Would it be better if Scientology never happened? (poll)

[lionheart]

A LOT.

As a 'recently left person', spending a lot of time on this message board, and having just finished Messiah or Madman, I've only started to look at these things. Realising just how much tech isn't actually Scientology, once I allowed myself the freedom to actually look at it. By that I mean, how much Hubbard said one thing but another results. Heavy ethics. Rewards and penalties. Scientology justice. Criticism and the concept of overts and withholds. etc.

I'm not actually sure anymore what are core-Scientology principles, but what attracted me to it in the first place, was the concept of spiritual 'enlightenment'. The ability to improve oneself, emotionally, mentally, spiritually. And, apparently, a tech by which to do it.

So when I look at the concepts one by one, I don't actually see this anymore (the ability to obtain spiritual enlightenment). Not sure how I saw it in the first place.

Yes, it is startling to realise how much we mis-saw isn't it!

A concept that has resulted in a lot of flack being directed at me in the past, but one which I think is worth newly-outs looking at is the concept of "suggestion".

For me the "how" of what Ron did was largely explained once I understood the concept of "suggestion" and how easily one can be tricked by it. Here in the UK there is a master of "suggestion" called Derren Brown. His TV programs show you how easy a tool it can be and for some ex-scns it explains well what Ron did. I think his videos are on You-Tube if you are not in the UK.

 

[Escalus]

That's an excellent point, and a question I'm still asking myself. How did we see it in the first place, what was it we actually saw, and at what point did we actually give ourselves over so to speak. Was it something we read? Was it all fear based? Pressure from the group? Not wanting to be the only one who didn't see it? Like the emperor and his clothes? Who knows, but for sure, I feel personaly that the more 'searching' for these answers I do the more confused I become, I feel that reading other people's stories and doing your own reading, and of course talking with others that have been there on here, things will come to you when they're meant to.

Perhaps is was just all a game we played with ourselves. Perhaps we were too aware to begin with and got ourselves hypnotized to the hilt and now the job is to undo it all. And why did we feel we needed to get involved in the first place even though they did pertain to have all the answers, when deep down all we had to do was look inside. So many questions.. so little time.. live for the moment that's all I can do now.. well at least try to..

I think it starts with an honest intellectual curiosity and an open mind. Everyone I knew wondered about the nature of existence, life, life after death, all those kinds of things. I think people who go into Scientology are usually more inquisitive and - dare I say - more natively intelligent than a lot of folks. They (we) had questions. We'd noticed things, observed things. Wondered if there was "more to it" than just what we saw on an everyday basis.

And the gains at the front end of Scientology are small and predictable. It runs on constant affirmation by your peers and a sense of "getting there" once you get further along.

Until it turns into you telling yourself things are happening when they are not.

In the immortal words of jason Beghe; "show me a fuckin Clear."

 

[lionheart]

Ok, only ten more years to go then..

Well there was no internet back then to speed up the information-flow!

But as someone once said, it takes as long as it takes!

The journey is wonderful! Savour it and do not yearn for an imagined tomorrow!

But, actually it doesn't matter how long it takes. Time is a mirage. there is only Now. And you will see all is well and realise that it always was and you are free!

 

[Pixie]

Yes, it is startling to realise how much we mis-saw isn't it!

A concept that has resulted in a lot of flack being directed at me in the past, but one which I think is worth newly-outs looking at is the concept of "suggestion".

For me the "how" of what Ron did was largely explained once I understood the concept of "suggestion" and how easily one can be tricked by it. Here in the UK there is a master of "suggestion" called Derren Brown. His TV programs show you how easy a tool it can be and for some ex-scns it explains well what Ron did. I think his videos are on You-Tube if you are not in the UK.

Yes, Derren Browne, I bought his book a year ago but couldn't read it, it was although he was quickly trying to make me 'think', or 'unbelieve' everything I was believing at the time. He's on tonight on Channel 4. He's brilliant, I love him, and sexy too Perhaps I ought to get that book out of cobwebs again. Suggestion is definatly a lot of what it is I agree for certain. And of course some people are a lot more 'suggestable' than others. Mmm.. much food for thought today.. good post as always Lionheart.

 

[Zinjifar]

Ok, only ten more years to go then..

Just as an observation, by someone who's watched people 'getting out' and 'out from under' for about 15 years now, the recovery can be surprisingly quick, or, never-ending.

The primary factor in which it'll be seems (to me) to be a question of how deeply the initial 'break' goes.

As a generalization; people who very quickly dump *everything* may spend some time digging through the rubble finding elements (the baby) they choose to reclaim, but also get rid of many of the 'poison pills' of Scientology Thought more quickly, allowing a more complete 'fresh start'.

This contrasted with those who more conservatively inspect and reject bits and pieces of the chains; removing them a piece at a time.

Those people seem to reach a long series of 'plateaus' where the 'unindoctrination' is declared 'complete', with a 'So far and no further!' attitude.

It's an understandable process, for someone who has adopted Scientology belief systems as the fullness of 'his own', since the loss is far more personally perceived than someone rejecting the entire kit and kaboodle as an 'external implant'.

There's no such thing as 'unindoctrination', although 'indoctrination' itself can be seen or recognized as a fairly clear cut process.

Unindoctrination is instead a long process that is possibly never over, although, there are stages where it seems to be 'complete'.

It's exactly these stages that make the process so interminable, because the 'indoc' itself is perceived as being 'owned' and 'personal' and something that needs defending and protecting.

Zinj

 

[Pixie]

Well there was no internet back then to speed up the information-flow!

But as someone once said, it takes as long as it takes!

The journey is wonderful! Savour it and do not yearn for a imagined tomorrow!

But, actually it doesn't matter how long it takes. Time is a mirage. there is only Now. And you will see all is well and realise that it always was and you are free!

I'm speechless.. You're hitting cords with me here all over the place here! Scaaaaaary..

Excellent way of putting it.. I think we should all just shut up now and let Lionheart just do all the postings and we can just all lie back, munch on our popcorn, gulp down our coffee and let him release us all from our burndens

 

[Pixie]

Just as an observation, by someone who's watched people 'getting out' and 'out from under' for about 15 years now, the recovery can be surprisingly quick, or, never-ending.

The primary factor in which it'll be seems (to me) to be a question of how deeply the initial 'break' goes.

As a generalization; people who very quickly dump *everything* may spend some time digging through the rubble finding elements (the baby) they choose to reclaim, but also get rid of many of the 'poison pills' of Scientology Thought more quickly, allowing a more complete 'fresh start'.

This contrasted with those who more conservatively inspect and reject bits and pieces of the chains; removing them a piece at a time.

Those people seem to reach a long series of 'plateaus' where the 'unindoctrination' is declared 'complete', with a 'So far and no further!' attitude.

It's an understandable process, for someone who has adopted Scientology belief systems as the fullness of 'his own', since the loss is far more personally perceived than someone rejecting the entire kit and kaboodle as an 'external implant'.

There's no such thing as 'unindoctrination', although 'indoctrination' itself can be seen or recognized as a fairly clear cut process.

Unindoctrination is instead a long process that is possibly never over, although, there are stages where it seems to be 'complete'.

It's exactly these stages that make the process so interminable, because the 'indoc' itself is perceived as being 'owned' and 'personal' and something that needs defending and protecting.

Zinj

Very enlightening post Zinj, much food for thought here too. I think I get the concept of what you're saying here, yes... mm.. but I can't yet put it into words.. well certainly not as eloquently as you that's for sure Thanks for that.

 

[Pixie]

I think it starts with an honest intellectual curiosity and an open mind. Everyone I knew wondered about the nature of existence, life, life after death, all those kinds of things. I think people who go into Scientology are usually more inquisitive and - dare I say - more natively intelligent than a lot of folks. They (we) had questions. We'd noticed things, observed things. Wondered if there was "more to it" than just what we saw on an everyday basis.

And the gains at the front end of Scientology are small and predictable. It runs on constant affirmation by your peers and a sense of "getting there" once you get further along.

Until it turns into you telling yourself things are happening when they are not.

In the immortal words of jason Beghe; "show me a fuckin Clear."

Yeh, good one Escalus, that makes a lot of sense, we were more curious for sure. Yes, I'd forgotten about the 'getting there' bit, they used that a heck of a lot didn't they, and the 'there' they talked about was already bloomin' well here!! Lionheart's right though about the 'suggestion', there was a LOT of suggestion going on, certain 'wins' and 'EP's' were expected, and you were sometimes scared incase you didn't get them cos if you didn't get them you knew you were in for yet another sec check to clean up your 'crimes'. Ugh! So in the end, you just sometimes gave them what they wanted to hear. Oh god .. just remembered, well ain't that the truth, and how disgusting, and how low did we go to do that, and all to try to stay out of trouble. One sup I had on KTL used to haul me in on a daily basis to ask me what my crimes were, it ruined KTL for me completely, she just took a disliking to me so I couldn't concentrate on that course at all. My 'KTL' was the beginning of a rocky road to hell. That's when everything really fell apart. So much compromise, I shoud have told her to fuck off and to hell with the consequences, I should have just got up and walked out, but then, how does one get passed all that security? I still feel physically sick when I think about that particular time.. anyway.. no room for waffles on this thread, I guess that's for another one..

 

[Pixie]

School did a great deal of damage. I used to be able to add columns of numbers in my head, but school required that it all be written out longhand their way. This broke a built-in skill that is now lost to me. I am personally stunned at the simplicity of certain problems for which I have to use the calculator. I can't blame $cn alone for this loss, the damage was already evident in high school.

I had the same innate skill to be able to read legalese (which is designed to confuse). I had the ability to put that sub-sub-subclause "on hold" and connecting the bits back up, as I got to the end of the sentence/paragraph.

I do, however, blame $cn for locking me up in my own self-importance so thoroughly that I still have to be the one who says "To hell with this," and gets in and fixes it. While I still have some computer stills left, they are reserved for a very select group of people. Anyone else asks me to do something: $80 per hour from my front door and back again.

Typography is about all I have left, and that was self-taught. To say that all criticism of the "church" stems from bitterness is prbably very accurate. When people realize how much they've lost, personally, emotionally, financially, they've earned the right to feel bitter.

I remember a story about a farmer losing eggs. It was his usual practice to put a china egg on the outside of the chicken wire, and another on the inside. The slow witted snake would swallow the egg on the outside, stick its front half through the wire, and swallow the second egg--snake immobilized and easily killed by the farmer next morning. Cut the snake open, and return the fake eggs to their trap positions...

No snakes were being caught, and yet eggs were still disappearing, so the farmer had to resort to poison, and some of the poison must have been misplaced because the family dog died. A little later on, the famer commented that eggs weren't disappearring any more, and one of the kids says, oh I remember Fido eating eggs...

The farmer promptly went outside, dug up the dead dog, and shot it!

Similarly, there are times when I would like the reconstituted remains of lrh's body laying in front of me just so I could give him a good hard kick, but somehow I don't think I would find it as satisfying.

That's so true, school was possibly where we learned first to 'do as we are told' wheather it was right or wrong. This was the first part of life's indoctrination into a totalitarian type reigeme. Sure, well all went to school with inbuilt skills and they were stomped on and crushed, we were invalidated and evaluated for from the start. It's a mad mad world. And indeed we did earn a right to be bitter, but I still say the bitterness is more with the self for putting up with their shit dirt treatment in the first place.

 

[lionheart]

I'm speechless.. You're hitting cords with me here all over the place here! Scaaaaaary..

Excellent way of putting it.. I think we should all just shut up now and let Lionheart just do all the postings and we can just all lie back, munch on our popcorn, gulp down our coffee and let him release us all from our burndens

That post is guaranteed to shut me up much more than a pro-scn poster ever could!

I'm psyching myself up for some Derren magic tonight! I hope this series is better than the last one.

By the way, when he does the "Trick or Treat" card at the start of the programme, turn you head upside down and read the card while he reads what it is to the "victim"!

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Perhaps, but is it to be processed on the internet?

Thin Veneer, or whatever his/her name is, seems to be a flaming hypocrite relative to the discussion here. Is he/she the only one around here who is allowed to make an evaluation of someone? I mean wtf?

The funny thing is when we used to come across people like this on staff the "handling" would be to get them out of the public area and scream "QUIT RUNNING THAT ON ME, ASSHOLE" two inches from their face so they could "duplicate" it.

I've known Vinaire a while. Nice guy, but he sometimes does kind of process critics. I can relate to that- being a bit judgemental myself.

The thing is, a lot of people on the forums do that. I've seen a lot of critics do that. They make value judgments, they evaluate, etc.

I'd suggest just telling Vinaire that you aren't really down with all that and that you prefer to keep the discussion academic. Or your own words to that effect.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

True. But "sometimes" doesn't equal always. Yet pro-scns regularly put-down scn criticism as being or stemming from bitterness. This tends to happen on ESMB as a final put-down when the critic doesn't stop being critical. I tend to point out the use of this Hubbard-esque evaluation of criticism when a pro-scn resorts to it.

Vin appeared to be doing this, which is why I picked him up on his generalisation.

This is a discussion board, so surely it is a forum for critical discussion? Scientologists seem to have some difficulty with criticism, which is hardly surprising since Hubbard taught us all to have an intolerant attitude to criticism while we were in his cult.

That's a generalization. They don't all do that. I don't. I've often said that I think criticism is healthy. I can think of a number of pro Scn contributors who don't do it or don't do it all the time.

And if it's Hubbardesque then why, oh why, do so many critics spend so much time on forums telling Scn'ists that they (the Scn'ists) are doing this or that because of Scn and so forth.

It's probably not a good idea to lay that on anybody and believe me, it's not the type of comment that only comes from the "pro Scn" side.