Okay, let’s say that this is the correct quote.
A statement that “you (in general) could be the storm or the sunset” is not the same as
a promise that says, “You Mr. Mostlylurker will be the storm or the sunset.”
Further, I wonder in what way you duplicate this sentence and what is your idea of being the storm or the sunset.
Do you have the idea that you would be able like a kind of allmighty God to be total cause over the sunset in this material universe?
That’s an interesting idea.
But what about all the others who would gain this ability too?
Perhaps you, being an allmighty God would like to have a sunset in the west, but another allmighty God would like to have a sunset in the east.
Are you telling me that you believed this and that you were disappointed because it didn’t happen?
When I was very young I was a Christian and I loved to discuss topics of the Bible with Jehova Witnesses.
At that time I learned that people could have a very different line of thinking and duplicating.
Neither them or me was always totally right or wrong, but we sure had a different way of looking at the Bible.
It seems that you are very disappointed about the Scientology philosophy itself.
I understand that.
Just take into account that others can have a different way of looking at the stuff and are very happy with it.
A major problem with "the philosophy" is that Hubbard wove nasty, evil, and destructive ideas directly into "the philosophy".
I have said it before and I will say it again. Support of "the philosophy" is FAR TOO GENERAL of a statement. So, you say that you are "happy with" the philosopy. Hubbard wrote the idea of disconnection into his philosophy, AND the list of suppressive acts clearly includes the that ANYONE who finds fault with Scn management or Hubbard is guilty of a suppressive act. Are you "happy" with THAT part of the philosophy?
Hubbard stated that enemies should be tricked, lied to and even hurt. Are you "happy" with THAT part of the philosophy?
Hubbard wrote that critics (whether stating facts or not) should be "handled" with overwhelming lawsuits or noisy investigations. Are you "happy" with THAT part of the philosophy?
Hubbard wrote the drill on ruin-finding as very effective way to "get people in", yet it is based on extreme manipulative use of "ARC". Are you "happy" with THAT part of the philosophy??
The philosophy ITSELF contains MANY negative, erroneous and even quite despicable "ideas". Are you "happy" with all of those?
My point is simply that your statement really says nothing, unless you clearly spell out what parts you are keeping and supporting, and what parts you are tossing away.
And, yes, I mostly agree with everything else that you said. Though possibly you under-estimate just how closely interwoven the "philosophy" is with the "practice" (just as it was carefully designed by Hubbard), and how difficult it can be for any person to separate the two in their minds after having been the effect of and seen a great deal of really nutty behavior by many "Scientologists" (people who also are VERY "happy" with the philosophy) over many many years.
My viewpoint when I walked in was this:
I could see that these people and this group were pushing various ideas HARD. Through promo, through briefings, through events, through musters, through graduation, through success stories, etc. These ideas were always based directly on Hubbard's IDEAS. As in ANY part of life, it can be difficult to distinguish what is "true" and what is BS. My attitude was to try it out and see what happened.
The problem, of course being that THIS is what Hubbard wanted. He designed the "philosophy" in a way that would slowly (gradiently) ensnare ANY person who started along his "bridge". These many mechanisms are clearly explained in his "philosophy" as delineated in the OEC volumes. KSW is a KEY part of the "philosophy". It doesn't leave much room for "tempering", unless you "pick and choose" - something the KSW issue itself forbids.
Having to spend (and lose) ten or twenty years of ones life is a high price to have to pay to finally discover, "oh, the philosophy has some great stuff but the organization really screws with people". The key is that Hubbard
intentionally designed it THAT WAY! His "philosophy" contains the notion that ONLY Scientology provides a "way out", and that "
anything can and should be done to get and keep these
reactive humanoids on the Bridge".
To most of the world, Scientology IS the
Church of Scientology and NOT some vague wishy-washy notion of "the philosophy".
But, I dont care if somebody wants to audit a few processes from TCOHA or do a few condition formulas in a very relaxed, UNORGANIZED context. When it comes down to it, it is largely Hubbard's clearly spelled-out "philosophy" about
Scientology organizations,
KSW and
the vital necessity of expansion that cause the majority of the "trouble".
+++++++++++++