The Pity Play - Tipoff Play of Sociopath

TG1

Angelic Poster
Purple,

Do you have a problem with me making the OP and continuing to post on this thread in support of the OP? If so, what is it? Do you think that I committed "unspeakable mental cruelty"?

You're entitled to every feeling you have because of wrongs that have been done to you by some goofball who "diagnosed" you from a list.

However, I'm also entitled to understand the attributes of people who drive others (including me) around the bend. You are actually beginning to sound like these subjects aren't even discussible.

What is the deal?

TG1
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
What an interesting article. Thank you very much. I see there's quite a bit of literature on empathy training in various contexts, not only for psychopaths, but for medical students and even children.

I wondered about the value of assessing empathy as a diagnostic criterion when clearly it is a skill that can be learned, and produced for tests. Hubbard certainly had highly developed empathic skills, which served him in his conning operations. He was so empathetic that he got his slaves proclaiming him to be mankind's greatest friend. Then he made it his business.

The "rapport" that all Scientologists drill is empathy. The trained rapport or empathy is then used for antisocial purposes.

fso-dissem-flyer-2004-1.jpg


But now I also understand that the professionals do distinguish between empathy as a spontaneous affect and willed empathy. That explains psychopaths' selectivity of targets; how they can love bomb some targets for some purposes, and hate bomb targets they have consciously evaluated according to their antisocial criteria. It is likely that psychopaths would hate bomb the people who have their number. The psychopaths would know such people wouldn't fall for their phony love bombing, so they hate bomb them, and get others to hate bomb them.

I think that ties in with a psychopath targeting vulnerabilities in others. Which in turn comes back to establishing healthy personal boundaries.

Vulnerability and the psychopath
http://psychopathsandlove.com/vulnerability-and-the-psychopath/
Psychopaths can easily spot a vulnerable person. They have an uncanny ability to look at a you and tell if you’re a potential victim, one who will easily succumb to their mind games and provide them with what they need.

Vulnerability is defined as being “capable of or susceptible to being wounded or hurt,” or “open to moral attack, criticism, temptation, etc.”

What makes you vulnerable? What kinds of things let a psychopath know you might be an easy target simply by watching you walk down the street or by having a short interaction with you?

If you’re experiencing any of the following in your life, you could be giving off the vibes of a potential victim:

Loneliness
Isolation from (or the lack of) good friends and family
A craving for a love relationship (if you’re in this category, you are particularly vulnerable)
A previous victimization that hasn’t been resolved
A strong need for approval, attention or support
A poor sense of self-worth, low self-esteem or a lack of self-respect
Being new in town
The death of someone close to you
Loss of a job
A recent divorce or breakup
Illness
Any other stressful event or loss

It’s sad but true – the psychopath will hit you when you’re down, although he’ll act like he’s appeared in your life as the perfect person to fulfill your needs and desires. Vulnerable people are the easiest to victimize, and the psychopath can bond with them quickly and deeply with promises of providing something they desperately want.

We’re all vulnerable at one time or another, and there’s nothing wrong with that — except that it can make you the target of a predator.

Stressful life events create a general demeanor of vulnerability — which the psychopath sees as weakness and neediness — that reveals itself through mannerisms and subtle signals like the way you walk, your posture, your facial expressions, the amount of eye contact you make, and the tone of your voice.

What can you do?

When you’re going through any kind of hard time in life, when you have some deep need that is unfulfilled, when you’re lonely or when you’re experiencing anything on the list above, be aware that you’re giving off vibes of vulnerability and be wary of new people who enter your life, especially those who seem offer a solution to your problem or an answer to your prayer.

According to Robert Hare, an esteemed psychopathy researcher, psychopaths indirectly communicate four basic things to seduce their victims:

I like who you are.
I’m just like you.
Your secrets are safe with me.
I’m the perfect partner for you.

To the vulnerable person the psychopath seems to be exactly what they need, so they happily take the bait.They believe their deepest desires have been fulfilled and their problems have been solved.

Actually, their problems are just beginning.

Psychopaths have a relentless need for self-gratification. They know exactly what your needs are, and they have the ability to put on whatever mask (persona) is necessary to get what they want from you. The psychopath gives you a delicious taste of what you need, which gives him great power over you. The realization that he could also take it away gives him even more power, and he plays that hand for all it’s worth.

Having needs is normal. For example, as humans we need love. That only becomes a problem when we believe there is only one person who can fulfill that need, one perfect partner who seems like our soul mate, who seems to know exactly what we lack and who seems to provide it so well. That’s the hook, the line and the sinker. It’s also absolutely untrue, but the victim can’t see this when caught up close and personal in the psychopath’s sticky web of deceit. After the fact, you’ll realize there was absolutely no substance to it; you’ll see the love the psychopath claimed to feel was like a mirage. In the desert, a mirage appears from a distance as a shimmering pool of water, but upon closer investigation you find there’s not one drop to quench your thirst. It only looked that way.

Psychopaths see human traits that they don’t have (love, insecurity, trust, compassion, fear) as weaknesses to exploit. They feel they have a right to victimize vulnerable people because they see them as weak or even worthless. They gain your trust and love only to gain control over you to get what they want.

If you aren’t aware your own deepest fears, desires, motivations and needs (and many people aren’t), you leave yourself open to the control of a manipulator. By knowing your own vulnerabilities, you can become aware of possible attempts at exploitation. Awareness of your “weak spots” gives you a chance to thwart an attack.

When someone knows you better than you know yourself, you’re at great risk. Take the time now to learn your vulnerabilities; it can help you to prevent victimization.

I recommend the excellent book by Harriet Braiker, PhD., “Who’s Pulling Your Strings?” Chapter 8, titled “What Are Your Hooks?” contains a valuable exercise that will help you figure out what you most want or need in your life, such as security, love, sexual fulfillment, happiness, a life partner, etc.

Some good defenses against a destructive relationship with a psychopath are these:

*Know yourself well, which means knowing all the places where you’re needy, lacking, wounded and fearful.

and

*When the perfect person comes along and fulfills your wishes like a genie from a magic lamp, look closely for the substance behind it, and look closely at the character of the genie. It’s hard to think critically and look for problems when you believe you’ve found someone wonderful, but it is necessary.
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
Purple,

Do you have a problem with me making the OP and continuing to post on this thread in support of the OP? If so, what is it? Do you think that I committed "unspeakable mental cruelty"?

You're entitled to every feeling you have because of wrongs that have been done to you by some goofball who "diagnosed" you from a list.

However, I'm also entitled to understand the attributes of people who drive others (including me) around the bend. You are actually beginning to sound like these subjects aren't even discussible.

What is the deal?

TG1

No, I do not have a problem with either of those things TG1. I am referring to another post made TO a particular poster on another thread (I think) by another poster. And I DO think that what has been done to that poster using those kinds of lists IS mental cruelty, because to the confident who cares what somebody else says, but to someone with insecurities it's the worst kind of mind game. I can refer you to that post if you wish, but it's really just an example of how I perceive people using these labels to attack others.

How am I sounding like the subject isn't discussable? I would really like to know that because I often get accused of being the "thought police" and I really don't understand it. I am passionate about what I write, just as I speak. When I post it's with a lot of emotion. But I am not trying to get the thread stopped, have not reported any posts on it, have not done anything except argue my perspective that I can see. Everyone has issues from their past that are more sensitive than others. If you are uncomfortable with me continuing to make posts on this thread I will respect that and go back to Pictionary, lol. I do respect you enormously, and I take it as a given that you know that. But maybe you don't. I don't know.

From my perspective, I am the one that gets the shut-the-fuck-up label of "thought police" rather than that I am dishing that out, but I don't know. I do want to make people see what I worry about. I'm not a cerebral arguer. I feel more than think. That is a weakness, and it gets me into shitloads of trouble, but it's just how I'm built.
 

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
"And my philosophy is why not kick a dog when it's down?"
L Ron Hubbard 20 April 1955.

"We are not a turn the other cheek religion"
Scientologist Lawyer Earle Cooley to CNN in 1995 after the Lerma Raid.
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
I think that ties in with a psychopath targeting vulnerabilities in others. Which in turn comes back to establishing healthy personal boundaries.
[...]

Excellent advice, FreeBeing, and thanks for the article too. The wikipedia article on personal boundaries linked to an entry on "emotional contagion," which the Scientologists use for luring people in, and for all kinds of antisocial engineering purposes. It is critically important to develop and maintain mature personal boundaries when dealing with Scientologists and their agents and supporters. These people are not individual, unconnected psychopaths, but are organized to victimize both the vulnerable and the not-so-vulnerable who have their number.

Wikipedia said:
Emotional contagion

"Emotional contagion is the tendency for two individuals to emotionally converge. One view developed by Elaine Hatfield et al. is that this can be done through automatic mimicry and synchronization of one’s expressions, vocalizations, postures and movements with those of another person.[1] When people unconsciously mimic their companions’ expressions of emotion, they come to feel reflections of their partner’s emotions.[1] Emotions can be shared across individuals in many different ways both implicitly or explicitly. For instance, conscious reasoning, analysis and imagination have all been found to contribute to the phenomenon.[1] Emotional contagion is important to personal relationships because it fosters emotional synchrony between individuals. A broader definition of the phenomenon was suggested by Schoenewolf: "a process in which a person or group influences the emotions or behavior of another person or group through the conscious or unconscious induction of emotion states and behavioral attitudes".[2]

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_contagion
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
Excellent advice, FreeBeing, and thanks for the article too. The wikipedia article on personal boundaries linked to an entry on "emotional contagion," which the Scientologists use for luring people in, and for all kinds of antisocial engineering purposes. It is critically important to develop and maintain mature personal boundaries when dealing with Scientologists and their agents and supporters. These people are not individual, unconnected psychopaths, but are organized to victimize both the vulnerable and the not-so-vulnerable who have their number.

:eyeroll:
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
Excellent advice, FreeBeing, and thanks for the article too. The wikipedia article on personal boundaries linked to an entry on "emotional contagion," which the Scientologists use for luring people in, and for all kinds of antisocial engineering purposes. It is critically important to develop and maintain mature personal boundaries when dealing with Scientologists and their agents and supporters. These people are not individual, unconnected psychopaths, but are organized to victimize both the vulnerable and the not-so-vulnerable who have their number.

This is completely fascinating and thank you, I'm going to read more about it.
 
Last edited:

TG1

Angelic Poster
No, I do not have a problem with either of those things TG1. I am referring to another post made TO a particular poster on another thread (I think) by another poster. And I DO think that what has been done to that poster using those kinds of lists IS mental cruelty, because to the confident who cares what somebody else says, but to someone with insecurities it's the worst kind of mind game. I can refer you to that post if you wish, but it's really just an example of how I perceive people using these labels to attack others.

How am I sounding like the subject isn't discussable? I would really like to know that because I often get accused of being the "thought police" and I really don't understand it. I am passionate about what I write, just as I speak. When I post it's with a lot of emotion. But I am not trying to get the thread stopped, have not reported any posts on it, have not done anything except argue my perspective that I can see. Everyone has issues from their past that are more sensitive than others. If you are uncomfortable with me continuing to make posts on this thread I will respect that and go back to Pictionary, lol. I do respect you enormously, and I take it as a given that you know that. But maybe you don't. I don't know.

From my perspective, I am the one that gets the shut-the-fuck-up label of "thought police" rather than that I am dishing that out, but I don't know. I do want to make people see what I worry about. I'm not a cerebral arguer. I feel more than think. That is a weakness, and it gets me into shitloads of trouble, but it's just how I'm built.

Thanks, Purple. I appreciate your response and your kind thoughts. I feel the same way about you.

I agree 100% that an actual diagnosis of "X-opathy" can only be done by someone has training and experience in the field and does that work day-in, day-out, so to speak.

The terms "sociopath" and "psychopath" do get thrown around a lot by average, everyday lay people -- "That psychopath!" Other psychological and learning diagnoses get slung around wrongly. I can think of more than a few people who've been misdiagnosed by school counselors. Ugh.

The "undiscussable" comment is because you've come back several times with similar arguments that reject the diagnoses, lists of behaviors associated with those diagnoses, and labeling of people. You've also said more than once that these diagnoses aren't nearly as important to you as the bad behaviors anyone can exhibit. And, of course, you're right that behaviors matter.

Where I'm coming from is that I want to avoid for myself (and people I care about) being the object of any of those nasty behaviors.

I've finally learned that I'm a soft touch. I think some people get a real raw deal in life and that they shouldn't be penalized for that. I don't think we're created equal because we're not all "born equal." I don't mean money, but the kind of parenting and family life they had access to as youngsters. I like to give most people the benefit of the doubt.

But I've been forced to learn that some jerks will take every advantage they can get from me and others. (I haven't even told here "The Story of the Financial Planner." It's a bad one!) They're just looking for ways to leverage the good intentions of others so they can benefit unfairly from our trusting ways.

So that's why I'm liking this thread. People aren't all cut from the same cloth. Some just flat-out try and take advantage of others. But we can't talk about this in fuzzy terms. That's why I like "lists" like the one posted in the OP that (to me) identify patterns of behavior. To me, such a list is no biggie.

Can we over-label sociopaths and de-value people that way? Of course. But we could also remain babes in the woods our whole life long and fail to recognize them before we become their victims. We can wind up giving them even a little bit of rope and then really regretting doing so.

That's the greater danger, I think -- that trusting, generous, empathic people will be stalked by cold-hearted assholes who target them as marks.

So forget "sociopaths." Let's rename people who consistently, reliably, regularly exhibit the behaviors in these lists as "assholes" or "schemers" or "cheaters." That might be a fun thread -- to come up with a long list of names for creeps like this who manipulate others for their benefit and others' pain.
 

clamicide

Gold Meritorious Patron
What an interesting article. Thank you very much. I see there's quite a bit of literature on empathy training in various contexts, not only for psychopaths, but for medical students and even children.

I wondered about the value of assessing empathy as a diagnostic criterion when clearly it is a skill that can be learned, and produced for tests. Hubbard certainly had highly developed empathic skills, which served him in his conning operations. He was so empathetic that he got his slaves proclaiming him to be mankind's greatest friend. Then he made it his business.

The "rapport" that all Scientologists drill is empathy. The trained rapport or empathy is then used for antisocial purposes.

fso-dissem-flyer-2004-1.jpg


But now I also understand that the professionals do distinguish between empathy as a spontaneous affect and willed empathy. That explains psychopaths' selectivity of targets; how they can love bomb some targets for some purposes, and hate bomb targets they have consciously evaluated according to their antisocial criteria. It is likely that psychopaths would hate bomb the people who have their number. The psychopaths would know such people wouldn't fall for their phony love bombing, so they hate bomb them, and get others to hate bomb them.


This is really interesting--I never linked a couple of things up until I read this post: I had been aware that those who lack total empathy can be quite good at faking it, but I never looked at how as auditors there was the training of "creating ARC" for a pc.

When you go through the TRs, you are supposed to have "no reaction". Then, you have to create ARC for the pc. In a lot of cases, it was rather manufactured and quite creepy looking back at it. One of the most-beloved auditors I worked with despised a lot of her pc s.... in no way would I ever claim she was sociopathic at all, as I do believe she had a good heart. However, she would mock up ARC for these pc s that she absolutely detested, who then would always request her as an auditor, mainly on the point of her having such "high ARC", and thinking that she adored them. Wasn't there a drill where one worked on the ability to 'grant beingness' and such? And you weren't supposed to have sympathy for the pc.

Egads. I got crammed once on some HCOB, because I have empath stuff happen sometimes, and I'd experience/feel what my pc was feeling in session, and the cram was about how messed up that was. It was some form of out-tech.
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
Thanks, Purple. I appreciate your response and your kind thoughts. I feel the same way about you.

I agree 100% that an actual diagnosis of "X-opathy" can only be done by someone has training and experience in the field and does that work day-in, day-out, so to speak.

The terms "sociopath" and "psychopath" do get thrown around a lot by average, everyday lay people -- "That psychopath!" Other psychological and learning diagnoses get slung around wrongly. I can think of more than a few people who've been misdiagnosed by school counselors. Ugh.

The "undiscussable" comment is because you've come back several times with similar arguments that reject the diagnoses, lists of behaviors associated with those diagnoses, and labeling of people. You've also said more than once that these diagnoses aren't nearly as important to you as the bad behaviors anyone can exhibit. And, of course, you're right that behaviors matter.

Where I'm coming from is that I want to avoid for myself (and people I care about) being the object of any of those nasty behaviors.

I've finally learned that I'm a soft touch. I think some people get a real raw deal in life and that they shouldn't be penalized for that. I don't think we're created equal because we're not all "born equal." I don't mean money, but the kind of parenting and family life they had access to as youngsters. I like to give most people the benefit of the doubt.

But I've been forced to learn that some jerks will take every advantage they can get from me and others. (I haven't even told here "The Story of the Financial Planner." It's a bad one!) They're just looking for ways to leverage the good intentions of others so they can benefit unfairly from our trusting ways.

So that's why I'm liking this thread. People aren't all cut from the same cloth. Some just flat-out try and take advantage of others. But we can't talk about this in fuzzy terms. That's why I like "lists" like the one posted in the OP that (to me) identify patterns of behavior. To me, such a list is no biggie.

Can we over-label sociopaths and de-value people that way? Of course. But we could also remain babes in the woods our whole life long and fail to recognize them before we become their victims. We can wind up giving them even a little bit of rope and then really regretting doing so.

That's the greater danger, I think -- that trusting, generous, empathic people will be stalked by cold-hearted assholes who target them as marks.

So forget "sociopaths." Let's rename people who consistently, reliably, regularly exhibit the behaviors in these lists as "assholes" or "schemers" or "cheaters." That might be a fun thread -- to come up with a long list of names for creeps like this who manipulate others for their benefit and others' pain.

I guess I'm okay with if someone calls me an asshole, because it's just their opinion and I know it means they don't like me, don't respect me, don't think much of me, and that's fine. That's their opinion. It still hurts, but okay. It's when somebody systematically tries to prove that there's something wrong with me, and back it up pseudo-scientifically, that I am objecting to - and I'm not talking about me personally necessarily.

I might believe in kindness theoretically, although we all know that there can be times where I can be distinctly and deliberately unkind, but that's pretty much always when in my mind I am defending someone I feel is "the underdog" in a particular situation. It doesn't even necessarily mean that I think they're right or I like them better than other people, just if there is something in there that I relate to that makes me feel for them I will go in to bat for them. I almost can't help it.

And when you add to that all those years worrying about being "the why" that the org doesn't expand, or having "source briefings" being read like an accusation - that you are checking the points of the policy letter or technical bulletin off in your head as they're read out - with a force that seems to go right through your body - when your family openly speculates to your face about whether you have the same mental disorder as your never-correctly-diagnosed-but-speculated-to-be-Asperger's uncle who had a breakdown in high school and had to have his affairs taken care of by power of attorney - when every man and his dog has a suggestion about what your acutely disabled daughter might be suffering from - all these things - then I think this all makes me particularly sensitive to their potential for abuse. Plus having studied several units on young people and crime and theories of crime - well, I have a lot more compassionate perspective than the "criminals are just arseholes one". But I don't think you subscribe to that either.

I do feel for you in that story, and understand the problems with being a soft touch, but basically I think with any crime or betrayal you take the preventive measures you can and you try and do the wise as serpents but harmless as doves thing but just as if you don't open yourself to love you'll never be hurt, if you don't open yourself to trust you'll never be betrayed, but that's no kind of life and you'll never be able to be who you are meant to be. With all the best precautions in the world you will still occasionally be harmed by others. So it's what to do with all that and what balance to find I suppose.

[video=youtube;QCt7RvEkK8s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCt7RvEkK8s[/video]

But also I am not trying to tell you what to do, and I already know you get my concerns. You're not really my audience for most of these comments. Like, in my mind I was really responding to BardoThodol. In these public arenas some of my posts are for the world, like I imagine journalists and so on reading them or people finding out about Scientology, and others are for the group - like "Isn't it fun playing pictionary?" and I imagine I am posting to the other ESMB members, and others I really forget I am posting to the whole world and imagine one person or a couple of people. So that does trip me up, sometimes. And also, sometimes I'll really have a general comment to make but I'll automatically quote the last post before mine when it doesn't relate to that post at all and that poster might get offended. But a) I don't have concerns about the way you are using this work, and b) you have already acknowledged me, so I knew you got my perspective and I was okay with yours, but perhaps I have not made that clear. But I still have huge problems with untrained and unqualified people using these traits to make other posters wrong.
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
<snip>So forget "sociopaths." Let's rename people who consistently, reliably, regularly exhibit the behaviors in these lists as "assholes" or "schemers" or "cheaters." That might be a fun thread -- to come up with a long list of names for creeps like this who manipulate others for their benefit and others' pain.

The term manipulator may be an easy blanket generality as a suggestion. Just because someone is an asshole, schemer or cheater doesn't necessarily mean they are a narcissist, sociopath or psychopath. However, for the sake of being concise and discussing the o.p. I wont refrain from using the psychological term sociopath or other psychological terminology when pertinent and wont be cornered into not doing so.
 
Last edited:

TG1

Angelic Poster
The term manipulator may be an easy blanket generality as a suggestion. Just because someone is an asshole, schemer or cheater doesn't necessarily mean they are a narcissist, sociopath or psychopath. However, for the sake being of concise and discussing the o.p. I wont refrain from using the psychological term sociopath or other psychological terminology when pertinent.

I agree. On both points.
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
The term manipulator may be an easy blanket generality as a suggestion. Just because someone is an asshole, schemer or cheater doesn't necessarily mean they are a narcissist, sociopath or psychopath. However, for the sake of being concise and discussing the o.p. I wont refrain from using the psychological term sociopath or other psychological terminology when pertinent and wont be cornered into not doing so.

I agree. On both points.

My interest in this subject is comprehending manipulation, especially after being in a cult. Manipulation in all it's abusive manifestations whether it be a cult, a relationship, a business arrangement, a friendship, an organization, a government, what have you. Not out of fear or paranoia but objectively and being self empowered to ask what's going on. Thank you for starting this thread.
 
Last edited:

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
This is really interesting--I never linked a couple of things up until I read this post: I had been aware that those who lack total empathy can be quite good at faking it, but I never looked at how as auditors there was the training of "creating ARC" for a pc.

When you go through the TRs, you are supposed to have "no reaction". Then, you have to create ARC for the pc. In a lot of cases, it was rather manufactured and quite creepy looking back at it. One of the most-beloved auditors I worked with despised a lot of her pc s.... in no way would I ever claim she was sociopathic at all, as I do believe she had a good heart. However, she would mock up ARC for these pc s that she absolutely detested, who then would always request her as an auditor, mainly on the point of her having such "high ARC", and thinking that she adored them. Wasn't there a drill where one worked on the ability to 'grant beingness' and such? And you weren't supposed to have sympathy for the pc.

Egads. I got crammed once on some HCOB, because I have empath stuff happen sometimes, and I'd experience/feel what my pc was feeling in session, and the cram was about how messed up that was. It was some form of out-tech.

Thanks for sharing this, clamicide. I agree, the standard auditor-pc relationship is creepy, and disgusting. Scientology auditors are prohibited from entering their own emotional reactions into session, and confront their preclears instead with completely synthetic but "natural-sounding" TRs and mocked up "auditor beingess." I regret every session I ever gave.

The Auditor's Code covers the points you mentioned about sympathy and granting beingness.

Hubbard said:


THE AUDITOR'S CODE

The pledge of practitioners of pastoral counseling.

Required to be signed by the holders of or before the issuance of certificates for the certificates to be valid.

I hereby promise as an auditor to follow the Auditor's Code.

1. I promise not to evaluate for the preclear or tell him what he should think about his case in session.

2. I promise not to invalidate the preclear's case or gains in or out of session.

3. I promise to administer only standard tech to a preclear in the standard way.

4. I promise to keep all auditing appointments once made.

5. I promise not to process a preclear who has not had sufficient rest and who is physically tired.

6. I promise not to process a preclear who is improperly fed or hungry.

7. I promise not to permit a frequent change of auditors.

8. I promise not to sympathize with a preclear but to be effective.

9. I promise not to let the preclear end session on his own determinism but to finish off those cycles I have begun.

10. I promise never to walk off from a preclear in session.

11. I promise never to get angry with a preclear in session.

12. I promise to run every major case action to a floating needle.

13. I promise never to run anyone action beyond its floating needle.

14. I promise to grant beingness to the preclear in session.

15. I promise not to mix the processes of Scientology with other practices except when the preclear is physically ill and only medical means will serve.

16. I promise to maintain communication with the preclear and not to cut his comm or permit him to overrun in session.

17. I promise not to enter comments, expressions or enturbulence into a session that distract a preclear from his case.

18. I promise to continue to give the preclear the process or auditing command when needed in the session.

19. I promise not to let a preclear run a wrongly understood command.

20. I promise not to explain, justify or make excuses in session for any auditor mistakes whether real or imagined.

21. I promise to estimate the current case state of a preclear only by standard case supervision data and not to diverge because of some imagined difference in the case.

22. I promise never to use the secrets of a preclear divulged in session for punishment or personal gain.

23. I promise to never falsify worksheets of sessions.

24. I promise to see that any fee received for processing is refunded following the policies of the Claims Verification Board, if the preclear is dissatisfied and demands it within three months after the processing, the only condition being that he may not again be processed or trained.

25. I promise not to advocate Dianetics or Scientology only to cure illness or only to treat the insane, knowing well they were intended for spiritual gain.

26. I promise to cooperate fully with the authorized organizations of Dianetics and Scientology in safeguarding the ethical use and practice of those subjects.

27. I promise to refuse to permit any being to be physically injured, violently damaged, operated on or killed in the name of "mental treatment."

28. I promise not to permit sexual liberties or violations of patients.

29. I promise to refuse to admit to the ranks of practitioners any being who is insane.


Hubbard, L. (1980, 19 June) The Auditor's Code. Organization Executive Course (1991 ed., Vol 4, pp. 1186-87). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
Thanks for sharing this, clamicide. I agree, the standard auditor-pc relationship is creepy, and disgusting. Scientology auditors are prohibited from entering their own emotional reactions into session, and confront their preclears instead with completely synthetic but "natural-sounding" TRs and mocked up "auditor beingess." I regret every session I ever gave.

The Auditor's Code covers the points you mentioned about sympathy and granting beingness.

I saw lots of auditors who genuinely cared about their pcs. I had one come and give me touch assists for free when I was a degraded being in the eyes of the local organisation for leaving staff and the sea org when I was pregnant with my fourth daughter and had a life-threatening deep vein thrombosis. The majority of auditors I ever knew cared deeply about other people, including their pcs.
 

BardoThodol

Silver Meritorious Patron
Because we're sociopaths and we're scared of being found out?

Or because we think a society where people are running around seeing [STRIKE]witches[/STRIKE] [STRIKE]communists[/STRIKE] sociopaths in every corner is inevitable and lamentable given human nature - that even though we know we're pissing in the wind we can't help but cry out "Wait!!" because we think it's a bloody stupid idea, let alone irresponsible, for a bunch of unqualified people to go around crying "Sociopath!" I don't know. You tell me. Frankly I think describing another poster as "gaslighting" and "manipulative" - with ZERO evidence of that and LINKS to the "lists" of such characteristics - was a kind of unspeakable mental cruelty and a complete abuse of the purpose for which they were designed. People preaching about kindness and sociopaths and then going out and hurting others just gets up my wick. If you choose to interpret that as the "thought police" trying to shut you up I could care less - and, yes, I know you didn't make that particular post, but it's just an example and it turns my stomach.

Didn't mean to get your wick up. But then again, it's easier to light a candle when the wick is up.

I don't really think of you as thought police. What I wrote was that I didn't have thought police in my own mind; I don't have censors telling me that I shouldn't think certain things.

I was mostly examining my own thoughts--because I'm a bit narcissistic.

Being under time constraints, I tend to scan most posts rather than read them carefully. I seldom even know to whom to attribute what concepts, and what came from which posters when I'm rushing through a thread (at a snail's pace, because I'm also a slow reader.)

So, if you felt I was aiming something at you, it was not intended as such. Simply broad impressions rather than specific targeting. I had just gotten the impression that discussing the concept of sociopathy didn't set well with some of the posters.

As for being bothered or upset about anyone trying to shut me up...?

Nah, I don't mind.

But, again, I didn't think that was your intent.

Actually, I think you're an enthusiastic, passionate poster--and when I read your posts it usually makes me smile. So have at it.

I don't think less of someone for disagreeing with me. In fact, some of my best moments in life came when I realized someone else was right and I was being a complete idiot.

Being an idiot makes me laugh. The perpetual blundering that makes vaudeville so funny. And if we can't find the humor in our own lives...?
 
Last edited:

Purple Rain

Crusader
Didn't mean to get your wick up. But then again, it's easier to light a candle when the wick is up.

I don't really think of you as thought police. What I wrote was that I didn't have thought police in my own mind; I don't censors telling me that I shouldn't think certain things.

I was mostly examining my own thoughts--because I'm a bit narcissistic.

Being under time constraints, I tend to scan most posts rather than read them carefully. I seldom even know to whom to attribute what concepts, and what came from which posters when I'm rushing through a thread (at a snail's pace, because I'm also a slow reader.)

So, if you felt I was aiming something at you, it was not intended as such. Simply broad impressions rather than specific targeting. I had just gotten the impression that discussing the concept of sociopathy didn't set well with some of the posters.

As for being bothered or upset about anyone trying to shut me up...?

Nah, I don't mind.

But, again, I didn't think that was your intent.

Actually, I think you're an enthusiastic, passionate poster--and when I read your posts it usually makes me smile. So have at it.

I don't think less of someone for disagreeing with me. In fact, some of my best moments in life came when I realized someone else was right and I was being a complete idiot.

Being an idiot makes me laugh. The perpetual blundering that makes vaudeville so funny. And if we can't find the humor in our own lives...?

Absolutely, and I love your sense of humour! You often make me smile or laugh out loud also. And I also am cool with you disagreeing with me.

As I said to TG1, the "thought police" or other "police" comments have been made about me a few times on the board and it genuinely baffles me - a) that people think I think I have the power to shut them up, and that b) they seriously think I would want to.

I like to get to a point of understanding - not necessarily agreement - that the best arguments have been made and understood by both sides and that life isn't so black and white that either one is all right or all wrong. Just with different experience bases and values people make different choices - like whether or not to risk a particular surgery or where the doctor gives you an option of two different kinds of treatment - most things have pros and cons.

But it is that point of understanding that I like in a conversation - and usually once that is reached there is a feeling of closeness between the two people even if nothing has changed and nothing is solved. I noticed that when I was married - sometimes you'd talk about your problems - and they'd always still be there - but at the end of a conversation you could feel a lot closer and it would matter a lot less. Or talking to people about my daughter's disability - never changed a damned thing, but it does make you feel better.
 

BardoThodol

Silver Meritorious Patron
Absolutely, and I love your sense of humour! You often make me smile or laugh out loud also. And I also am cool with you disagreeing with me.

As I said to TG1, the "thought police" or other "police" comments have been made about me a few times on the board and it genuinely baffles me - a) that people think I think I have the power to shut them up, and that b) they seriously think I would want to.

I like to get to a point of understanding - not necessarily agreement - that the best arguments have been made and understood by both sides and that life isn't so black and white that either one is all right or all wrong. Just with different experience bases and values people make different choices - like whether or not to risk a particular surgery or where the doctor gives you an option of two different kinds of treatment - most things have pros and cons.

But it is that point of understanding that I like in a conversation - and usually once that is reached there is a feeling of closeness between the two people even if nothing has changed and nothing is solved. I noticed that when I was married - sometimes you'd talk about your problems - and they'd always still be there - but at the end of a conversation you could feel a lot closer and it would matter a lot less. Or talking to people about my daughter's disability - never changed a damned thing, but it does make you feel better.

Yep. Understanding is good. Have had the same experiences with my wife.

As for surgery. Got knee surgery in March and have wished every day since July that I hadn't.

As for being baffled. I've come to enjoy bafflement. Others seem to enjoy me a bit better when i don't know everything.

Imagine that.
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
Yep. Understanding is good. Have had the same experiences with my wife.

As for surgery. Got knee surgery in March and have wished every day since July that I hadn't.

As for being baffled. I've come to enjoy bafflement. Others seem to enjoy me a bit better when i don't know everything.

Imagine that.

Recipe for a happy life.

2 cups of bafflement
1 cup of understanding
2 teaspoons of laughter
1 brain, preferably fresh

Combine other ingredients and marinate brain overnight, then cook well at a warm temperature for several hours. Lol!
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
I saw lots of auditors who genuinely cared about their pcs. I had one come and give me touch assists for free when I was a degraded being in the eyes of the local organisation for leaving staff and the sea org when I was pregnant with my fourth daughter and had a life-threatening deep vein thrombosis. The majority of auditors I ever knew cared deeply about other people, including their pcs.

Good. I don't regret the auditing I gave because I didn't care about my pcs. I regret the auditing I gave because I do care now. Regardless of my Scientology certs, and my good record as a Flag-trained auditor, I had no business messing around with anyone's mind with any Hubbard tech, standard or not.
 
Last edited:
Top