What's new

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

FYI

Antony is posting old Pilot tracks here because the Apollo thread has 1,000 readers a day on average. We all like our stuff to be read.

Antony is the founder, editor, publisher of International Viewpoints magazine which ran in print from the early 1980s to about a year ago. It is now web based with a new staff.

For those of you Johnny-come-lately to being ex sci, IVy, as it is called, had the luminaries of ex sci writers (Jack Horner, John McMaster among many more) writing and commenting for decades. While you guys were auditing endless BTs, we were frittering away our eterneties being off purpose, and encouraging others to do the same.

The Pilot was Ken Ogger, a computer programmer who drove the church crazy with his critiques. This was long before anonymous. Once the Co$ found out who he was, they did all sorts of dirty tricks to him. He died some years back by jumping into his pool with concrete attached to his legs.
 

Smilla

Ordinary Human
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

FYI

Antony is posting old Pilot tracks here because the Apollo thread has 1,000 readers a day on average. We all like our stuff to be read.

Antony is the founder, editor, publisher of International Viewpoints magazine which ran in print from the early 1980s to about a year ago. It is now web based with a new staff.

For those of you Johnny-come-lately to being ex sci, IVy, as it is called, had the luminaries of ex sci writers (Jack Horner, John McMaster among many more) writing and commenting for decades. While you guys were auditing endless BTs, we were frittering away our eterneties being off purpose, and encouraging others to do the same.

The Pilot was Ken Ogger, a computer programmer who drove the church crazy with his critiques. This was long before anonymous. Once the Co$ found out who he was, they did all sorts of dirty tricks to him. He died some years back by jumping into his pool with concrete attached to his legs.

All very nice people, and no doubt about that. So there's no problem, eh?
 

lkwdblds

Crusader
Re: What Does it Mean to Say That Something Works or That Something Doesn't Work?

Fair enough Lakey, given the context I think my post was probably not the best way to make my point, but I do think there is a valid point to be made, so I'll give it a go.

One of my 'core disagreements' with Scientology is that while it claims to address the user of it as a spirit, it is excessively focussed on the mind - the conscious mind, in fact. I feel that the focus on 'mental image pictures' is very unhelpful. The idea that a Human Being can be controlled and made insane by 'mental image pictures' he constantly and compulsively creates, is patently ridiculous. This has never been demonstrated. A human being is much much more than the content of his conscious mind. When I say 'conscious mind' I mean the part of his/her mind that he/she is aware of, or can easily become aware of and verbalise - everyday trivia, and stuff that can be 'dug up' by auditing, if you like.

Hence:

"If you want to remember yourself, the best thing is not to think about yourself. As long as you think about yourself, you will not remember yourself."

- P D Ouspensky


"CEASING TO COMPULSIVELY CREATE "CLEAR AND OT" refers to the futility of spending a lifetime chasing an unattainable goal, and the advisability of finding something more realistic to aim for.

Don't forget to dislike Anthony's post for just quoting from some philosopher's book he agreed with, without making any point of his own. Lol.


All the best,

Smilla xx







Smila, your write up introduces the term "conscious mind" which is not defined in Hubbard's tech. He uses the terms "reactive mind" and "analytical mind" To me, if you are going to make an effort to debunk Hubbard's tech, it would be better to start off with his model of the mind. Things would be clearer if you had introduced a "conscious" mind to make the points you want to make, since you did not do that, I feel there should be a transitioin in your post where you make a tie in between "conscious mind " vis a vis "reactive and analytical minds" You chose not to do this which makes it harder (at least for me) to understand the points you are making.

Nevertheless, I tried to fill in the transition for myself and I reached the following conclusions:

What you you and Ouspensky are offering are not proven scientific models but are theories being offered in a manner similar to how Hubbard is offering his theories. For me, the conclusions which you arrive at from your premises are not self evident conclusions but rather they are interesting counter theories to Hubbard's theories.

In my opinion they are not strong enough to debunk Hubbard's theories but then again, his theories do not fully debunk your theories. I believe that your opinions merit further study and consideration and plan to look at them further. I will write another response tomorrow.
Lakey
 

paradox

ab intra silentio vera
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

All very nice people, and no doubt about that. So there's no problem, eh?

Except that Ogger ended up no better off than, and probably worse than, the Commodore in the end. So much for endless digging in the mind-ego.
 

FoTi

Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

FYI

Antony is posting old Pilot tracks here because the Apollo thread has 1,000 readers a day on average. We all like our stuff to be read.

Antony is the founder, editor, publisher of International Viewpoints magazine which ran in print from the early 1980s to about a year ago. It is now web based with a new staff.

For those of you Johnny-come-lately to being ex sci, IVy, as it is called, had the luminaries of ex sci writers (Jack Horner, John McMaster among many more) writing and commenting for decades. While you guys were auditing endless BTs, we were frittering away our eterneties being off purpose, and encouraging others to do the same.

The Pilot was Ken Ogger, a computer programmer who drove the church crazy with his critiques. This was long before anonymous. Once the Co$ found out who he was, they did all sorts of dirty tricks to him. He died some years back by jumping into his pool with concrete attached to his legs.

Did he really jump in his pool on his own or was he assisted to the bottom of the pool by someone who didn't want him around anymore? Sounds more like what the mafia does to people they want to get rid of.
 
Ken Ogger, the Pilot

Did he really jump in his pool on his own or was he assisted to the bottom of the pool by someone who didn't want him around anymore? Sounds more like what the mafia does to people they want to get rid of.

9446596.jpg


the week before he and his mother (Louise Kelly, former Commodore Staff Class Vlll) had watched the Sopranos on HBO together on the couch pictured. Someone was killed with the concrete weights into the pool in that episode.

attachment.php


After his death, I did the accounting of his estate. He had borrowed from $20-30,000 on 20 or more credit cards. His house, because of the impending crash was worth, perhaps $350,000. He had it mortgaged to $500,000. He had a rejection note for more credit, and a few hundred bucks in his bank. He hadn't worked in 6 years. He was heading for a financial crash.

To me and to his mother, it pointed toward suicide. That is what the police called it.
 

FoTi

Crusader
Re: Ken Ogger, the Pilot

9446596.jpg


the week before he and his mother (Louise Kelly, former Commodore Staff Class Vlll) had watched the Sopranos on HBO together on the couch pictured. Someone was killed with the concrete weights into the pool in that episode.

attachment.php


After his death, I did the accounting of his estate. He had borrowed from $20-30,000 on 20 or more credit cards. His house, because of the impending crash was worth, perhaps $350,000. He had it mortgaged to $500,000. He had a rejection note for more credit, and a few hundred bucks in his bank. He hadn't worked in 6 years. He was heading for a financial crash.

To me and to his mother, it pointed toward suicide. That is what the police called it.

Could he not have declared bankruptcy?

What happened to his mother after he died?
 
Re: Ken Ogger, the Pilot

Could he not have declared bankruptcy?

He could have, but he had NO INCOME and NO MONEY IN THE BANK. He would have lost his house. He would have had to get a job.

What happened to his mother after he died?

I rented out rooms in the house for the year it took to be foreclosed. She got all that money. Because she was a Sea Org worker for many years, and had spent her lifesavings on her mother, she had nothing, nada, and no Social Security to speak of. No Social Security benefits from Ken, either, who had made hundreds of thousands back when he was working) because he had never done any taxes for six years. He didn't make /owe money, and chose to ignore them. By his not reporting his mother as a dependent, he effectively screwed her out of his SS benefits. I tried retroactively filing his taxes, but the IRS wasn't going to play. Louise found a nice apartment for herself out by Ventura. Her other son, who couldn't or wouldn't help her financially, did help her move. From there, she moved in with her sister in New York. And there she died.

not a pretty story.
 

lkwdblds

Crusader
Re: Ken Ogger, the Pilot

He could have, but he had NO INCOME and NO MONEY IN THE BANK. He would have lost his house. He would have had to get a job.



I rented out rooms in the house for the year it took to be foreclosed. She got all that money. Because she was a Sea Org worker for many years, and had spent her lifesavings on her mother, she had nothing, nada, and no Social Security to speak of. No Social Security benefits from Ken, either, who had made hundreds of thousands back when he was working) because he had never done any taxes for six years. He didn't make /owe money, and chose to ignore them. By his not reporting his mother as a dependent, he effectively screwed her out of his SS benefits. I tried retroactively filing his taxes, but the IRS wasn't going to play. Louise found a nice apartment for herself out by Ventura. Her other son, who couldn't or wouldn't help her financially, did help her move. From there, she moved in with her sister in New York. And there she died.

not a pretty story.

It's good to get some factual data about The Pilot. When I first read of Ogger being found dead in his pool, I took it for granted that C of S must have had something to do with his drowning. Adding in the facts which you have presented, Carmelo, suicide looks like a more likely alternative.
Lakey
 

lkwdblds

Crusader
Re: What Does it Mean to Say That Something Works or That Something Doesn't Work?

I'm completely convinced that it works very well - as a way of endlessly shuffling and re-shuffling thoughts. Scientology, and it's spinoffs, claim to address the soul, but I've never seen that demonstrated. What I have seen demonstrated is that it addresses the personality/ego and thoughts about the personality/ego. It's rather superficial in it's reach.

But hey, if you dig it do it.

During the day my discussion with Smila was perculating in my mind and thought of several points which I believe are relevant.

First, there is Scientifically accepted research on the concept that both physical and psychological illness can be addressed and be at least partially alleviated by having a person look at pictures of their past which exist in their mind. That research was started by Sigmund Freud and was accepted as valid research by the official Scholastic and Scientific bodies of his time (late 19th and early 20th centuries). Other researchers, notably Jung followed and expanded on the work started by Freud.

When Hubbard got involved he was attempting to building on earlier accepted scientific work. Hubbard was not educated or trained in his field of choice and therefore had no standing in the scientific community of his day. For this reason he was debunked as being unscientific by the scientific community of his day.

When Book One of Dianetics came out, Hubbard had not yet claimed to be dealing with a spirit. Early Dianetics was initially aimed at the body, the analytical mind and the reactive mind. At first, ransacking one's pictures was not considered as having anything at all to do with a spirit. Simply stirring up pictures was never a goal of Hubbard's. He believed man was a one lifetime being and he was going for erasure of pictures. He made repeated stabs at developing a one shot clear process, an effort that would have made examining large numbers of pictures unnecessary.

As I understand it, what led Hubbard into the spiritual realm was the fact that many of his early clients began recounting what seemed to be past life pictures. If this were truly the case then he figured that some portion of the person survived physical death and was still around as a being began subsequent lifetimes. This is how Hubbard made the jump to his subject being not just mental and physical but also being spiritual.

In those early days, many processes were developed to spring the spirit out of the body and the mind. None of these processes ransacked a person's bank of pictures. Typical processes were;

"Try to be 3 feet in back of your head!" and the more effective process, "Try not to be 3 feet in back of your head!"

These two process, to me, are a direct attempt by Hubbard to address the soul and can serve as counter examples to what Smila is claiming.

Hubbard claimed that the second of these two processes worked on about 50% of the raw public.

For what it is worth, endlessly ransacking people's pictures was not practiced on a large scale until the early 1980's when NOTS replaced the earlier OT Levels 4 through 7.

The majority of picture running was done on Dianetics only on the part of the bridge below OTIII and then it was done again on OT III. Aside from those two levels, most of the other portions of the bridge including Life Repair, Straightwire, The Expanded Grades, Power and Power Plus did not have anything to do with running pictures. All of these levels did not address pictures or the mind but instead made an effort to directly address the spirit.

SUMMARY
This post attempts to make several points:
1a. Freud was the first researcher in the scientific community to formally take up the possibility that a person could heal himself by looking inward into his past. Other scientific researchers also were involved in this line of research.

1b. Hubbard used Freud's work as the jumping off point for his theories of the mind. Hubbard did not originate the concept of ransacking one's past pictures, Freud did.

1c. Early Dianetics was done without a spiritual component. Pictures were looked at in large numbers but the goal was to erase pictures not stir them up. The goal was to heal the body and the mind through erasing the pictures in portions of one's reactive mind.

2. Hubbard's foray into the spirit came about unexpectedly when a large number of early Dianeticists began running what looked like past life pictures.

3. Hubbard accepted these pictures as being authentic and by doing so he began his career as one who was dealing with the human soul or spirit.

4. From this point forward, running pictures was de-emphasized in C of S for about 25 years. One ran pictures only to heal mental and physical illness and then was pretty much off of pictures until OTIII. After OTIII they were back off of pictures again.

5. Only after NOTS came in did running pictures became a major activity on the C of S bridge.
Lakey
 
Last edited:

FoTi

Crusader
Re: Ken Ogger, the Pilot

He could have, but he had NO INCOME and NO MONEY IN THE BANK. He would have lost his house. He would have had to get a job.



I rented out rooms in the house for the year it took to be foreclosed. She got all that money. Because she was a Sea Org worker for many years, and had spent her lifesavings on her mother, she had nothing, nada, and no Social Security to speak of. No Social Security benefits from Ken, either, who had made hundreds of thousands back when he was working) because he had never done any taxes for six years. He didn't make /owe money, and chose to ignore them. By his not reporting his mother as a dependent, he effectively screwed her out of his SS benefits. I tried retroactively filing his taxes, but the IRS wasn't going to play. Louise found a nice apartment for herself out by Ventura. Her other son, who couldn't or wouldn't help her financially, did help her move. From there, she moved in with her sister in New York. And there she died.

not a pretty story.

What a horrible end for two people who spent most of their lives in Scientology, supposedly to improve their lives and make a better world. Very sad.
 

Smilla

Ordinary Human
Re: What Does it Mean to Say That Something Works or That Something Doesn't Work?

During the day my discussion with Smila was perculating in my mind and thought of several points which I believe are relevant.

First, there is Scientifically accepted research on the concept that both physical and psychological illness can be addressed and be at least partially alleviated by having a person look at pictures of their past which exist in their mind. That research was started by Sigmund Freud and was accepted as valid research by the official Scholastic and Scientific bodies of his time (late 19th and early 20th centuries). Other researchers, notably Jung followed and expanded on the work started by Freud.

When Hubbard got involved he was attempting to building on earlier accepted scientific work. Hubbard was not educated or trained in his field of choice and therefore had no standing in the scientific community of his day. For this reason he was debunked as being unscientific by the scientific community of his day.

When Book One of Dianetics came out, Hubbard had not yet claimed to be dealing with a spirit. Early Dianetics was initially aimed at the body, the analytical mind and the reactive mind. At first, ransacking one's pictures was not considered as having anything at all to do with a spirit. Simply stirring up pictures was never a goal of Hubbard's. He believed man was a one lifetime being and he was going for erasure of pictures. He made repeated stabs at developing a one shot clear process, an effort that would have made examining large numbers of pictures unnecessary.

As I understand it, what led Hubbard into the spiritual realm was the fact that many of his early clients began recounting what seemed to be past life pictures. If this were truly the case then he figured that some portion of the person survived physical death and was still around as a being began subsequent lifetimes. This is how Hubbard made the jump to his subject being not just mental and physical but also being spiritual.

In those early days, many processes were developed to spring the spirit out of the body and the mind. None of these processes ransacked a person's bank of pictures. Typical processes were;

"Try to be 3 feet in back of your head!" and the more effective process, "Try not to be 3 feet in back of your head!"

These two process, to me, are a direct attempt by Hubbard to address the soul and can serve as counter examples to what Smila is claiming.

Hubbard claimed that the second of these two processes worked on about 50% of the raw public.

For what it is worth, endlessly ransacking people's pictures was not practiced on a large scale until the early 1980's when NOTS replaced the earlier OT Levels 4 through 7.

The majority of picture running was done on Dianetics only on the part of the bridge below OTIII and then it was done again on OT III. Aside from those two levels, most of the other portions of the bridge including Life Repair, Straightwire, The Expanded Grades, Power and Power Plus did not have anything to do with running pictures. All of these levels did not address pictures or the mind but instead made an effort to directly address the spirit.

SUMMARY
This post attempts to make several points:
1a. Freud was the first researcher in the scientific community to formally take up the possibility that a person could heal himself by looking inward into his past. Other scientific researchers also were involved in this line of research.

1b. Hubbard used Freud's work as the jumping off point for his theories of the mind. Hubbard did not originate the concept of ransacking one's past pictures, Freud did.

1c. Early Dianetics was done without a spiritual component. Pictures were looked at in large numbers but the goal was to erase pictures not stir them up. The goal was to heal the body and the mind through erasing the pictures in portions of one's reactive mind.

2. Hubbard's foray into the spirit came about unexpectedly when a large number of early Dianeticists began running what looked like past life pictures.

3. Hubbard accepted these pictures as being authentic and by doing so he began his career as one who was dealing with the human soul or spirit.

4. From this point forward, running pictures was de-emphasized in C of S for about 25 years. One ran pictures only to heal mental and physical illness and then was pretty much off of pictures until OTIII. After OTIII they were back off of pictures again.

5. Only after NOTS came in did running pictures became a major activity on the C of S bridge.
Lakey
Thanks for the reply Lakey. Nothing of what I say is presented as absolute truth. All I ever present is my opinion, but I still don't believe that people constantly and compulsively create 'mental image pictures' recording every moment of their experience. Freud did not address 'pictures' in his work, so you do him a small disservice by stating he did. Neither did Jung. Freud and Jung did address past experience though, alongside dream analysis and other methods. They chose to work that way after concluding that the subconscious/unconscious mind functioned non-verbally - a conclusion I share with them. I still don't see how the 'conscious mind' running pictures qualifies as a spiritual activity.

I am willing to agree though, that some of Hubbard's ideas - "be three feet behind your head" etc, did attempt to address the spirit. Unfortunately, they did not produce much in the way of useful results, as is well known, and were subsequently abandoned. That 'auditing command' contains a problem. How can a thing with no location be three feet behind it's head? Is it a particle or a wave? Neither, in my opinion, but 'the measurement problem' has direct relevance to Hubbards 'time, place, form and event' as-izzy thingy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle

I'd rather rely on more generally accepted terminology than Hubbard's as I don't consider him an authority on anything - including the true nature of his own work :) From what I understand, he had very little in the way of self-awareness. His behaviour is more typical of someone frantically fighting against self-awareness. "Work it out, or act it out", as some therapists like to say.

I'd prefer to stick with conscious mind, subconscious/unconscious mind, and collective subconscious/unconscious mind, as they are more broadly accepted and understood.

I have come to the conclusion that most of the interesting stuff in us is happening outside the realm of what you would call the analytical mind. For instance, when I play, the 'analytical mind' just gets in the way, and I have to let go of it to allow the music to manifest itself. I'm sure you'll understand that. The 'analytical mind' is too slow and lacking in bandwidth, to be useful to me musically. It's refresh rate is too slow to keep up, Lol. My conclusion is that the part of us which can verbalise it's experience, is the least intelligent and least interesting part of us.

On a personal note, I do not actually consider myself to be a thetan - or even a soul, in the generally accepted sense. Rather, I consider myself to be a transmission. Strange as that statement may sound when examined through the filters of Hubbard, it feels quite real to me, just as your conclusions about your own nature probably do to you.

Here's a quote you might like. Perhaps you know of it already. It opens the door to some interesting discussion.

"In the province of the mind what one believes to be true, either is true or becomes true within certain limits. These limits are to be found experimentally and experientially. When so found these limits turn out to be further beliefs to be transcended. In the province of the mind there are no limits. However, in the province of the body there are definite limits not to be transcended."

“In the province of connected minds, what the network believes to be true, either is true or becomes true within certain limits to be found experientially and experimentally. These limits are further beliefs to be transcended. In the network’s mind there are no limits.”

"What of the region that includes our body, other’s bodies? Here there are definite limits. "

- John C Lilly.

I'm not saying I wholeheartedly agree with Lilly's statements, but they form a good jumping-off point for conversation.

Can't say more just now, as I need to prepare for Shabbat. Will be back online after Shabbat.

Apologies for my poor English.

Thanks again for your interesting post.
 
Last edited:

Smilla

Ordinary Human
Re: Ken Ogger, the Pilot

What a horrible end for two people who spent most of their lives in Scientology, supposedly to improve their lives and make a better world. Very sad.

Yes, from what I have been told, he was a sweet person. It's sad the way things ended up.
 

looker

Patron Meritorious
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Question;
Allan Walters mentions approximatley 100 folks were part of the reseach teams at St Hill in the late 50s. There were famous actors Drs and a few fortune 500 CEOs. He does not name them. Does anyone know who they were?
 

Auditor's Toad

Clear as Mud
Re: What Does it Mean to Say That Something Works or That Something Doesn't Work?

<snip>
Only after NOTS came in did running pictures became a major activity on the C of S bridge.
Lakey

Lakey my bet is you were never really a trained auditor but what we used to call a professional PC.

In any event, I think your post I quoted illustrates that you do not understand what scientology auditing is about. I know you " think " you know, but, your posts makes that not true.

Whether or not they currently agree with the tech, there are many people here who have a depth of tech training and really do understand it - and you ain't one of 'em.

You might want to consider leaving tech discussions to those who really do understand it ( and therefore can present it for what it is...and what it isn't ).
 

RogerB

Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Question;
Allan Walters mentions approximatley 100 folks were part of the reseach teams at St Hill in the late 50s. There were famous actors Drs and a few fortune 500 CEOs. He does not name them. Does anyone know who they were?

More precisely, it was in the period 1962-4 on the 1st SHSBC. Alan didn't get into Scn till sometime in '61. (in Melbourne)

Alan attended that early SHSBC conducted personally by Hubbard twice.

He notes names on his Opening Pandora's Box thread.

Dunno about the "famous actors and Fortune 500 execs" bit though. But there were some stellar people there.

R
 

FoTi

Crusader
Re: What Does it Mean to Say That Something Works or That Something Doesn't Work?

On a personal note, I do not actually consider myself to be a thetan - or even a soul, in the generally accepted sense. Rather, I consider myself to be a transmission. Strange as that statement may sound when examined through the filters of Hubbard, it feels quite real to me, just as your conclusions about your own nature probably do to you.

Apologies for my poor English.

Thanks again for your interesting post.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

Shabbot Shalom.

Your English seems okay to me.

Would you please explain what you mean when you say you consider yourself to be a "transmission"?
 

RogerB

Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

PS: Looker . . .

I just saw your post on the Keeping ACW in View thread . . .

The "2 Fortune 500 CEO's" were not really that . . . that is Alan using a comparative to convey senior business executive status. One of them was Reg Sharpe, and the other possibly wife.

Reg, an Englishman, was head of his own large business in insurance. He in fact loaned Hubbard money to set him up in the UK and, I believe, to acquire St. Hill Manor.

They don't have "Fortune 500's" in the UK. Instead they have the "FT ##" (Used to be 40, then I believe they increased it) "FT= The Financial Times.

AS far as "actors" . . . well he mentions Jack Horner, but the other likely one was a fellow from S. Diego who was a very accomplished magician . . . (long time since I last saw him and his name escapes me for the moment, but he has since passed on.)

R
 

looker

Patron Meritorious
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

PS: Looker . . .

I just saw your post on the Keeping ACW in View thread . . .

The "2 Fortune 500 CEO's" were not really that . . . that is Alan using a comparative to convey senior business executive status. One of them was Reg Sharpe, and the other possibly wife.

Reg, an Englishman, was head of his own large business in insurance. He in fact loaned Hubbard money to set him up in the UK and, I believe, to acquire St. Hill Manor.

They don't have "Fortune 500's" in the UK. Instead they have the "FT ##" (Used to be 40, then I believe they increased it) "FT= The Financial Times.

AS far as "actors" . . . well he mentions Jack Horner, but the other likely one was a fellow from S. Diego who was a very accomplished magician . . . (long time since I last saw him and his name escapes me for the moment, but he has since passed on.)

R

Thanks Rog,

It starts to knit together what the real scene was back then.

Interesting. My view has changed when LRH is metioned as source. It looks more like he was a controlling editor and publisher of others original discoveries as well as an embelisher and a thief.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top