What are OT POWERS?

[alex]

I'm just gonna chime in on this one. Though I would not say that the tech is a dangerous and harmful system, I would say that it is unproven in either way.

It has not been proven as successful. It has not been proven as not successful.

But the tech, as used in Scientology is an incredibly long and expensive road. And the members are kept on a thread or a hope that the next step is going to handle (blank) or, make them OT (whatever that is, as a "provable" state, it is not).

---

And it does, unfortunately, end up in a discussion about the church, policies or administration to give a better or more complete answer.

The truth is the cost and how people pay for their auditing, can be quite immoral. And many file for bankrupcy afterwards to get out of their debt. So they "pay" for their auditing. But did they really?

Their exchange, and thus their ethics, are out.

-----

Can you prove it is NOT dangerous?

The cost of the bridge on an annualized basis is very similar to the sport of winter downhill snow skiing.

An upper middle class person may spend 8 or 10 grand a year flying off to the slopes, paying hotel and meals and such, plus clothes and equiment which change every year. And if its a family double that at least....

Many hobbies now days take that kind of money, a ski boat, flying a small plane, having a mistress....

A person who stays on track, and gets trained along side being processed would spend a similar amount.

Its the fools who mortagage their homes, looking for the quick solution who end up bankrupt, and disillusioned. (and the fools who encourage them, who end up defeating their own noble goals).

Would they be better of to have taken up a hobby? Would the hobby be at least as physically dangerous?




alex

 

[Bea Kiddo]

Well Alex, I am going to politely disagree. People have been regged and told to file bankrupcy later to get out of the loan. This is a little more than just "Ooops, can't pay the bill". They went into the loan knowing that they would not be able/willing to pay it back.

 

[alex]

Well Alex, I am going to politely disagree. People have been regged and told to file bankrupcy later to get out of the loan. This is a little more than just "Ooops, can't pay the bill". They went into the loan knowing that they would not be able/willing to pay it back.

Yes of course they have....and they are out ethics, irresponsible fools, and criminal for having done so and same for the people who encouraged them to do it.

My point is that the costs of scientology are comparable to many other common activities that are discretionary and take similar amounts of time and effort.

Or maybe my point is that cost is a red herring, the issue is whether the product is delivered.

alex

 

[Bea Kiddo]

Yes of course they have....and they are out ethics, irresponsible fools, and criminal for having done so and same for the people who encouraged them to do it.

My point is that the costs of scientology are comparable to many other common activities that are discretionary and take similar amounts of time and effort.

Or maybe my point is that cost is a red herring, the issue is weather the product is delivered.

alex

Right. Product delivered is the issue.

 

[Pierrot]

Well Alex, I am going to politely disagree. People have been regged and told to file bankrupcy later to get out of the loan. This is a little more than just "Ooops, can't pay the bill". They went into the loan knowing that they would not be able/willing to pay it back.

And supposedly some went into the loan hoping that after gaining OT powers or such the money will just "appear" by sheer postulate. Fair enough - but then all the auditing and services are delivered above a PTP of a hidden standard, which would need to be adressed first. It creates a "loop situation".

 

[alex]

I'll take up your challenge and I promise not to use the things you don't want critics to use. I'll even try to use Scn tech to explain why Scn can be dangerous. Well, I wouldn't use the word "dangerous", that was Zinj's word and Zinj is available to answer if he wishes.

So I'll explain why it can be harmful and more often than that, why it can ultimately lead to a dead-end.

It starts off pretty good in attempting to raise a PC's ability. It concentrates on help and being in "present time". Relieving painful memories of the past seems to work pretty well. The grades give real tangible results that PCs often demonstrate in their lives.

BUT the tech (processing and training) has another thread running all the way through it. It controls the PCs attention into dictionaries, the person sitting opposite, a book, a bottle, an ashtray, an auditor's words, their own "reactive minds", etc. It is all control of attention, control by another. This is other-determinism, not self-determinism. This is putting the PC at effect of external causes. Training controls the person's attention and controls how the person views life by repetition of simplified explanations (KSW for example).

This is interlaced with "wins" from the subjects addressed. Relief from past pain, improved "hereness", comm/problem, releases. Relief from hostlities and upsets and the compulsion to be right. All pretty good stuff for a lot of people. These "wins" make the person want more wins, but they are only allowed to get these if they hand over control of their attention and thoughts to others who are the source of these future wins.

The PC or student is now stuck between wanting wins (which their attention has been directed, by repetition, to believing are only available from Scn) and being effect.

Nothing wrong with being effect, as I've discussed. But, in Scn, the PC/student is extremely limited over what he/she can be at cause over. So he is in a double-whammy. Whammy one: Wanting what he believes he lacks and only Scn can provide, and whammy two: hardly allowed to be cause any more.

He is stuck in the effect side of the Illusion called life, that Scn promises to free him from.

Once he has demonstrated that he will allow Scn tech to control his thoughts and behaviour he is allowed onto the secret, dangerous levels that will put him "at cause". But Scn itself has put him "at effect" and now the win that he wants more than anything else is to no longer be "at effect". This is a goal that has been implanted in him by Scn auditing and training, which is what put him at effect in the first place!

Now the Pre-OT has a false goal to be "at cause". An impossible goal whilever he resists being at effect. He has now been taught that effect (except Scn effect) is "bad". He has been taught that cause (except cause over Scn) is "good".

This even violates Scientology's own axioms, but the tech in application has very little to do with the axioms of its own subject.

The Pr-OT is now whammied with the biggest Auditor's Code break of all and is told what causes he is at effect of! This is the ultimate attention directing putting of him at effect that the tech implants into him.

The poor Pre-OT is now stuck. This is the dead-end fate that awaits all students of Scn who persist with the auditing and training. Some are "harmed" and leave in a hurt and sad state with their idealism betrayed. Some stay around and worry away at this whole cause/effect stuff. They sometimes have wins, sometimes wonderful ones, but these just further stick them to this cause/effect GPM game.

The technical truth is the Pre-OT is the effect of nothing, except what he has had his attention directed into believing he is the effect of!

The technical truth is the Pre-OT is already "at cause", except he has been indoctrinated into believing he is at effect.

The actual, metaphysical truth is that the Pre-OT is both cause and effect and paradoxically neither.

The Pre-OT can continue playing this cause/effect resolution game either in the CofS or the FZ. He has a good long-lasting game because it can never resolve whilever he holds the implanted ideas "cause good - effect bad". It can never resolve for as long as he grants cause to the tech and lets it direct his attention, just as it did back in those good old days of TRs and objectives.

As a general comment on all the specific points you made, I think that "the tech" needs to be seen as a transitional step in a larger process. An extended bridge if you will beyond what is there now.

Yes is it very much as you describe above, but I see it as an incremental step "up" from which then other steps are needed.

"OT" as available in the church is just the mearest glimmerings of the start of ability. Mostly is just removing the junk in the way of a person even being able to conceptualize ability outside the realm of human existence.

If the "tech" is seen as an end, it is surely a trap.

alex

 

[alex]

And supposedly some went into the loan hoping that after gaining OT powers or such the money will just "appear" by sheer postulate. Fair enough - but then all the auditing and services are delivered above a PTP of a hidden standard, which would need to be adressed first. It creates a "loop situation".

Yes it does.

I have seen this reg cycle enough in people I know.

Catch 22.

But then money does just appear by postulate for some....

Have you read: "The Master Key System" by Charles Haanel or my favorite "The Science of Getting Rich" by Wallace Wattles ?

I'll email them if you want....

You can have money if you want. Ask Alan.



alex

 

[Tanstaafl]

As a general comment on all the specific points you made, I think that "the tech" needs to be seen as a transitional step in a larger process. An extended bridge if you will beyond what is there now.

Yes is it very much as you describe above, but I see it as an incremental step "up" from which then other steps are needed.

"OT" as available in the church is just the mearest glimmerings of the start of ability. Mostly is just removing the junk in the way of a person even being able to conceptualize ability outside the realm of human existence.

If the "tech" is seen as an end, it is surely a trap.

alex

I'll go along with that.

 

[Case]

I'm just gonna chime in on this one. Though I would not say that the tech is a dangerous and harmful system, I would say that it is unproven in either way.

It has not been proven as successful. It has not been proven as not successful.

What about the thousands of success stories? I think it is proven to improve peoples lives. Although bonafide OT abilities, well that's a different issue. Also, whether one wishes to show off ones OT abilities once gained (whether from scinetology or other practives) is another thing altogether. Some people do:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWeK8tcB6AI

But the tech, as used in Scientology is an incredibly long and expensive road. And the members are kept on a thread or a hope that the next step is going to handle (blank) or, make them OT (whatever that is, as a "provable" state, it is not).

---

I dont personally mind that the LRH bridge will probably take me close to a decade to complete. Although in an ideal world it would take 5 years max. But for those that do there are self-clearing manuals and other scientology practices, like idenics.

And it does, unfortunately, end up in a discussion about the church, policies or administration to give a better or more complete answer.

The truth is the cost and how people pay for their auditing, can be quite immoral. And many file for bankrupcy afterwards to get out of their debt. So they "pay" for their auditing. But did they really?

Their exchange, and thus their ethics, are out.

-----

Can you prove it is NOT dangerous?

So far I have no data to conclude that auditing is dangerous, from a personal standpoint and from having scoured the internet. I have seen out-tech do damage though. But any tech can be used for negative purposes if; 1) it is not used correctly and 2) it's use is intended to harm.

The tech is a tool. And like a chisel you can either construct something out of it, or destroy something. Depends what you're intention is when using the tool.

Comes back to my NLP analogy. Most NLP is used for destructive purposes on this planet- to gain wealth and control others. But it does have the tremendous ability to help people. Thus it isn't the tech of NLP that is dangerous, it is the one operating it who is potentially dangerous. But thats the nature of human beings....

 

[Pierrot]

Yes it does.

I have seen this reg cycle enough in people I know.

Catch 22.

But then money does just appear by postulate for some....

Have you read: "The Master Key System" by Charles Haanel or my favorite "The Science of Getting Rich" by Wallace Wattles ?

I'll email them if you want....

You can have money if you want. Ask Alan.



alex

Thanks Alex - I've read those books, and others like Kiyosaki's "Rich Dad, Poor Dad". The point being - money is regulated by postulates, positives and negaties alike, and postulates "work" best when not in an out-rudiments situation.

And then... I was a Reg, a shark reg at that, so I know how to make appear money out of nothing

 

[lionheart]

As a general comment on all the specific points you made, I think that "the tech" needs to be seen as a transitional step in a larger process. An extended bridge if you will beyond what is there now.

Yes is it very much as you describe above, but I see it as an incremental step "up" from which then other steps are needed.

"OT" as available in the church is just the mearest glimmerings of the start of ability. Mostly is just removing the junk in the way of a person even being able to conceptualize ability outside the realm of human existence.

If the "tech" is seen as an end, it is surely a trap.

alex

Cool! My point of departure is where LRH tells you what cause you are the effect of (the dangerous, they will affect you terribly if misused, "confidential" levels) At that point the Scn tech has got your attention well and truly under its control, not your control and you are an implanted scientologist.

The lower grades and training are used by the "tech" as a grooming for this to see how compliant you have become and how suggestible you are.

The lower levels have great merit, but throw away the dictionaries, the clay, the ashtray, the book and the bottle. Ask the PC what he wants to have handled, only run that and don't eval or inval and get the PC to the point where he can release charge himself without an auditor as soon as possible. Then you have the makings of some good tech.

I certainly see the "tech" that I did as an incremental or transitional step towards other sytems of spiritual enlightenment. I reject Scn's description of "ability" as defined by OT. It is juvenile nonsense and belies a poor understanding of the nature of existence.

 

[alex]

Thanks Alex - I've read those books, and others like Kiyosaki's "Rich Dad, Poor Dad". The point being - money is regulated by postulates, positives and negaties alike, and postulates "work" best when not in an out-rudiments situation.

And then... I was a Reg, a shark reg at that, so I know how to make appear money out of nothing

I used to reward regs with my money for the shear asthetics of their performance sometimes.

Its a thing to be admired, that ability to move a persons viewpoint around like the good regs do.

Sometimes being at effect is just as good an experience as being at cause.

A real sense of the ethics is of course key...

alex

 

[Veda]

"Case" is using the word "tech" as a red herring, to distract from the subject of Scientology, which simultaneuously is the tech, yet is not the tech, yet is not Scientology, yet is.

Supposedly "The Tech" is only "training and auditing," along the "Bridge." Which "Bridge"? The Scientology Bridge. Mmm...

What about "Ethics" and "Ethics tech"? Well, "Case" refers to "97.5%" of those receiving services in the "Church" of Scientology deriving benefit - "97.5"%"? That sounds familiar. Is that "The Tech"? That's Scientology "Ethics tech," with its SP Doctrine. But wait, that's not part of the "Tech" is it?, or is it?

And then here comes the spirited defense of Xenu, Incident One and Incident Two, in all its pill and Rum and injected cocaine-glory (biographical details of Hubbard, but, hey, that's not relevant, since that's not 'The Tech."). What have been the results of OT 2 and OT 3? Did these serve as a central pillar of the Hubbardian mind f--k, using e-meters to manipulate, telling people the contents of their own minds and space, with a little actual auditing wrapped around it, to establish a nice mix. And letting the person know how important this is to his/her "Survival," and making sure they had a "win," some where along the way.

Yep. And the results are? "Freedom from overwhelm," or "Overcame the final barrier to Full OT"? This is what people were (are) told that allowed them to open their minds to this bad science fiction. Well, the results don't compensate for the mind f--k. It's a bad trade off.

But is Xenu, etc. part of "The Tech"? Apparently so.

But wait, "Case" has used the word, "Eternity," and in the fashion used by Hubbard when he was trying to scare people, so is that "The Tech" too, or is that "LRH," or is that "Cosmology," etc.

The bottom line: Scientology's founder lied to Scientologists, and Scientology has been covering its ass in every possible way to "handle" that, while denying it - in other words, while still lying, while still attempting to manipulate.

Same old same old.

Scientology believes it can "play," like a cheap harmonica, most any "Wog," or "DB," and to a true believing Scientologist, anyone who rejects Scientology is a DB, or an SP.

 

[Case]

I'll take up your challenge and I promise not to use the things you don't want critics to use.

If you can't see that a legitimate analysis of the tech would not include information about the church or LRH, then you shouldn't even bother to attempt to honestly criticize the tech. It's not a matter of what I want, it's a matter of valid criticism. Can you see that the tech should be criticized on its own merits and shortcomings, not on LRH's shortcomings or the CofS'?

I'll even try to use Scn tech to explain why Scn can be dangerous. Well, I wouldn't use the word "dangerous", that was Zinj's word and Zinj is available to answer if he wishes.

So I'll explain why it can be harmful and more often than that, why it can ultimately lead to a dead-end.

It starts off pretty good in attempting to raise a PC's ability. It concentrates on help and being in "present time". Relieving painful memories of the past seems to work pretty well. The grades give real tangible results that PCs often demonstrate in their lives.

Agreed.

BUT the tech (processing and training) has another thread running all the way through it. It controls the PCs attention into dictionaries, the person sitting opposite, a book, a bottle, an ashtray, an auditor's words, their own "reactive minds", etc. It is all control of attention, control by another.

So you think dictionaries shouldn't be looked up to understand the meaning of a word?

This is other-determinism, not self-determinism. This is putting the PC at effect of external causes. Training controls the person's attention and controls how the person views life by repetition of simplified explanations (KSW for example).

So on the one hand you think auditing the lower bridge is good because it gives people "real tangible results", but then you think the fact that ones attention is focused on something, you imply it's negative. You think that the other-determinism is a negative. Fair enough. If you look at the lower part of the Rons Org bridge (Start to OT 8) you will see that handling other-determinism is the first phase of auditing as per the bridge.

http://www.freezone.org/images/e_bridge.pdf
http://www.arovast.co.uk/bridge.htm

This is interlaced with "wins" from the subjects addressed. Relief from past pain, improved "hereness", comm/problem, releases. Relief from hostlities and upsets and the compulsion to be right. All pretty good stuff for a lot of people. These "wins" make the person want more wins, but they are only allowed to get these if they hand over control of their attention and thoughts to others who are the source of these future wins.

This is a bit vague. Can you clarify what this has to with the bridge. Your implicating something do with LRH?

The PC or student is now stuck between wanting wins (which their attention has been directed, by repetition, to believing are only available from Scn) and being effect.

Can you describe the mechanics of how this is so. It's under-developed as a theory as it stands.

Nothing wrong with being effect, as I've discussed. But, in Scn, the PC/student is extremely limited over what he/she can be at cause over. So he is in a double-whammy. Whammy one: Wanting what he believes he lacks and only Scn can provide, and whammy two: hardly allowed to be cause any more.

Again a bit vague. Can you give more detail?

He is stuck in the effect side of the Illusion called life, that Scn promises to free him from.

I agree that the bridge is to a large degree about as-ising other-determinism, as can be seen from dianetics, the composite case etc. The O/W level is one exception, and so is some objectives and stuff from The Creation of Human Ability.

Once he has demonstrated that he will allow Scn tech to control his thoughts and behaviour he is allowed onto the secret, dangerous levels that will put him "at cause".

But Scn itself has put him "at effect" and now the win that he wants more than anything else is to no longer be "at effect". This is a goal that has been implanted in him by Scn auditing and training, which is what put him at effect in the first place!

I disagree here. The data I learnt in scientology has helped me become more at cause in life. I have been able to un-hypnotize myself from at lot of the crap that goes on in life on this planet through using scientology tech.

Your viewpoint is shared by this guys, who thinks that scientology is an implant!

http://larabell.org/ultimate.html

Now the Pre-OT has a false goal to be "at cause".

Why is being at cause a false goal?

An impossible goal whilever he resists being at effect. He has now been taught that effect (except Scn effect) is "bad". He has been taught that cause (except cause over Scn) is "good".

I tend to disagree here. Being cause over scientology, being able to think with and use the tech is paramount to success with the subject. GAT is something that aims to take that away.

This even violates Scientology's own axioms, but the tech in application has very little to do with the axioms of its own subject.

I disagree. I think the processes align with the axioms.

The Pr-OT is now whammied with the biggest Auditor's Code break of all and is told what causes he is at effect of! This is the ultimate attention directing putting of him at effect that the tech implants into him.

So while you agree dianetics and scientology is beneficial (largely because it removes the effects of implants from the PC), you believe that ultimately Scientology tech is another implant...

...Ive never heard of an implant that frees you from previous implants and then implants you again...

The poor Pre-OT is now stuck. This is the dead-end fate that awaits all students of Scn who persist with the auditing and training. Some are "harmed" and leave in a hurt and sad state with their idealism betrayed. Some stay around and worry away at this whole cause/effect stuff. They sometimes have wins, sometimes wonderful ones, but these just further stick them to this cause/effect GPM game.

The technical truth is the Pre-OT is the effect of nothing, except what he has had his attention directed into believing he is the effect of!

What about the effect of being in a body living endless lives as bodies (with the "effect liabilities" that entails), before one even gets into scientology. I personally always had trouble with my body and knew that before scientology. Scientology offers a way out of being effect of the body, the GE, the MEST universe and other universes - back to static. The way out is the way through.

Thank you for having a stab at criticizing the tech based on the merits of the tech.

 

[lionheart]

"Case" is using the word "tech" as a red herring, to distract from the subject of Scientology, which simultaneuously is the tech, yet is not the tech, yet is not Scientology, yet is.

Supposedly "The Tech" is only "training and auditing," along the "Bridge." Which "Bridge"? The Scientology Bridge. Mmm...

What about "Ethics" and "Ethics tech"? Well, "Case" refers to "97.5%" of those receiving services in the "Church" of Scientology deriving benefit - "97.5"%"? That sounds familiar. Is that "The Tech"? That's Scientology "Ethics tech," with its SP Doctrine. But wait, that's not part of the "Tech" is it?, or is it?

And then here comes the spirited defense of Xenu, Incident One and Incident Two, in all its pill and Rum and injected cocaine-glory (biographical details of Hubbard, but, hey, that's not relevant, since that's not 'The Tech."). What have been the results of OT 2 and OT 3? Did these serve as a central pillar of the Hubbardian mind f--k, using e-meters to manipulate, telling people the contents of their own minds and space, with a little actual auditing wrapped around it, to establish a nice mix. And letting the person know how important this is to his/her "Survival," and making sure they had a "win," some where along the way.

Yep. And the results are? "Freedom from overwhelm," or "Overcame the final barrier to Full OT"? This is what people were (are) told that allowed them to open their minds to this bad science fiction. Well, the results don't compensate for the mind f--k. It's a bad trade off.

But is Xenu, etc. part of "The Tech"? Apparently so.

But wait, "Case" has used the word, "Eternity," and in the fashion used by Hubbard when he was trying to scare people, so is that "The Tech" too, or is that "LRH," or is that "Cosmology," etc.

The bottom line: Scientology's founder lied to Scientologists, and Scientology has been covering its ass in every possible way to "handle" that, while denying it - in other words, while still lying, while still attempting to manipulate.

Same old same old.

Scientology believes it can "play," like a cheap harmonica, most any "Wog," or "DB," and to a true believing Scientologist, anyone who rejects Scientology is a DB, or an SP.

Veda, your response was a masterful rebuttal of his illogical argument.

 

[Pierrot]

I used to reward regs with my money for the shear asthetics of their performance sometimes.

Its a thing to be admired, that ability to move a persons viewpoint around like the good regs do.

Sometimes being at effect is just as good an experience as being at cause.

A real sense of the ethics is of course key...

alex

Sense of ethics, yes, and knowledge of the rules of the game one is playing in. The first week I was staff I noticed I was being at the effect point, as all the staffs knew policies, bulletins, ... , I had no clue about.

Then I was posted as the bookstore officer. So I sold books, and read them ALL while on post. Shortly I was told that as I was selling more books than others were making GI, groos income, I was invited to be the Reg. It was FUN, real fun - especially that before coming into Scn I was sort of clueless about the subject of money.

But while being a Reg, I already knew the policies, the rules of the game. Actually my CO had tough time with me, as I was upstat, for months and months - but refused completely and utterly all the dev-t and bizarre things. Finally - I was "removed" from post, even though upstat. It was about the time I was suggested to make people borrow money for their services, and I didn't comply, pointing at the never "borrow" policy. All people I regged when met later on had a smile and said "thank you for all". It was fun...

I cannot relate to the "pc being at the effect point" discussed in this thread. Actually already in the first book, Dianetics, one should run the session after erasing an engram, so as to run out all auditors influence on the session, to be sure the pc is at cause.

Maybe that tradition was lost, however I found beneficial to run out all the Bridge, all the Scn track, when through with it. It "dissapears" actually better when auditing processes are applied on the auditing/Scn track, than with other techniques.

And it dissapears well when one finds the basic and the earlier beginning of that basic. I have yet to find an incident where the pc is not at the cause point in the basic or earlier beginning...

Bea's thread "what got you in, what made you stay?" is also very enlightening ... ;-)

 

[alex]

Sense of ethics, yes, and knowledge of the rules of the game one is playing in. The first week I was staff I noticed I was being at the effect point, as all the staffs knew policies, bulletins, ... , I had no clue about.

Then I was posted as the bookstore officer. So I sold books, and read them ALL while on post. Shortly I was told that as I was selling more books than others were making GI, groos income, I was invited to be the Reg. It was FUN, real fun - especially that before coming into Scn I was sort of clueless about the subject of money.

But while being a Reg, I already knew the policies, the rules of the game. Actually my CO had tough time with me, as I was upstat, for months and months - but refused completely and utterly all the dev-t and bizarre things. Finally - I was "removed" from post, even though upstat. It was about the time I was suggested to make people borrow money for their services, and I didn't comply, pointing at the never "borrow" policy. All people I regged when met later on had a smile and said "thank you for all". It was fun...

I cannot relate to the "pc being at the effect point" discussed in this thread. Actually already in the first book, Dianetics, one should run the session after erasing an engram, so as to run out all auditors influence on the session, to be sure the pc is at cause.

Maybe that tradition was lost, however I found beneficial to run out all the Bridge, all the Scn track, when through with it. It "dissapears" actually better when auditing processes are applied on the auditing/Scn track, than with other techniques.

And it dissapears well when one finds the basic and the earlier beginning of that basic. I have yet to find an incident where the pc is not at the cause point in the basic or earlier beginning...

Bea's thread "what got you in, what made you stay?" is also very enlightening ... ;-)

Well scientology would run pretty smoothly if is was all being done by fully self aware, wise and altruistic individuals for the purpose of sharing those states with others, but its not. Its to some degree the blind leading the blind, groping for the exit in a dark room full of closet doors. And when the exit is found it is just to another room anyway.

Me, I'll just stay in the room and pinch the cute girls butts. I know whats out the door already.

One of these days someone is going to turn the lights on and the nifty tools lying around the room will be of use.

alex

 

[lionheart]

Thanks for the good reply.

If you can't see that a legitimate analysis of the tech would not include information about the church or LRH, then you shouldn't even bother to attempt to honestly criticize the tech. It's not a matter of what I want, it's a matter of valid criticism. Can you see that the tech should be criticized on its own merits and shortcomings, not on LRH's shortcomings or the CofS'?

I accepted your premiss and your challenge and did my analysis without any criticism of LRH or the Church

Agreed.

So you think dictionaries shouldn't be looked up to understand the meaning of a word?

Dictionaries have their uses but the tech uses it so intensively that it becomes another attention controlling mechanism. Did you never see students wading through strings of definitions for days on end?

The tech uses mutliple reasons for comm lags, depending on the context. If it wants to imply "case" it says that is the cause of a comm lag. If it want's to fixate someone's attention onto words it uses the m/u as the reason for a comm lag.

The truth is there are millions of reasons for a comm lag. The tech uses it as weapon to control the pc/students attention

So on the one hand you think auditing the lower bridge is good because it gives people "real tangible results", but then you think the fact that ones attention is focused on something, you imply it's negative. You think that the other-determinism is a negative. Fair enough. If you look at the lower part of the Rons Org bridge (Start to OT 8) you will see that handling other-determinism is the first phase of auditing as per the bridge.

http://www.freezone.org/images/e_bridge.pdf
http://www.arovast.co.uk/bridge.htm

I think I explained that the results/wins are interlaced with this other aspect of controlling attention and making effect. The two things co-exist perfectly well when the tech is applied. I didn't say other-determinism was a negative. I said emphasis on being effect is the result of the tech and that is an artificially indiced inbalance brought about by application of the tech.

I knew Captain Bill when he was a Sea Org thug, so my opinion of him is not a good one. His "tech" is not Scn tech and is the product of insanity. I thought we were talking about Scn "tech" and that we were not to introduce other factors like LRH or CofS. Now it seems you may be talking about someone else's "tech", and you have introduced someone into your equation, so you'll have to forgive me if I refer to the "source" of your squirrel tech as an insane thug.

This is a bit vague. Can you clarify what this has to with the bridge. Your implicating something do with LRH?

No, I'm not. The "bridge", as you call it is delivered by people who apply the tech, whoever they are. The tech does not allow you to apply the tech yourself, until you have proved compliant suggestibility. Self-auditing is squirrelling and the PC is not allowed by the tech to get the promised wins unless they think the right thoughts and let the appliers of the tech direct their attention where the tech says it should be directed. This absolute control by others and is an intrinsic part of the tech.

Can you describe the mechanics of how this is so. It's under-developed as a theory as it stands.

The repetition of the idea that scn tech is the only source of the wins is through all of the tech training materials that both PC and student study. KSW is just one example. By repeated repetition of this idea, the PC is led to believe that scn tech is the only thing that can give him the wins he wants and restore his causation. But he will only get these wins if he continues to put himself at effect of the tech. This is a contradiction, an impossible conundrum.

Again a bit vague. Can you give more detail?

No, it's perfectly clear and doesn't need re-explaining.

I agree that the bridge is to a large degree about as-ising other-determinism, as can be seen from dianetics, the composite case etc. The O/W level is one exception, and so is some objectives and stuff from The Creation of Human Ability.

The "bridge", I prefer to use "tech", does not as-is other determinism! It says it does, while all the time making the PC more and more other-determined (tech-determined as I've already described). The tech tells the PC what to believe, what is the cause of their "case", even that they have a "case"! These concepts are completely other-determined and the tech does not as-is its own influence.

I disagree here. The data I learnt in scientology has helped me become more at cause in life. I have been able to un-hypnotize myself from at lot of the crap that goes on in life on this planet through using scientology tech.

Your viewpoint is shared by this guys, who thinks that scientology is an implant!

http://larabell.org/ultimate.html

I'm glad. Now try letting go of every Scn concept that the tech has given you. It is a bit scary at first, but I mean it. Try. You want to be at cause in life, well that includes tech concepts that you have adopted. Let them go. Allow the opposite concept to be true for a while, you have nothing to lose except some other-determined ideas. Discover your own truths not what the tech has told you is true.

The reference you gave me is full of other-determined ideas from a particular individual. I thought we were keeping particular practitioners and groups out of this?

Why is being at cause a false goal?

Because the Pre-OT already is at cause and is at effect and neither. The tech's axioms state this but the tech ignores its axioms. The tech gives the Pre-OT a false, unachievable goal.

I tend to disagree here. Being cause over scientology, being able to think with and use the tech is paramount to success with the subject. GAT is something that aims to take that away.

Great!

I disagree. I think the processes align with the axioms.

Well study the axioms again and the tech and see how the tech alligns with the axioms and how it mis-alligns witht the axioms. That's all I can suggest.

So while you agree dianetics and scientology is beneficial (largely because it removes the effects of implants from the PC), you believe that ultimately Scientology tech is another implant...

...Ive never heard of an implant that frees you from previous implants and then implants you again...

I never said Dn and Scn tech removes the effects of implants. I believe the tech says that, but I don't and didn't say that. I said the confidential parts of the tech break the Auditor's Code. An implant is another-determined idea that the PC believes is true. During Scn tech application the PC is put under this stress that I have described of wanting "wins" that the tech says only the tech can give him so long as he accepts the tech absolutely. The tech then tells him what has caused his "case". Looks like a tech definition of an implant to me!

What about the effect of being in a body living endless lives as bodies (with the "effect liabilities" that entails), before one even gets into scientology. I personally always had trouble with my body and knew that before scientology. Scientology offers a way out of being effect of the body, the GE, the MEST universe and other universes - back to static. The way out is the way through.

The tech has told you all that. It is not a self-discovered truth. It is a taught truth. Taught to you by the tech!

Thank you for having a stab at criticizing the tech based on the merits of the tech.

You are welcome but your description of my words as a "stab" is a little dismissive. And my critique of the tech was not based upon the "merits" of the tech. You have put words in my mouth. My critique is based upon the liabilities of the tech.

I won't explain or clarify further. I have said all that is required and fulfilled your challenge.

 

[alex]

Cool! My point of departure is where LRH tells you what cause you are the effect of (the dangerous, they will affect you terribly if misused, "confidential" levels) At that point the Scn tech has got your attention well and truly under its control, not your control and you are an implanted scientologist.

The lower grades and training are used by the "tech" as a grooming for this to see how compliant you have become and how suggestible you are.

The lower levels have great merit, but throw away the dictionaries, the clay, the ashtray, the book and the bottle. Ask the PC what he wants to have handled, only run that and don't eval or inval and get the PC to the point where he can release charge himself without an auditor as soon as possible. Then you have the makings of some good tech.

I certainly see the "tech" that I did as an incremental or transitional step towards other sytems of spiritual enlightenment. I reject Scn's description of "ability" as defined by OT. It is juvenile nonsense and belies a poor understanding of the nature of existence.

While I fully support the notion of running the "interest", sometimes an exterior viewpoint as to what one could be interested in can be valuable.

I look to people with experiences other than mine to provide opportunities for interest.

A spiritual process that only runs what the person is interested in, rather that what folks who have advanced insight might suggest, would tend to just improve the persons present condition rather than open new vistas...

There is some need for gurus.....if they really know something I dont or can point at things I may not have noticed.

I see scientology and related things as an attempt to venture beyond where we are rather than just fix where we are.

I appreciate the well crafted occasional "evaluation".

alex

 

[Case]

The bottom line: Scientology's founder lied to Scientologists, and Scientology has been covering its ass in every possible way to "handle" that, while denying it - in other words, while still lying, while still attempting to manipulate.

I've read enough sales letters to know that "the bottomline" is a phrase often used to persuade someone on something in a very definite way.

Veda, you make generalized statements to persuade others of your viewpoint. Try a more balanced approach. Otherwise the game becomes a "lets jump the bandwagon of a generalized datum" type of thing, whether its "psychiatry is evil", or "scientology is destructive"...

I have only asked that people differentiate between the tech, the cofs and LRH. You reply by saying that its a red herring. You obviously want to view the whole situation from a more generalized viewpoint, and you want others to do the same. I would like others to make more exacting statements rather than "scientology is lie" type generalizations.

The CofS encourages one to hand over ones analytical mind to them. Thinking in generalities is a sign that one never took back ones analytical mind when one left the CofS...

Instead one just changed "generalities viewpoint" from anti-psychiatry/anti-sp to anti-scientology.