or something?

I have no problem with word clearing. I was interested in words and use of dictionaries long before I participated in scientology.

Surely there has to be a point where people understand each other. I mean, the registrar is not required to use word clearing to speak with the prospect.

Communication is the operating corner of the ARC triangle where beings are co-mmunicating. Note that there can be no communication without first having assumed affinity. Affinity relates to BE, communication to DO, reality to HAVE.

When working with people/beings of low communication ability, low affinity, maintenance of affinity is perhaps the most important corner. This is also noted in SOS. The lower-toned cases require higher toned auditors and processes.

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Lakey, while I do not wish to be you, I am nonetheless thrilled to share in your joy. It is written all over the page in this posting. Does that make sense?

Who the hell cares about dog shit? Only the people who step in it.

I'd say Joseph Campbell was right, "Follow your bliss." I will add, every thing else is likely a wrong item.

Ted,

Based on your comments, may I assume that if Lakey were to get auditing at Flag currently, his item would be given to him as "dog poop"?

I understand the mecca of technical perfection knows better than us common folk.

 

[Ted]

Ted,

Based on your comments, may I assume that if Lakey were to get auditing at Flag currently, his item would be given to him as "dog poop"?

I understand the mecca of technical perfection knows better than us common folk.

Any item a person might get at Flag would be as good as dog poop. Even if it is a right item, by the time you do the routing form, get hit up for a basic books package by everyone you meet, and regged for all the money you don't have to spare... Yes, the entire experience would be like that thing you always try to avoid stepping in, dog poop.

Given that I am not too keen on references that stem from the world of Muslims, Flag being the Mecca of technical perfection just does not bring in my VGI's. Well, that and the very, very dirty field, all of its own creation.