Now and then the discussion crops up of what L. Ron Hubbard really contributed of value to the world. Like with most Scientology discussions, the debaters tend to fall pretty squarely into two camps. This polarizing is sometimes puzzling or seems right out weird for those not so familiar with the subject and its history. Hell, it still puzzles me.
I would like to see if we can have a level-headed discussion to try to sift out Hubbard’s groundbreaking contributions, if any.
There is no doubt that the man was a prolific writer with some 65 million words of non-fiction and around 500 novels and short stories published. He covered a great many fields from religion, spirituality and enlightenment to mental therapy, organizational philosophy, family therapy, study technology, physics, photography, ethics, justice, politics, history, electronics, human behavior and evaluation, communication and much more. According to Wikipedia; “Hubbard is the Guinness World Record holder for the most published author, with 1,084 works, most translated book (70 languages for The Way to Happiness) and most audiobooks (185 as of April 2009)“. In addition to being a writer, he was a navy officer, an organizational leader, photographer, explorer – a prominent contributor in many fields.
What do you see as his greatest gifts to mankind?
Geir Isene - uncut 
Hubbard is the Guinness World Record holder for the most published author, with 1,084 works, most translated book (70 languages for The Way to Happiness) and most audiobooks (185 as of April 2009)
The main way that all the HCOBs and HCOPLs were written was for a staff member to write them and for L Ron Hubbard to approve and then publish them. This used to be plainly evident in the original versions of the HCOPLs and HCOBs, with “assisted by CS6” and other attributions made at the bottom. Those attributions were all taken out in the late 80’s, which was when the Church started going after Guinness Book of World Records for PR reasons, as well. so Ron didn’t actually write all the HCOBs and HCOPLs. He actually wrote very few, in fact.
Also, the Guinness designation of “most translated” means something when a publishing house is willing to translate your book into another language. It means they believe you will have a large readership in that language and are willing to take the risk of paying for your book to be translated into the other language and selling it. With Scientology, most all the translations are done by Scientologists for free, and the Way to Happiness book is distributed for free as well.
So when you compare an author like John Grisham to L Ron Hubbard, you are not comparing the same accomplishments.
Hubbard also made a lot of speeches at congresses, which were a large source of income for him. He had the foresight to tape each one, so he could sell the tapes later. Each tape and its transcript is being counted in the tally above. And they have all been produced and published by Golden Era Studios using Sea Org free labor.
Hubbard definitely wrote a lot and he talked a lot, and he got a lot of people to help him make money for himself, working for free. In other words, as an author, he had a real cult following. But these accomplishments are not what they seem when compared to other authors who published simply as authors, and not as leaders of a group of followers who worked for free and felt it would save the world if everyone was amazed at their leaders’ stats as a writer.
Having said all that above, if there is one area where Hubbard was very successful, if not “groundbreaking”, it was in being a writer.
In the 40’s and 50’s, for a writer to write and sell a bunch of books under the same brand, under “Dianetics” and then “Scientology”, was very unique, cutting edge, and wildly successful.
And each move he made as a writer, from creating a group of devoted fans who would literally do anything for him, to starting his own publishing house and getting them to work there, to writing and making his own films, each one of these moves was very advanced and successful.
Also, as I’ve mentioned, LRH was the first spiritual leader I know to apply technical writing skills to spiritual practices – to write and arrange any spiritual practice into a recipe-type format so it can more easily be applied – was, I believe, a unique advance and groundbreaking. If others followed his lead, it would create a huge improvement to all spiritual writing.
So even though comparing Hubbard’s “stats” as a writer have major problems when you compare them to other writers in the way they were meant to be compared, his individual success as a writer approaches a kind of genius level. And in one area, at least, I believe his work was “groundbreaking”.
Based on my experience, Hubbard developed the best trauma, abuse, stress and “negative programming” removal therapy in the world.
Not only the best, but the only one that really works. It is the opposite of hypnosis. Hypnosis puts (implants) stuff in the mind. Dianetics and Scientology processing takes stuff out of the mind.
He was able to cure certain aberrations of the mind that others could not.
He fell short, in that he was not able to resolve all the various types of aberrations of the mind, or maybe rather the word “character” is more correct.
Some types of aberrations, yes, ……most certainly….. but not all. This is obvious when you honestly evaluate the products coming off the bridge or anywhere on the bridge, for that matter.
Generally speaking, for the most part, the people are very often still screwed up and lacking as desirable people.
The main aberration is “asshole”. There are others that are similar or related, that don’t have such colorful, descriptive, outstanding nomenclature.
(Note: If I could find another more tasteful word, more acceptable in discerning company, I would prefer to use it, but so far my search has been unfruitful. If any one knows of a word that just as accurately describes the condition, I would certainly I like to hear it, and add it to my vocabulary. The lack of the word makes me often uncomfortable and lost for words.
The definition of “asshole” is a person who will usually shit on you when you take him down enough miles of bad road and bad weather. His Scientology serfacs, implants, and valences deteriorate and his true colors become apparent. )
If you recall in Dianetics, Hubbard tactfully described how Dianetics works, and gave the example that if you cleared a cannibal, you would only have a “clear” cannibal. Not a homo Novus or sorts.
Well the same principal applies in the case of the state or condition of “asshole”. If you clear an “asshole” you only have a “clear asshole”.
This condition is often what gave them “case” in the first place.
It will continue to cause them to create “case” faster than they can clear it. That is why so many Scientologists crash or are still aberrated, even after completing the bridge, and at best, can only get along with other Scientologists, if he can even do that. That is one of the reasons why Scientology is in a state of disrepute, practically everywhere.
In real bad cases, he often can’t even get along with himself, never mind others.
From my experience, as far as I know, the only cure for “asshole” and those other more or less unspecific aberrations or conditions are found in the bible. At least most of the cure, and the first part of it, other sources will complete the cure.
The lack of this data is what causes all Scientology groups to be unstable.
Dio
It just occurred to me that the problem I described above is at least part of the reason why, that some one mentioned a while ago, that the Christian hell is better than the Scientology hell.
I also want to add, that it is my experience that the bible does not cure the problems of the spirit and mind that Dianetics and Scientology doe, either.
So to me the two of them make a good combination, if done right. There is a right way or an most optimum way to do everything and many less right or wrong ways to do everything.
The value of the most optimum way is determined by the number of problems it solves.
The greatest gift of LRH has been to bring back to life a line of investigation which had been abandoned for quite some time. As a result he inspired and gathered around him a lot of intelligent minds.
.
Ron combined the mechanics of western science with the affinity oriented eastern spirituality and created a reality-based approach to the spiritual universe.
His most novel idea that people bought in the early 1950 was a “Lay Therapy Church Based on Reason and Science.”
I remember Phil Spikler in a video saying that after he read Dianetics he declared “If this is true then I am saved!”
I think Phil and others like him had such bold declarations in the early days because of the presumed scientific weight Dianetics and Scientology CLAIMED to have. In my view it was Hubbards lies about science that pulled in the early crowd.
But the seed idea of a “Lay Therapy Church Based on Science” is brilliant and still not realized in our world.
So IMHO his greatest contribution was the unrealized product he never delivered.
Groundbreaking? To realize a gigantic con organization based on instrumentalizing people’s everday fear and offer them “help”.
Generalities, much?
And regarding the 65 million words – an immense ability to describe mundane and completely trite stuff in seemingly endless monologues, like a one hour congress with the groundbreaking result “that man’s ability can be lowered or heightened” – now that’s something I never would have guessed myself without listening to LRH.
Biggest scamster to ever set foot on earth, or at least a close 2nd.
Try this.
You are hilarious. 😀
How does the PM show Hubbard’s groundbreaking work?
My introduction to LRH materials was DMSMH, and I stayed up all night reading it from cover to cover. I saw with that first reading that here was a precisely laid-out technology of the mind. In my college days I was interested in the subject of psychology, at first. My viewpoint was: What else is there to be interested in but the mind – everything else follows. But after just one psychology class I got that there was no systematic tech to it. My concept then was something like – “Well, I see that a psychologist has to be really wise, practically be God, so it’s not for everybody” – and that was my last psychology class. I took up philosophy instead and continued my interest in that and thus had enough datums of comparable maginitude to have an appreciation of what I was looking at when I came across Dianetics and Scientology.
From my first reading of DMSMH, I somehow knew (knowingness) that there was truth to LRH’s discoveries about the mind. And I found out as time went on that his correct description of how it worked in all its detail (for the most part even from the beginning with DMSMH) was a huge breakthrough in itself – let alone the development of precise tech to handle it.
Scn tech probably isn’t the whole of what can be done for the mind and spirit, even when done standardly, but it’s an awesome groundbreaking and a huge start in that direction. This is why I find it so frustrating that even people who know what it can do when done right can so easily forget that or take it for granted and look almost exclusively at how it later went wrong – and mainly look elsewhere for answers rather than emphasize its preservation as at least a phenomenal and start.
Typo – last line should read “at least a phonomenal start.”
There were many groundbreaking contributions in my view: the arc triangle, the theta mest theory, the Overt and Withold theory, the admin scale, the Data Series, the book scn 8-8008 and on top of it all the codified processes (auditing) he developed.
I got into scientology 25 years ago. Got declared and never been into an Org for the last 6 years. I have been in the SO, experienced Management heat and later family disconnection and fair game, I donated a lot of money (really a lot) to the church.
Yet when I look back at my scientology experience, I have to admin it helped me immensely. When I got into scientology I was a high school drop out, drug addict and a very shy person. 25 years later I am wealthy, a well known professional with a lot of properties, with a great family and a lot of friends. The date coincidence of my change: getting into scientology.
So, yes the whole scn thing has got several bugs. Human rights issues of the C. of S. are definitely a problem, some of the tech doesn’t work as advertised but, boy, scientology did change my life really for the better. It wasn’t the only thing. But without it I wouldn’t be who I am today.
So Geir, IMO there ia a lot of groundbreaking stuff in it.
Sp Declared
Many people say the same thing about the Marines.
They have human rights violations, too, lost income, and even death and dismemberment issues.
But ex-Marines frequently say that they would not be who they are today without the Marines.
What exactly do you think was a groundbreaking discovery of L Ron Hubbard’s?
If you read again my post, you’d see I already answered as far as the groundbreaking discoveries: the arc triangle, the theta mest theory, the Overt and Withold theory, the admin scale, the Data Series, the book scn 8-8008 and on top of it all the codified processes (auditing) he developed.
As far as the Marines are concerned, even if I respect them big time, thank God I was never part of it. I don’t want war and I consider it stupid that in order to improve oneself one has to join a group that supports the physical obliteration of the enemy.
Rather than the Marines I would much prefer to join OSA. Make love and not war.
SP 1
Yes, you are right. I spotted my mistake last night and was going to answer you but I fell asleep instead. Sorry.
Each of the things you listed as groundbreaking have roots elsewhere.
I think we need to define “groundbreaking”
“Characterized by originality and innovation” is one definition.
“Innovate” means “Make changes in something established, esp. by introducing new methods, ideas, or products. To Introduce something new, esp. a product.”
So, originality AND innovation.
I would definitely say that he made innovations in many of the areas you listed, but none are original to Hubbard.
The best description of Hubbard’s work I have seen is written in a new book by Hugh Urban “The Church of Scientology: A History of a New Religion”.
http://www.amazon.com/Church-Scientology-History-New-Religion/dp/069114608X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1325173454&sr=8-1
In that book, the author describes Hubbard as a “bricoleur”. It’s a very interesting word which I think fits him perfectly. It is not a put-down. I believe it is a description of what Hubbard’s life work as a writer is all about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bricolage
Thanks Alanzo.
Steve Jobs copied the mouse from Xerox, Bill Gates created Windows copying it from the original Mac. Who cares what was their source? Weren’t they anyhow brilliant and … ground breaking?
“I mean, Picasso used to say: ‘good artists copy, great artists steal’. We never felt shame for stealing great ideas”. – Steve Jobs from Chapter VII of his Biography.
Then I understand that in order to feel right for having abandoned the study of scientology, you have to find all the ways that Hubbard copied, stole, was not exactly brilliant, etc. If that makes you feel better and gives you some kind of justification or relief that is fine with me.
But wouldn’t it be better to assess a correction list on yourself and find out what went wrong?
😉
Alanzo, I have friendship for you anyway. You don’t know it but most likely we did a part of our scientology stint together. Probably we even met. I have a lot of admiration for all you have done.
Best Regards
SP1
I don’t think Alanzo needs to go through any Correction Listing. It is simply a matter of categorizing LRH’s work in a proper manner.
Can we say that LRH did groundbreaking work in hypnotism? 🙂
.
SP1 wrote:
Then I understand that in order to feel right for having abandoned the study of scientology, you have to find all the ways that Hubbard copied, stole, was not exactly brilliant, etc. If that makes you feel better and gives you some kind of justification or relief that is fine with me.
But wouldn’t it be better to assess a correction list on yourself and find out what went wrong?
Ha!
I abandoned my study of Scientology, wrapped in a blanket by the side of the road, and sped away!
Yes. The guilt is killing me! (:>)
Damn Geir, every time i made a comment, i swear it will be the last one but interesting postings continues appearing.
For me the main grounbreaking that could be attributed to lrh is the aplication of informatics, cybernetics and electronic biofeed-back in the handling of the human mind ( THE HUMAN MIND ). Yes, because the religious handling of the spirit is related with the correct conduct ( a subjet that the church of scientology is ignorant about as a group person ).
Please see this info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybernetics
Auditing. No therapy has ever been developed that remotely approximates auditing either in form or function or clarity of results. Psychotherapy may have been auditing’s great-great-grandfather, but Picasso’s great-great-grandfather was probably a farmer or merchant.
😀
Have you ever studied techniques in hypnotherapy?
It more than remotely approximates auditing.
In fact, I would say that auditing is a highly developed, and in some ways very advanced, form of hypnotherapy.
Dear Dan Koon, so you are talking in therapy terms. I gree, Dianetics and Scientology ARE the modern science of mental health.
I have been thinking about results gotten from Scientology compared to those gotten from Buddhism. My first impression is that results from Scientology are confined primarily to the first dynamic in terms from self-satisfaction. The results from Buddhism seem to transcend self. I have yet to find a Scientologist who is selflessly engaged some social project.
I would go with Alanzo’s comparison of Scientology with hypnotherapy. The end results of Scientology seem to bring about a subtle from of conditioning that traps one into looking at everything in terms of advantage for self and Scientology.
.
That´s because you don´t know enough scientologists maybe.
I mean REAL scientologist; not the ones that call themselves Scientologist.
Make oneself be named as “scientologist” or “christian” or “Buddhist” is a great responsibility in itself. It raises the bar for one´s behavior.
IMHO any real scientologist or christian or buddhist IS ACTUALLY selflessly engaged in social proyects. The problem is that many name themselves something that they are not.
I´m the worst example in the world of a scientologist. Actually I´m not a Scientologist nor a Christian not because I don´t want to; but because i don´t deserve that title.
But I have my share of social project with no money, fame of benefit in return…
Is my opinion and personal true that one of each 1,000 that call themselves scientologist really deserve that title. Starting with the point of at least knowing the tech and finishing on the point to have enough personal integrity to face what is true or false inside that tech. Think for themselves; not trough the lens of LRH.
Smile Vinaire.
Buddhism is a great path. But also the true Scientology applied with common sense.
I have the same problem. Except instead of Scientologists, I find VERY FEW true Scotsmen that wont’ fall for the True Scotsman fallacy.
Most of them act like …. well … dare I say it … Austrailains.
Give this one a read, Roberto.
What do you think about it?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
I have read it.
Fascinating.
Thanks for that Alanzo.
Common sense, amen to that bro !!!.
Alonzo,
I have taken some mainstream psychology and hypnotherapy.
The mechanics of them are opposite to Dianetics and Scientology processing.
I went for some psychotherapy offered by the community here, that was after I had some Dianetics and Scientology therapy, and I found it terrible.
It hurt.
The therapist was a good natured guy and he tried his best, but he had no clue of how the mind works and gets screwed up.
Dio
Dio wrote:
I have taken some mainstream psychology and hypnotherapy.
The mechanics of them are opposite to Dianetics and Scientology processing.
The opposite?
How so, exactly?
And I’m asking you for your real world experience now, not your understanding of Hubbard’s claims.
What did the hypnotherapist do, exactly?
How, exactly, was that the opposite of Dianetics and Scientology processing?
Hey, all you critics of Hubbard and Scientology: Be objective when you make a criticism.
Be perceptually honest and give credit where credit is due and criticism where criticism is due.
On one extreme there are people ( like Jan) who say that Hubbard was the biggest scammer that ever walked the earth and did no good and those that say that everything he said was gospel and they worship him, etc.
Neither are qualified to form and express an opinion on anything. Both groups should be thrown into the hungry lion’s den. If the lions don’t eat them, then they are telling the truth.
I was so sick ( mentally and physically) on Good Friday of 1997 that I was going to commit suicide. I did not want to do it. That was about 10 AM.
But I could go on no further.
I decided to say a prayer. I said: God I want my sanity back. Then I fell asleep for about 10-15 min. . I then woke and decided to go to the kitchen to get something to eat. On the way I turned the TV on and caught a commercial with only text on the screen, saying: The cause of all your emotional problems read: Dianetics page so and so.
Short story: I got the book and began to read it and was blown away. This was the first author I read, after reading a few hundred books on self help and spirituality and related stuff, that knew what he was talking about. I too, much like Maria, stayed up late into the night reading the book and much of the next day. On Saturday evening I some how found a number and called it and it happened to be the Toronto org. I asked for more info and the guy asked me to come for a demo. I did. The auditor was so good and so professional.
( He happened to be a very nice young businessman from WISE. Thank God the guy from the cos who was appointed to be my auditor did not show up, so they had to go to WISE to get an auditor. I later met the guy who did not show up. He did not have half the stuff the WISE guy had.)
After two hrs of demo and a lot of Kleenex, the session ended and I felt like I was pulled out from under a rock pile. That saved my life. In two hours, he did more for me than 25 yrs of everything else. It saved my life a few times after that, too.
During those previous 25 yrs I searched night and day for help.
I am an expert on what does not work.
God answered my prayer perfectly.
Today, at 58, I am better than I have ever been, since getting a very severe beating at 4 or 5 yrs old for getting my new shoes wet.
Thank you God.
Thank you Ron.
Dio
THANK YOU.
And yes, the OP pretty much agrees with you regarding the lion’s den. Maybe Jan and Al didn’t really read the OP?
Diogenese, that is an amazing story and powerfully heroic. It is the story of the seeking hero.
I have a friend who has a similar story, but you must take out “Scientology” and put in “Christianity” and change “Auditing” for “Prayer Without Ceasing” you essentially get the same powerful, life changing, testimony.
And such experiences ROCK ones world. They give us meaning.
My religious experience is different. I had POWERFUL results when I became a Christian. But my best and most fruitful experience was when I saw the PROCESSES that created the same heroic story in both me and you.
And Hubbard’s contribution was that he took those processes and ramped them up into overdrive. So much so that whenever someone experienced them THEY WOULD GIVE THEM THEIR ENTIRE LIVES.
For me, Hubbard’s greatest contribution was clearly demonstrating HOW people can get so much meaning from social structures and memes that they will give up so much self-determinism to keep them working. His contribution was the hypnotic and social engineering behind the curtain of Scientology. The tech one does not readily see.
And obviating THAT is my spiritual practice.
For me Scientology isn’t just a cult, it’s the ultimate object lesson of the power of cult transformation. And cult transformation has been a survival mechanic that has worked well in our evolution.
Never forget, the hero of The Wizard of Oz isn’t Dorothy.
It’s that STUBBORN STUPID dog that woke everybody up. The dog pulled back the curtain.
And then what?
Dorothy tried to get in a balloon with him?!? WTF? Even then, the three friends wore their trophies he gave them in pride?
Because once you believe a Wizard, it’s hard to see him any other way because the story of how we got there is just too compelling and beautiful.
SCENE: THE BETWEEN LIVES AREA
GUARDIAN 1: “Next up Katageek/Bunkai, AKA Will Harper.”
KATAGEEK: “WTF?”
GUARDIAN 2: “You died. Get over it. Okay let’s see here … Yoga Rat … copywriter … kung fu fighter … marketer … SCIENTOLOGY CRITIC THAT BELIEVED HE WAS JUST MEAT?”
KATAGEEK: “Um … well … yeah … about that … ”
GUARDIAN 1: Well what do you think NOW smarty pants. See you ARE a Thetan after all. So you don’t get OT coolness forever cuz you thought you were just smart hamburger. You have to go back to another planet and live again. And to cheese you off, we are sending you to the Wizard of Oz version of Earth. You can be any character you want from the movie.”
KATAGEEK: “Great, I’ll take the dog role – Toto. ”
GUARDIAN 1: “Are you KIDDING me?”
KATAGEEK: “Nope. Make me the fucking dog.”
GUARDIAN 2: “The Cowardly Lion is available.”
KATAGEEK: “Fuck him. I want the dog.”
GUARDIAN: “Scarecrow … Tin Man ….
KATAGEEK: “Give me the FUCKING DOG! He is the only one there with any real brains, courage or heart. He don’t need no medals, diplomas or dangly heart with a watch in it. He can get all those from the eBay using a bogus online human identity.”
GUARDIAN 2: “Okay. Off you go.”
WHOOSH!
GUARDIAN 1: “Noble that one. A truth seeker.”
GUARDIAN 2: “Oh yeah, right. Don’t you get it? Dorothy looks exactly like an 18 year old Judy Garland in that movie. Don’t you know Dorothy sleeps in the nude every night with her dog to keep her warm?”
GUARDIAN 1: “Oh … that … bastard…”
🙂
Oh my Holy God!
A piece of meat with a touch of humor and a bit of genius.
My friend, you are an amazing hamburger 🙂
Thank you all.
When I look at Science, I still concur with the meat hypothesis. But maybe a meat system cannot fully explain itself. But one thing I know for sure…
When I look, Theta and Thetans are just a dream and we are just a wad of meat.
But one meme haunts my neural network …
“Anything that is not impossible is mandatory.”
http://buddhism-for-vampires.com/you-being-meat
KG… Clap, clap, clap!
.
Prior to the release of Dianetics, the Modern Science of Mental Health, it was generally assumed that there was no memory of incidents that caused unconsciousness, such as car accidents, operations, and illnesses that produced unconscious states. Since the person was “out” there was no record to be obtained so none was looked for.
Prior to 1950, severely traumatic incidents that the person remembered somewhat were explored in sleep induced hypnosis session. It was assumed that the person could only remember them with the aid of deep hypnosis. When they awoke they did not remember the session at all and the therapist reviewed the results with them, explaining what happened during the session or the therapist simply implanted suggestions while they were under.
The breakthrough that LRH brought to this arena was
A) All incidents were recorded whether or not the individual was unconscious.
B) That it was not necessary to induce deep hypnotic states of sleep/unconsciousness to bring such memories to view.
The delineation of the full extent of the components of the communication cycle.
The efficacy and importance of the two-way communication cycle.
The mapping of the polarities, such as the tone scale, scale of attitudes, effect scale and so on. While the knowledge of polarities was discussed at length by the New Thought writers, they did not attempt to map the poles in a graduated scale. Much of this research is now finding its way into mainstream psychology and holistic medicine. It has been mirrored by work coming out of muscle testing and the mapping of the emotional scale is nearly identical.
The development of Gurdjieff’s 4th way processes, in which an individual is instructed to engage in “self-remembering” or staying completely conscious instead of moving through life in a state of sleeping automaticity – he pointed out that people sleep their way through their day, barely notice the things around them and often arriving at a destination by traveling on automatic. These are found in the TRs and in the objective processes, which result in an individual stepping through automaticities into fully aware, self-remembering or self-aware (fully in the present) execution of the steps of the objective processes. Gurdjieff used various means, including deliberate movement and assignments to walk around making very sure that one’s attention remained focused on remembering oneself and on the present time environment. LRH took this to a whole new level.
The observation that the periodic cycles discussed at length in Eastern tradition, of start, change, stop (create, survive, destroy) was an apparency and that there was really only create, create, create. This is probably one of the most major breakthroughs of all of them.
The debilitating effect of evaluation and invalidation on case progress. This had been expressed in the Christian concept of judge not, that ye be judged, and in the Buddhist teachings about impossible thinking and detachment, but as far as I can find so far, no one had introduced it as a crucial component for practitioners of the mind sciences or to spiritual teachers.
Comprehensive study and delineation of e-meter phenomena as a tool for use in regression. The work on this was monumental. It is just now finding its way into the mind sciences in various forms.
The TR’s, specifically 0, 2 and 4 as these are the ones that you can use to help. The concept of an earlier, similar incident, holding s/t in place. Integrity processing and the false purpose rundown, releasing huge chunks of theta, back to the being. The technology of L11 (never had 10 and 12) and the concept of an immortal spiritual being, particularly the definition of a static. The axiom that details how to as-is charge and making a perfect duplicate. The concept of being exterior…with life but not entrenched. The concept of the tone scale.
I do not agree and have never agreed that all cases are the same but there is much truth in what LRH has written and that stays with me. I do believe he missed the boat on the 8th dynamic but I have found my own way on that one.
After 42 years, this is the quick list…there is more, but there were peaks and valleys. The above are the peaks.
When looking at Dianetics and Scientology we, who had more years of contact with it, tend to speak about it’s positive effects. I think this is partially because of our previous conditioning in the subject. We can’t be critical ’cause that would be the sign of our antisociality:)
Now, you have a flat tire, you will not stop to praise it’s value, but to fix it.
When we praise Scientology we have to admit that it is like praising a mouse-trap. Yes, the cheese is definitely good in the trap and delicious but can we escape from this trap with the cheese in our mouth?:) We can put every kind of tasty stuff into the muse-trap but will it be really useful for us, mouses?
Unless it is not recognized that Scientology is a mouse-trap it is not useful to speak about the cheese in it.
In this light we could pick up certain things and if we know a subject with comparable magnitude from that point we can evaluate Scientology and we can develop the subject.
(See: https://isene.wordpress.com/2011/12/26/thought-experiment-series-evaluation-of-scientology/
Logic 8 is “A datum can be evaluated only by a datum of comparable magnitude.”
I do not say, this is definitely true but it is safe now to work with this datum:) and rhymes here pretty much.)
I have the fortune to find comparable magnitude subject which I will not name here but we can have a look at the wisdom of past centuries and we can find much workable truths there like the Sutra, the Vedas or the Tantra, etc. And vinaire did tell lot’s of great important details in the subject so far. Please, do not believe what Hubbard told that there is no other workable knowledge other than Scientology. But as he told, look for the source.
By the way, the auditor code would be an example of such groundbreaking. But I’ve just listened to a demo-auditing from Hubbard. It was amazing to see how much auditor code breakings he introduced into his own session…
Roberto wrote:
It is my opinion and personal true that one of each 1,000 that call themselves scientologist really deserve that title. Starting with the point of at least knowing the tech and finishing on the point to have enough personal integrity to face what is true or false inside that tech. Think for themselves; not trough the lens of LRH.nter your comment here.
Roberto: That is not an opinion. I would say that you have discovered an “absolute”.
I have also said that of all the scientologists that I have met in person and in cyberspace in the 14 yrs since I got into this business, there is only one who stands out and or jumps to mind, when I think about it. There are one or two others that do a fairly good job. And that is based from amongst around a 1000 or so people.
( I feel exonerated after reading your post.)
Your evaluation of scientology , and the rest of your post, is a very high caliber one. Well done.
I really like your kind of mind.
Where are the English subtitles for your youtube video?
Dio
*********************************************************************
gODd quoted:
Logic 8 is “A datum can be evaluated only by a datum of comparable magnitude.”
It logically follows (ipso facto) that if you have not applied Logic 8 to Scientology, honestly and whole heartedly in the full spirit of it’s meaning, ( and the more the better, at least a half a dozen) you cannot be qualified to comment on, or form an intelligent and informed comment on Scientology. It is not possible.
And also (ipso facto) you do not and cannot understand Scientology.
It is not possible.
That is Logic 8a.
And there are a couple of other pretty good (honest) evaluations too from others, on this thread.
Dio
Absolutes are unobtainable (at least here). But what do you want to tell with that?
Katageek said:
“His contribution was the hypnotic and social engineering behind the curtain of Scientology. The tech one does not readily see. ”
Yes, there is nothing more important to know and keep in mind about Hubbard and Scientology.
If people only knew the subliminal (unspoken) postulates that were laced into everything he said and did………only a handful know or are aware of that.
Hubbard was a very complex, crafty, diabolical and extremely intelligent and able man.
Scientology is a very complex and extensive subject. It is written on many different levels, tone levels, if you will.
The most dangerous mental constructs are the ones, that are almost true, partially true, and the ones that are true but laced with postulates in energy form only.
The more truth there is in these mental constructs, the more it acts as a glue to hold them in place, and a Trojan horse ( or a bait , a carrot) to maintain and deliver the lies and traps.
The feeble minded then do not evaluate or do not inspect and defend it to death.
The truth is the best bait in the universe.
I also suspect that there were more than one being in his body, and in his space.
The very interesting thing is that even with all the traps and lies and covert postulates in Scientology, Hubbard did cleverly up a number of “clues” and “signs” that pointed the way out of the trap, for those who had/have the special “eyes to see, ears to hear and a mind to understand”.
One of them is Logic 8.
In fact, come to think of it, Logic 8 exonerates Hubbard from all his sins.
Also, in this way, Logic 8 is in alignment with “many are called and few are chosen” from the bible.
This earth is an elite school. It is boot camp for Gods in training. It is not for the faint hearted and feeble minded. Scientology is only one of the courses in this school.
“God is not a respecter of persons.”
Scientology is a trap for fools and “a power and freedom” for the wise, therefore the appropriate title:”Excalibur”.
Roughly only one in a 1000 have/had the eyes to see and the ears to hear and mind to recognize and understand the clues and signs.
Boy, oh boy, …writing this has gave me a new level of cognitions.
Dio
Diogenese said: “Scientology is a very complex and extensive subject. It is written on many different levels, tone levels, if you will.
“The most dangerous mental constructs are the ones, that are almost true, partially true, and the ones that are true but laced with postulates in energy form only.”
.
Dio, can you give a specific example?
(BTW, the “Reply” button below and to the right of each comment is hard to see, but it would be helpful if you used those in reply to a comment.)
Katageek said:
Diogenese, that is an amazing story and powerfully heroic. It is the story of the seeking hero.
I have a friend who has a similar story, but you must take out “Scientology” and put in “Christianity” and change “Auditing” for “Prayer Without Ceasing” you essentially get the same powerful, life changing, testimony.
And such experiences ROCK ones world. They give us meaning.
My religious experience is different. I had POWERFUL results when I became a Christian. But my best and most fruitful experience was when I saw the PROCESSES that created the same heroic story in both me and you.
Thank you Katageek.
I went the fullest route I could find in search for help, from what I did not know until I found Scientology.
All the while suffering from narcolepsy, catatonia and cataplexy, and stupor.
I went to Christians and churches asking and looking for help and all they had to offer was hot air and empty words.
I read the bible a couple of times before I got into scientology too. As well as many other books of comparable magnitude.
It was not until after I did some scientology, that the messages in the bible and everything else I read and did prior, began to make sense and come into alignment for me.
Now everything fits together like a jigsaw puzzle.
I mean everything from the earliest spiritual writings to spiritual and personal improvement writings of the present.
Scientology is part of the science of increasing the use of one’s mind from the normal 10% to 100%.
The other parts exist outside of Scientology, as in alignment with Logic 8.
Dio
This off topic and picking, but….
sp 1 said:
Thanks Alanzo. Steve Jobs copied the mouse from Xerox, Bill Gates created Windows copying it from the original Mac.
*********************
According to the recent doc on Steve Jobs and Apple, on TV, it showed Woz inventing the mouse from the roller ball from a deoderant container and a match box or something like that.
Then after Steve Jobs was practically fired from Apple by the Pepsi Exec that he hired to run the company and the Pepsi exec ran it into the ground, and Steve came back, he went to Bill Gates and Bill gave Steve a $150 M. to get Apple on the track again.
It is apparent that Bill and Steve had a pretty good sensible and respectable relationship along.
Jobs and Gates were interviewed at the same time on some TV talk show recently before Steve’s passing and the interview was congenial, kidding and impressive.
From what I understand, those people of those days from the early IBM unix era including the guy who developed Linux and especially the guy who developed Linux had a very new and radical type of thinking and that was that everything should be free. Not that it was all or nothing, but also a mix in different people.
Woz never had the notion to have any need of money. He just liked to invent.
They were an interesting group of guys.
Dio
Miraldi said
Diogenese said: “Scientology is a very complex and extensive subject. It is written on many different levels, tone levels, if you will. “The most dangerous mental constructs are the ones, that are almost true, partially true, and the ones that are true but laced with postulates in energy form only.” . Dio, can you give a specific example? (BTW, the “Reply” button below and to the right of each comment is hard to see, but it would be helpful if you used those in reply to a comment.)
Well, Miraldi; two things:
I have had enough postings for now. I am tired and want to get away from this computer again for a few days. I have wanted to do that for quite a few hours now. I need some down time.
and as for examples, I will choose to speak in generalities in any event.
Examples will appear to those who diligently apply the tech of how to study a science, or apply Logic 8 in the full and true spirit of the data.
That is what Hubbard meant when he said that data.
Take each datum of scientology and compare it to everything else ( all other data of comparable magnitude) in the known universe, including road testing.
Those who have those special eyes to see, the special ears to hear and that special mind to understand will do so.
Until later………….
Cheers
Dio
I could need some sown time as well…
No way. No down time for you.
You’re like the United States Postal Service:
“Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds.”
Or the Ford Motor Company: “The best never rest.” 🙂
Phew, I hear ya, I hear ya…
Atta boy. 😀
.
(I’m pretty sure it’s a labor of love anyway :-))
And Miraldi, let’s not forget: “When the going gets tough, the tough get going.”
Or: “No rest for the weary.”
(Alternately: “No rest for the wicked.” ;-))
Your no-answer answer seems to be a fancy (and condescending) way of copping out and not simply answering the question. Sorry, Dio.
The use of the E-meter to mental and spiritual matters and a great theory behind auditing and the collection of the Scientology materials, so most of it’s philosophy and the humanistic approach and the effort (would be good not to be fake) to make a better world is groundbreaking. Also the idea to be organized toward this achievement is groundbreaking.
But, we know the rest of the story:(
As an SP, I have to say that I am completely overwhelmed in this thread. There is so much to suppress I do not know where to turn.
🙂
I would say the Key to Life course is a ground breaking discovery, but not the LOC. I think that course had demonstratable benifits. Much else Ron took from other sources and adjusted it to fit into his needs. There were things like the CCh’s, creative processing, stuff from COHA that I believe were his. It is my understanding, in the saint hill days, it was collaborative so I don’t know how much is actually his. Ie, I read some where most study tech, correction lists etc. were by others. But I think he was behind a lot of the goals stuff. If GPMs in fact exist, and it seems likely, that that would be another discovery. 3, 5 and 7, may be the third. But I think that is about it.
Mimsey
mmm… just to point out that there has not been yet a defensor of the groundbreaking and completly new non- denominational applied religious philosophy.
OK, name something about Scientology that ISN’T groundbreaking?
Valkov, the sci-fi used to control the scientology bots is the same in any blood sucking cult, you know, like heavens gate or Rael.
OK Mr. Nunez, I get that. I didn’t make myself clear – When I refer to “Scientology, I mean the auditing philosophy and tech and the basic concepts of Ethics, not the CoS.
Valkov, understood, 3 subjects and 3 responses:
1.- Auditing tech is the modern science of mental health but can be improved with the use of the concepts of respect, dignity, decency and honor to the subject.
2.- The auditing philosophy was corrupted by an old desperate man without the assistance of his family and huge economic needs, lrh the human.
3.- THe basic concepts of ethics are a mix of good and bad things, i take some and reject some, but this is a vast field.
Mr.Nunez, it sounds like we are not talking about the same subject. Perhaps we live in two parallel but different worlds?
Do you have any examples of:
1. How respect, dignity, decency and honor are not built into the way auditing was prescribed to be done by LRH? Every LRH lecture on auditing I have ever listened to prescribed just those qualities as being necessary.
2. How was the auditing philosophy corrupted by LRH?
3. Which basic concepts of Ethics are you referring to? I am referring to such concepts the Code of Honor, the Dynamics, the Conditions, Integrity, the use of Reason and the Contemplation of Optimum Survival, etc. I don’t see anything ‘bad’ in those.
Mr. Valkov, you wrote ” I have had little or nothing to do with the CoS in 25-30 years, but I like to study LRH’s philosophy “. I have been lately on service and my family too, i have seen at least 2 cases of psychotic break. Yes, we are talking from 2 diferent worlds.
And…
Crickets from Valkov.
I am sorry to hear this, Mr.Nunez.
Anyone who has “lately been on service” is at great risk because for a longtime now the CoS has been using auditing in a reverse way, especially at the high levels like at Flag.
LRH said the purpose of auditing is to raise the ARC of the Preclear. Flag has been using what they call “auditing” to lower the ARC of the Preclear.
There are several posters on Marty’s blog who have described their own experience with being driven psychotic by Flag “Auditors” to the point of feeling suicidal. Apparently intentionally.
Scott Campbell is one such poster who was lucky to survive. Try searching Marty’s blog for his story, which is mostly found in the Comments. Fortunately people damaged in this way can be repaired, but often they are afraid to go into session ever again because of the trauma they have suffered. Sometimes they have been given drugs like chloral hydrate and Valium by the CoS “auditors”. Scott was given both drugs. Then it becomes a PDH situation and that much more difficult to handle later.
This is what some people call “Black Dianetics”, or “Reverse Scientology”. The CoS is no longer a “Scientology” organization. It is a “reverse scientology” organization, in other words it is now an organization of Implant Stations working to “Drive People A Lot Lower”.
Those are just common tools for political control and oppression. They are not themselves part of the Scientology philosophy.
Valkov, i am talking about CULT and MIND control tools not about politics.
Well, I am talking about North Korea, China, Soviet Union, Nazi Germany etc. I suppose
those could be considered cults, but in fact “cults” in that sense have existed as long as mankind, and those control tactics have also.
I think what you are referring to are what Katageek( a sometimes poster here) refers to as “cult dynamics”. Those are common “tech” used in groups, sometimes for great evil, but sometimes they are used as simple team-building techniques. Military boot camp is one variation. I call them “group dynamics”. They can be used for evil. It is manipulation of people in groups in various ways. Politicians do use them too.
The name Scientology itself and its tech. It was created before Ron got into business with it. He stole it after he lost the owership of Dianetics. But he brought it more successfully in to the world than the German who actually greated the start of it.
The 4th, in my mind, would be the proceedure and technology of auditing, including use of the meter. Much of the green volume stuff, not ground breaking, but application of existing principles to the running of the organization, and as such does not qualify. However there is one exception:
There is one truly ground breaking bit of green on white (or is it written in another color?) that LRH will forever be famed for, and that is the whole Operation Snow White skullduggery, which is widely acknowledged as the largest infiltration of the US government ever. It could easily top the list.
Mimsey
LRH’s worked out auditing techniques were on a scale never seen before. Lots and lots of processes that could be run to improve individuals’ conditions and increase their awareness. Armed with just objectives and self analysis lists (and PTS handlings) someone can really make a difference. Add to that some more straightwire processes, running out secondaries and even in its earliest form (using the Auditor’s Code) you have a body of work that is extremeley effective and impressive. The Tone Scale and the theta/mest/enmest theory in Science of Survival was a whole new way of looking at human behavior and dealing with it. 8-8008 was also full of new ways of looking at life and the spirit. De-buggin study by going back to where “you last thought you were doing well” and getting the unknown action gotten at THAT point rather than “where did you run into difficulty” is another example of a new look at a subject. And I could go on and on. There were many groundbreaking ideas that Ron came up with.
And I’ll add that the idea of “end phenomena”; that you take a technique or a process to its productive conclusion (one that the person feels very good about it) and not stopping until you do was also something VERY new and very positive for the individual.
For me it was the discovery about “metalosis”. Since 35 years I suffered from it, heavy somatics. I could not have metal on or in my body but i was not aware of it. 10 years after i joined scn I saw the bulletin the first time. A clever Cs showed it to me when 80% of the somatics blew, when I got a big fat metal filling (tooth) removed.the somatics were for me normal condition, I fucked up in the age of 13 when I got my very first metal filling. however, the 20% rest somatics were still enough to feel lazy, and tired. At the end of the day I felt
someone was crushing my feet, like clamped in a vice. I do not wish anybody this crap.
See EXP DN series in the volume “auditing rundowns” page 317. LRH says here:
I tole you I tole you I tole you if the pc roller coasters he is PTS OR HE HAS WORN METAL!!!!!!!
It was never checked in the org. Instead of the metalosis rundown, I got FPRD. *loool
I tooks annother 14 years to come trough, of course without doing the RD.
I tell you, its a new LIFE.
ML
Hello Spongebob
Volumes in red mean? In which book?
Thanks in advance
The Red tech volumes, I do not remember the Number but its named : Auditing Rundowns” look for the Expanded Dianetic Series, or better look in the subject index for “metalosis”. These Bulletins are LRH C/Sed sessions.
ML Spongebob
keep in mind that not necessaryly every PC suffers on it. It depends on the case. The message is simply: If PTS handlings don´t stop roller coaster the its probably metalosis.
the details you find in the bulletins.
Hallo Spongebob, I have found the reference and I have understand the thing
Thank you very much for the interesting.Somebody may have some benefits with this
ARC Cristiano
ok, the data is important, because if a pc really suffers on metalosis pts handlings won´t work. one can do pts handlings until the end of time and the pc still roller coasters. pc ,ethics and auditors will become desperate. Imagine the mess you are driving a pc into.
PTs CS1 , pts rundown, supressed person rundown, and finally FPRD (maybe this works) *lool
A suggestion, what can be done if there is no opportunity to get the rundown.
get rid of metal fillings (teeth) ,replace by ceramic ONLY
Don´t use gold crowns because its a metal
get rid of innerspring matress
craftsman which are supposed to wear safety shoes, should use those which don´t have steel bars, there exist good ones with plastic
do not wear metal rings, necklace and watches…….
glasses frame should be also plastic, I nkow they look horrible……`lool
avoid metal belt buckles
You probably read in the bulletin, that belt buckles have been causing appendictis
( also in my case, 30 years ago)
by changing the above, the situation should clearly improve but it will not remove the engramms completely.
The most interesting, observation I made was: While the dentist was reboring metal fillings
I felt somatics in my feet resolved and disappeared. This was actually the point in time where I realized, by observing data coincidence,that the data is true :-))
I hope it helps 🙂
ML
Tech Volume Auditing Rundowns. Expanded Dianetic series page 317.
Metalosis Rundown:
…If the PC roller coasters, he is pts OR HE HAS WORN METAL.
Auditor PLUS Preclear is greater than the reactive bank.
Auditor = one who listens (without invalidation and without evaluation.)
“It has been discovered that the two most important aspects of the code are the preservation of the preclear’s sense of reality and the trustworthiness of the auditor.”
“Any two people in constant association who will conduct themselves according to the auditor’s code will soon find not only that they are clear or almost as a group of two but also that their knowledge of, and joy in human relationships has been immeasurably increased.”
“Any breach of Auditor’s Code is serious, but invalidation of preclear’s data is the most serious.”
Quotes from Notes on the Lectures
” “Any two people in constant association who will conduct themselves according to the auditor’s code will soon find not only that they are clear or almost as a group of two but also that their knowledge of, and joy in human relationships has been immeasurably increased.” “Any breach of Auditor’s Code is serious, but invalidation of preclear’s data is the most serious.” Quotes from Notes on the Lectures
******************************************************************************************************
Thanks for posting that Maria.
I recall getting into a disagreement a few years ago, a couple of times, about that.
Someone said something to me during training, not in session, that was very much in violation of something in the auditor’s code. I don’t recall what it was. I objected to the comment and said it was in violation of the auditor’s code. The individual who had more training told me that the auditor’s code only applied to auditing sessions.
I disagreed, but was shot down anyways.
It is not absolute, but the principles apply in general.
It is also not complete.
There are other codes of comparable magnitude which are very good to know too.
The ten commandments are one.
I put together a list a couple of yrs ago that I collected from various sources.
Here it is:
http://www.freewebs.com/freezone3001/virtuesfor.htm
There is a trap contained in Hubbard’s words too.
It is “Any breach of Auditor’s Code is serious, but invalidation of preclear’s data is the most serious.”
The other side of that coin are Hubbard’s words:
In order to learn something, you have to be willing to be wrong.
Few Scngists operate on that one. The average scngist often blows up if he is told something that he needs to hear and is contrary to his operating data.
(There is a right way and a wrong way to do most things.)
Hubbard would of done a lot better if he included the following data:
“A person’s critics (or can be) are his best teachers.
The problem or catch, lies in that scn attracted so many individuals (pcs) that were suppressed to such a serious degree and been constantly invalidated and told false and limiting data and abusive data, throughout their life, that they have charge on being told anything, even good data, due to A=A=A.
Dio
Dio: That’s a good list on your website. I was just at your website yesterday, so imagine my surprise when you posted that link! Nice collection you have there.
I wasn’t thinking in terms of virtues. I was thinking only in terms of in the realm of one-on-one counseling or therapies.
Thanks for your reply, and your ack on my list of virtues, Maria.
Yes, the auditors code primarily applies to auditing and one and one therapies.
But from what I gathered, that was not your point for your original post.
The more significant statement that you posted ( which was your point) was the other data by Hubbard that the auditor’s code applies outside of therapy.
Quote: “Any two people in constant association who will conduct themselves according to the auditor’s code will soon find not only that they are clear or almost as a group of two but also that their knowledge of, and joy in human relationships has been increase immeasurably.”
My point was and is that the auditor’s code does well or serves well as far as it goes but does not go far enough in all aspects of human relationships, as Hubbard implies or wants his audience or reader to think, ……………………………..which you used (seconded) to make your point.
My point was and is that it takes a lot more data of comparable magnitude to make things go smoothly, or achieve the joy in human relationships, that Hubbard refers to.
In other words Hubbard does well as far as he goes but does not go far enough.
Hubbard’s other words, (to the effect, but not exact quote, plus my addition) that add to this:
I have blazed a trail through the jungle of the human mind and the false and limiting data and areas of no data that it contains, now it up to you to make a better bridge or a multi-lane highway.
Another aspect to this of Hubbard’s words that applies to this is ( again; not exact, and with my addition) ” that no subject can be understood from within itself. In order to understand any subject you have to study and evaluate all other subjects of comparable magnitude in the known universe and compare and evaluate them to each other and against the mest and theta universe. Otherwise it is impossible to fully understand it. ”
Understanding is the universal solvent.
That is why I made my comment on your post, with the additional data of comparable magnitude, to make it more well rounded, more complete, for more and deeper understanding.
The most significant data, that I have been processing in my my over the last year or so was the significance of the commandment:
Thou shall not bear false witness.
I asked myself what does that mean? ( especially from a Scientology point of view and what data is there in Scientology that is of comparable magnitude)
I realized that it means to “see” what is really there ( when you are looking at something ) and if and when you need to tell others what you saw, tell exactly what you saw.
I also realized that that is at least one of the keys, if not the main key to preventing aberration.
That is in alignment with Hubbard’s words to the effect, if not exact:
“All I want you to do is take a look.”
This commandment is essential to achieving the “clear” that Hubbard is referring to in his words:
Quote: ” “Any two people in constant association who will conduct themselves according to the auditor’s code will soon find not only that they are clear or almost as a group of two but also that their knowledge of, and joy in human relationships has been increase immeasurably.”
Anything that is not in alignment with truth and love and all the virtues, will stick in the mind and cause case.
And no vias either.
So seeing what you look at or in other words seeing the truth of what you look at and speaking the truth ( an aspect of “as-ising”) is essential to going and staying clear.
In more other words: take an honest look. ( in lay language: call a spade a spade)
Be perceptually honest and intellectually honest.
“Say what you mean and mean what you say”, is another datum of comparable magnitude that adds to the above and adds clarity.
Therefore the validity of:
“Only the truth ( the honest truth) will set you free.” (Free=clear)
Dio.
Dio
All good points Dio.
You said: “I also realized that that is at least one of the keys, if not the main key to preventing aberration.”
I completely agree. I think it is THE fundamental that actually makes auditing, therapy and human communication an agency of change, illumination and empowerment in terms of rehabilitation of free-will and determinism.
I also agree with you that the self-determined adoption and practice of virtues (and one is a dedication to truth) is critical. This would be a process of sincere life-long learning and personal practice carried out by an individual entered into by choice, and not as a result of enforced or inhibited efforts by others.
The specific, and clearly stated idea that not entering evaluation / invalidation into the interactions of relationship would result in a “cleared” relationship was also new, although it has been expressed in a less specific way (just as you point out) in the Christian precepts: judge not, that ye be judged and the concepts of forgiveness and unconditional love. However many Christians I know would would find this offensive and heretical, because they believe that true forgiveness comes solely from the grace of God and not from any effort or behavior of another person.
As regards why I didn’t go into what you mentioned, I was trying to stay on topic by ONLY responding to the OP: What groundbreaking could be attributed to L. Ron Hubbard?
The idea of not entering any evaluation or evaluation into a therapy or counseling interaction was a new, and IMO groundbreaking idea in the 1950s. I cannot find any earlier statement in psychology or therapeutic practices to this effect.
I acknowledge your post, Maria.
Thanks.
Dio