Did Scientology have a positive impact on their lives?

I want to make a story about the successful people in Scientology. Those people who became truly successful as a result of Scientology.

It was 2005 and I was having a coffee down town with an old school mate of mine that was now a journalist for the national broadcasting corporation of Norway. He looked expectingly at me while I was desperately trying to come up with such people.

I was rummaging my mind while thinking “Crap! I can’t find any 😦 Let me think… let – me – think – – – Damn!“, and then I said “Interesting angle. I’ll think about it and get back to you.

My friend was serious. He wanted to balance the constant negative press by a surprising angle on Scientology where he would portray the really successful scientologists, of which he apparently thought there were quite a few. I couldn’t think of any in Norway. Or Scandinavia. Or any I personally knew anywhere in the world. Sure, there were some with average success here and there, but no one that stood out as remarkable. None.

I never got back to the guy. Until I left the church in 2009 and told him I had a story for him.

This question about the actual success of Scientology bugged me for quite a while. I wrote a blog post three years ago titled, “Where are the amazing people?“. And the usual discussion ensued including justifications of how that is not a relevant question or what one mean by “amazing” and other nitpicking points. But the main point remains: Scientology does not seem to produce anything out of the ordinary in terms of good life or skills or amazingness.

Today I sat down, took a good hard look at the people I have known in Scientology. I decided to make a list of people I have known well in Scientology and how Scientology has impacted their lives. The first 50 people that popped to my mind, only the people I have known for years and where I could clearly see how Scientology has affected them. They come from all walks of life – from house wives and business people to former drug users and average Joe. I put the names into three categories:

  1. Scientology had a positive impact on their lives
  2. Scientology had no significant positive or negative impact on their lives
  3. Scientology had a negative impact on their lives

I was somewhat surprised when I summarized the results.

Scientology-Impact-on-Life

I then looked at categories 1 and 3 to sift out those who had life-changing gains from Scientology and those who had life-ruining crashes from Scientology. The result was pretty grim.

Scientology-Impact-on-Life-Details

A couple of notes about the above:

  • Of those that have had awesome improvements in their lives, 80% came into Scientology with a life in ruins
  • Of those that had their lives ruined through Scientology, 86% had an average life when they got in

Almost all (90%) of the list of people have lived a somewhat sheltered life on the fringe of the Scientology empire here in the Land of Santa.

From my experience, if you become involved with the Church of Scientology, there are some statistics you should be aware of:

  • There is a 20% chance that Scientology will improve your life overall
  • There is a 64% chance that Scientology will negatively affect your life
  • The chance that Scientology will dramatically improve your life is 10%
  • The chance that Scientology will ruin your life is 14%
  • You a have 40% greater chance of having your life ruined than dramatically improved
  • If your life is not already in shambles, your chance of having your life ruined is much greater than having it greatly improved through Scientology

While I do not know how the statistics are for Scientology delivered outside the Church, I suspect it is better. Simply because one does not have the Nazi regime, the thought police and the incessant craving for your time and money. I would be interested in hearing your own honest statistics, both from people you know having gotten Scientology in the Church and independently.

283 thoughts on “Did Scientology have a positive impact on their lives?

  1. I cannot respond on such a broad review of results, so I am going to break down my gain/improvements into several distinct areas of endeavor, spanning my last 40 years — this includes three years prior, and eight years after Scientology.

    Communication/Expressiveness: Tremendous positive gain in terms of skill and confidence. Shifted from being introverted, shy and poor conversationalist to being a real people person, great conversationalist and sensational hostess!

    Learning, Research and Analysis: I was always smart and capable of penetrating analysis,, however, along the way during my grades, I gained an ability to zero in on important information with great clarity and speed and spot inconsistencies with rapidity. I cannot attribute all of this to Scientology, however, it boosted this ability. This ability went into overdrive after leaving, and participating on Geir’s blogs and forums. I have had three major careers, the equivalent of three master’s degrees in terms of study and comprehension.

    Writing: I took LRH’s advice – writers write. He was right about that! Positive improvement.

    Family: Scientology greatly helped my immediate family, sisters, brothers, mother, etc. in the early years. We’re still tight. It was disastrous as a “chaplain/ethics” type function in the later years, both crazy and destructive in working with two failing marriages, marriages that were failing after incomplete and failed FPRDs in both instances. On the positive, application of Child Dianetics to my own children, who I raised outside of the C of S, refusing all attempts to recruit them as pcs, students, or staff are all doing very well in their respective endeavors. By their own choice, none of them are currently involved in the C of S, all of them use the principles they grew up with (which was my version of Scientology, which I now understand could be summed up as non-violent communication, law of attraction and WTH principles.)

    Financially: If I had all the money I made over the years, and had invested it in reasonably sound endeavors along the way, I would be extremely wealthy now. During my time in Scientology, my hourly income factually went up over 20 times the rate I started at. However, Scientology consumed a great of that income, and as well, I became a huge risk-taker, somewhat bored with the conventional and mundane existence that builds consistent wealth. I gained a lot, I lost a lot. Over the years the gains/losses went from trivial to huge.

  2. I have another way of reviewing this.

    Impact in terms of typical success markers in North American society: NEGATIVE

    Impact in terms of self discovery: HUGE. Both positive and negative.

    It has IMPACT. Enormous, powerful and so life-changing that there is no going back, ever. Whether it is positive or negative depends on which viewpoint one views it from.

  3. Spiritual gains a lot of them, it answered my philosophical questions which bugged me. I was looking for an answer and I got it.
    Family wise was demanding and destructive, too much time required, too much money needed to go on. Always stay on the safe side and never allowed any real ruin or risk for me or my family, When I left in 2005 I did not go any more on a game with no end (OTVII) for time and money and with no gains as the ethics police Church was ruining all my gains and finances.
    When I started OTVII my income quadrupled but all this extra maney was sucked by the level itself. No real gains from scientology from the Church (in a suppressive environment you can’t have betterment). A clean up with an auditor prior of 1980 and TR’s done to real EP made the differnce.
    Live better now because I am free of them.
    I think that scientology really helps, its a compass and a useful tool, but have to stay away from a Church which fakes to use it but really uses it for getting your money and you (they want you totally and obedient slave).
    If you would ask me if it was better to have known scientology or not, I would definetely answer YES even going through all the nightmare I went through.

  4. Hummm. Well Geir, without knowing the values you used to assign these categories it is hard to say that you have done much more than graphed an opinion. I think you should do a phase II wherein you have a survey with the same questions you asked your self. If you could get Mike Rinder and Marty to include it on their blogs as well over at ESMB, the Entheta Slingers Message Board, you might have an interesting graph to show. Jeff Hawkins did something similar on his board a few years ago – it got a lot of responses.

    Mimsey

    1. I agree with this — I don’t know what criteria you are using to make your evaluation, Geir. I do know that under certain criteria, Scientology can be very very negative. But, under other criteria it can be very very positive.

    2. It wasn’t meant as more than a nice graphing of my opinion. And looking at responses elsewhere at the fringes of the Internet, I see that some are complaining that my post is “merely anecdotal”. I find that amusing, since that would put my post on par with existing evidence for the workability of Scientology 😉

      1. Geir, sorry to be the bearer of bad news but you could never be “merely anecdotal” in my book. Even if you tried really hard to postulate it. 😉

        This was a stunning post. Your insights are amazing.

        1. Sorry to say AnonLover and Geir but in my view anything before this very moment can count as ‘anecdotal’ in the strict sense of life. Nevertheless, I like the OP.

  5. I take a risk of being ‘evaluative and subjective’, so may be wrong. Aside from what you are speaking about in the video, the tone of your voice is very clear…could be
    between 8.0-22.0. Also, the body movements are very smooth and exact. If I compare it to your recent videos, I see a difference. In the recent ones it looks that there is more effort, more energy use. Just a guess in your case, which is an experience in my own life ( as I mentioned it earlier), one in the pure state of ‘I am’, while walking in life can be exposed to ‘views and energies’ of ‘others’…with its consequencies. You had a post earlier ‘caught in the crowd’…yeah, it can happen more or less. The good news is, in my reality, that on the journey to the ‘ I am ME’ one is learning about what one is not. If one sees/applies this knowledge while communicating with others and sees, acknowledges what they are (the being) and also what they are not, one is more or less cause over both oneSelf and the other one’sSelf…..clearing The Self in this way. Please put me right if I am very mistaken in it.

  6. I just did a review of the people I know in Scientology and their actual condition; family shattered, bankrupt, foreclosure, cancer or early death. It is staggering. I see no one with gains worth the “side effects”.

    1. Yes, Just Human: My ex had a heart attack, saved by a “WOG” police man. The divorce cost both of of huge funds. The family is very upset and his leaving after 27 years of marriage; because I was declared; has only brought on suffering to his children.

  7. I have used Scientology for over 37 years. While there have been up and downs form time to time the actual application of the knowledg has been spot on each time it has been applied to the exact situation. Those that I have run into that Scientology did not handle what they came for were in most cases were given the wrong program o help them. Or they were there for other reasons than what was stated in the beginning. Each case is easily handled it they are given the correct help. Some cases joined to try and destroy the subject and so on. Over all it has helped me greatly in all of dealings in life. Sometimes evil intended people get on staff and violate various policies and drive people away “i the name of Scientology”

    1. Soderqvist1: what exactly can you handle which I a non-Scientologis cannot do? I claim that if you can solve something with scientology, I can do it too, but without scientology!

      1. God for you when is your book coming out? YOU HAVE YOUR MIND MADE UP SO YOU TRY AND PUT ME ON TRIAL. THERE HAVE BEEN MANY THINGS BUT i WILL NOT DELINEATE THEM HERE AS YOU WILL SIMPLY TRY AND MAKE IT WRONG AND INVALIDATE MY GAINS. So f… off !

          1. ‘Human emotions and reactions’ are part of life as well as anything else. Playing them out has its own beauty, as well as there is the chance of a release or as-is.
            I love it when it happens so sometimes on your blog. To others or to you. Truthful, better than being ‘polite’ when behind politeness there is some suppressed emotion. Also true, that one can release emotions in many other ways – going into the forest and really, really shout is a funny way….one can get a surprise how much reluctance can be behind that….many-many years ago I did that with some others….it was hilarious.

            1. Well, he seems overly worked up, acting much like a troll, and so I chose to give him the benefit of any doubt and checking with him if this was simply H E & R. I am sure he will offer a better explanation if he has one. Or would you prefer to offer one for him?

            2. Yes, his posts got wilder and more strident as time went on. At the time I posted mine, he wasn’t there yet, but now?

              Perhaps he has a lot of catching up to do, on reality? I imagine many of my own earliest posts, like on your Forum, sounded much like some of his…..

            3. Valkov: “Perhaps he has a lot of catching up to do, on reality? I imagine many of my own earliest posts, like on your Forum, sounded much like some of his…..”

              Me: Something that keeps hitting home with me:

              The first casuality in Scientology is so often simple human decency and manners. People forget how to be nice. Being nice isn’t a nice-to-have, it’s a necessity to be able to get along.

              This one little thing freaks me out so much, becuase I still struggle with it myself. Oh well. On the good side I have many tolerant people around.

            4. Such a good point Alan. And another good example of do as I say and not as I do policies by Mr Hubbard. His so called “Manners” PL gives lip service to this problem yet his organization’s profanity has no organizational equal in contemporary society. Having been involved and participated personally in this rough behavior, I understand that this misconduct passes for “toughness, ” but I do not know why.

            5. ‘Or would you prefer to offer one for him?’ For myself also, or anyone who wants to
              join ‘What is Greatness’. I went over to Marty’s blog as you provided the link to read about emotions. Was reading the comments too when there was Oracle’s post on
              she meeting Jim Lynch before his death.
              And here I would really like to stop and communicate something which has been with me since Marildi stopped posting.
              1.I have been blogging here for almost a year and NEVER perceived that the intent of any blogger was ‘bad’. In my view, it cannot be otherwise as the BASIC intent is ALWAYS to contribute, no matter what ‘form’ it takes. The intent is coming from our basic nature, which is ‘love’.
              2. What veils/shades it is the ‘amount’ of confusion, which eventually makes up the
              ‘Emotion Scale’, where we find the different forms of behaviour/actions etc. …the ‘destructive’ ones are interesting….look to be ‘negative’, yet, if we stop, with a closer look, we can see that they are a ‘cry for help, attention and love’. Their basis
              is always the loss of trust/confidence/love…. in oneself. And ignorance.
              3. I don’t know who Oracle is, who Jim Lynch was. As I read that post, I got a sense of that ‘natural core of our being’ – truth…also, compassion…
              4. Reading this blog, in many cases, the blogger’s ‘identity’ (name, picture etc.) is not there….yet, IT IS THERE. The flow, the tone of the writing tells a lot more than
              the words themselves…..here I want to express that during my blogging here Marildi
              showed such a theta-flow persistence accompanied by the knowing of the spirit, wisdom, wittiness, playfulness, humour, good will, respect towards anybody that I call her a ‘great spirit’. In some cases we were in such a sync, that she wrote what I had just thought in a couple of minutes before. First it looked to be unbelievable…what is it? With a closer look, at a higher awareness I observed that in these cases it was very high affinity and theta co-creation…always positive. Yet, on the Soap-box thread, I posted for her and Geir some quotes about life, karma. In my view, co-creation happens on all tones but as I could observe-perceive, only ‘theta’ has the ability to have an effect, produce change. Blogging here has helped me to see lots of things much more clearly. Thank you all for that. I have been learning….

            6. One thing to add….I have no consideration of being a ‘scientolog-ist’, buddhist, Christian…whatever. Not even has a sense of ‘me’ (filter), as I wrote. There is a use of ‘knowledge’…..from sources which can be different….but the truth is the same…this is my perception. I care for the being in front of me…

        1. Jay
          Like your communications! I have read all your comments….great, simply great!
          Nothing to say….one, just one response, here…..any gain which can be invalidated,
          made wrong, is not a true (lasting) gain, in my view. If you like, just put some here…what I have observed is that when I communicate, things always ‘get better’…
          marianne

          1. Thank you Marianne. Thee are so many wins. Some of the wins I have were in finishing OT III. Freedom from overwhelm. Amazing when one truly does the level with any OWs cleaned up before hand and of course no PTSness either. You will find those who can not do any of it wiil insist that you demonstrate your ability. That is a trap one would be careful to stay away from. Beings who can not duplicate Scientology will always find fault with it. But they are only speaking from their own blackened souls.

            1. Yes indeed. Thus we are taught that expecting Scientology to live up to its hype and to deliver. what was promised was a “hidden standard.” Warned away with fancy double talk, now the true believer in Scientology sounds no different than the true believer in any faith based religion anywhere.

        2. Hail, HYDRA! Immortal HYDRA! We shall never be destroyed! Cut off a limb, and two more shall take its place! We serve none but the Master—as the world shall soon will be CLEAR! Hail HYDRA!

    2. Jay, I got into Scientology for the promise of enlightenment/total freedom and exterior with full perceptions. That was what was promised. That is what Ron sold.

      I never met nor did I attain anyone who could demostrate these states, even after thousands spent.

      In the real world that is called a fraud. In Scientology seeing it that way is a Hi Crime punishable by loosing family and friends.

      1. That is to bad for you. On the other hand I saw many people do that. I have been exterior many times. Sorry you got screwed. Did they ever give you all of your money back. They should have if they didn’t. Where did you go fro services?

          1. Those that were on my lines did not have those horrible things happen to them. But then again I was in a position of power where I could protect them from some crazy bastards, thus was able to deliver what was promised.

        1. Jay: “Did they ever give you all of your money back.”

          Me: bwahahahahaha, shit that’s funny. Dude you crack me up.

          Do you know what it takes to get money back out of the Church?

          I do. And not in the way you probably think.

          1. Sounds like you go into Scientology later on the timeline. There used to be a policy by Ron that stated, “Any dissatified person with their services is to be refunded promptly” Something to that effect. I saw a man who got back over 400,00 dollars and another one got back 150,00. I don;t know about you. Ever since miscavige took over they changed that policy which is wrong.

            1. Should have done != did do.

              I was a Flag Rep at an org. At the same time I was the FBO. For 5 years my signature was required on any cheque from that org. And I usually ended up being a deputized KOT when refund cases went legal.

              Like I said, I know what it takes to get a refund out of an org. I paid the refunds.

            2. Good then you know of the policy of being refunded promptly. Did you not follow that policy?

            3. Jay: “Good then you know of the policy of being refunded promptly. Did you not follow that policy?”

              Oh yes, I know the full policy in detail. I also know the policy on CVB, FP #1 and I especially know the policy about routing forms. I didn’t have the authority to cut a refund cheque without OK from up-lines, that OK seldom if ever arrived, I would have been declared on the spot if I bypassed that, and I would still have needed a second signature anyway. Second signatory would have been just as unwilling to sign.

              There was only one thing that ever got a refund processed and approved: when the applicant sued in a court of law and made a big stink, then and only then was the heat turned on.

              What you seem to be unwilling to observe, is that the nice policy letters were mere PR exercises, fluff, window dressing. Hubbard liked to *say* these things but seldom actually *did* them. Read the many biographies out there written by people who were there and observed first hand.

            4. I worked for LRH on a weekly basis for 2 years. I have all of the written comm from that time. I knew of several people who got refunds. I do not know what those other people claim but I was there and saw it occur.

            5. if you are going to make an extraordinary claim like that, you need to back it up with extraordinary evidence. Nothing outrageous, just ordinary stuff:

              your name
              when you worked with Hubbard
              where you worked with Hubbard
              what was your job(s) at the time

            6. In the SO I helped him establish the first 3 N/OTs Division on Flag. I have over 100 personal letters from the man and had to debrief to him sometime twice a week. I was offered by him to work in his Special Unit back in 1978-1979. I was busy establishing the NOTs Divs. I debriefed to him that we will ehave to catch up later. I have all the proof that I need. If you go to Chris Blacks Facebook site ther are 3 letter of the over 100 posted there. You can read them if you want.

            7. URL?

              Facebook search for Chris Black turns up two musicians and one fellow in Johannesbug. None of them are it.

            8. I don’t know that policy but from the view of common sense (common sensing-perception-considering) when one pays (particle) and is not satisfied (particle or no particle) with the exchange (particle or no particle), both parties’ attention will remain on the exhange which can ‘contract’ their reach, that is life potential….so, it’s a question of ethics (life force) also physics (mest) for the sake of both parties.
              My view of it.

            9. Marianne: “I don’t know that policy but from the view of common sense…”

              That policy does exist and it is worded as Jay quoted it. The problem is getting it applied in CoS. I tried, I really did but I only had so much clout and what I had wasn’t very much.

              It’s a good policy and successful retail businesses often apply it well. After I left staff, I worked for a local Scientologist as an electronics tech and became the “trusted 2 I/C” in short order. It’s with a certain amount of pride I can tell you that in the 7 years I was there, about 15 customers had valid cause to ask for a refund, or deserved to have their money back. All 15 got it, none of them had to ask for it.

              The word of mouth promotion from that was almost unbelievable, we usually got a customer for life just by being honest. I took their money and later it turned out I couldn’t actually deliver the promise of repaired goods. With on average 400-600 paying customers a month and one refund every two months, it really was a no-brainer.

          2. I got the money I had “on account” back easily 2 1/2 years ago, from my local org. To my knowledge, no-one has been declared for giving me my money back. I wish they were! There are some nice people there I would like to see out.

            I had first contacted one of the KOTs at Flag(Bob Bolger), thinking my money was there, but it turned out to have been just a “courtesy transfer” so the I went to my local org. There was no red tape or delays at all.

            Some posters here are generalizing from their own specific experiences, and that just plain doesn’t work. Any more than Ron generalizing from his case to everyone else’s.

            1. Hi Valkov

              I expanded later on why I know what it took (within the scope of Africa orgs).

              I signed the refund cheques for years.

            2. “(within the scope of Africa orgs)”

              My point exactly. Time place form and event can’t necessarily be generalized to the entire world and all it’s orgs and all it’s staff. Omitted time can especially make a big difference, and time is the factor most often omitted in the posts I see, not just here.

        2. I exteriorized many times also. Stable exterior with full perception was sold as attainable.

          The test for such a state is very simple.

          Intermittant popping out of a body is considered temprarily keyed out. That is what Ron said happened in other religions.

          Stable exterior was the cheese sold. Stable exterior with full percetion was not delivered.

          Stable exterior was marketed on the original grade chart.

          Do you why it was removed? Because the 100% standard tech at the time was a standard untruth. Nobody, not even Ron attained it. So the wording of the standard tech grade chart changed its standardness.

          And to make more self induced madness, it was a crime to invalidate(see clearly) that no one ever attained stable exterior with full perception.

          Enter the state of mindless cult member who considers his own perception of truth to be a. Hi Crime, Punishable by loosing friends and family.

          Stable exterior with full perception: show me one, only one. Lets test him or her if they exist. I am willing to be wrong. The test is simple Jay.

          Ball in your court

          1. I have my own theory on exteriorization and what’s going on. But first, according to the meter I’ve been exterior in session many times albeit never with perception – not even partial.

            Those I’ve spoken to who have been exterior with perception all described surroundings they were already familiar with, usually the local environment. None passed even basic ESP tests such as identifying a card obscured behind a screen. Surely this would be trivial for someone truly exterior with perception? I never met anyone who could, but I reserve the right to be wrong and maybe someone here can.

            So onto my theory. I think the brain is constructing a 3D model of the known environment from a different viewpoint. Think about this, we have 2 eyes so see in 3D, we have depth perception and we know exactly where objects are in relation to other objects, even while the object, surroundings and the viewpoint itself is moving. For a demonstration, just watch a first class cricketer take a catch at silly point off a fast bowler. The ball is doing what? 80km/h? and is in flight for 1 second? That’s an amazing 3D construct to hold in the mind, and we can all do it.

            It’s not hard to imagine we can also construct a 3D image with the top corner of the room as the viewpoint. You already have all the information necessary to do it. We even have computers do it with trivial ease, we call them games consoles.

          2. How the hell do you know about Ron not doing that. You have a failed purpose on going exterior. You are running a make wrong by being the judge of such an ability. I have know many people who attained that state on a regular basis. Stop the whinng and finish you Bridge

            1. Jay: “How the hell do you know about Ron not doing that. You have a failed purpose on going exterior. You are running a make wrong by being the judge of such an ability. I have know many people who attained that state on a regular basis. Stop the whinng and finish you Bridge”

              Dude, seriously, knock off the eval and inval. You claim to be OTIII and a practising field auditor so start behaving like one, your reference is “An Open Letter to All Clears”.

              Something you should know: the vast majority of regulars here long ago left Scientology and Hubbard behind and have almost zero interest in doing any Bridge at all. Punting Hubbard here is about as successful as trying to sell pork chops in Islamabad. Just sayin’

            2. You overts are speaking loudly. It is you who invalidated LRH and those who have gone exterior

            3. Jay: “You overts are speaking loudly. It is you who invalidated LRH and those who have gone exterior”

              Me:

              ^_^ (that’s a raised eyebrow smiley).

              I haven’t even *started* invalidating Hubbard yet. So let me wind up and get going:

              Hubbard was a habitual liar and bullshit artist of the first order. Few individuals in history have come close to what he pulled off.

              He lied about his school career
              He lied about his travels in the East as a youngster
              He lied about his university career
              He lied about his military career
              He lied about his war injuries
              He lied about what he was doing with Crowley
              He lied about being a nuclear physicist
              He lied about his original Dianetics research
              He lied about making Clears in 1950
              He lied when he claimed Dianetics worked[1]
              He lied about his drug consumption
              He lied about his alcohol consumption
              He lied about what really happened with Purcell
              He lied about his first wife to his second wife, then married her anyway
              He lied to Sara about Alexis’ whereabouts
              He lied to Alexis later, claiming he was not her father
              He lied to you about Quentin
              He lied about the meter, reversing his stance once Matheyson’s patents had expired
              He lied about what exactly he was doing in Rhodesia
              He lied about the effects of LSD (and only had two subjects)
              He lied about Mission Into Time
              He lied about what exactly the SO was doing in the Med at every single port
              He lied about the volcanoes Xenu used (they did not exist then)
              He lied about Incident I (it’s actually a Greek Orthodox Easter ceremony)
              He lied about Snow White
              He lied about discarding Mary Sue under the bus
              He lied about O/W being the sole cause of blows
              He lied when he declared Herbie Parkhouse
              He lied when he declared Nibs
              He lied when he declared John McMaster
              He lied when he declared David Mayo
              He lied about locking kids up in chain lockers
              He lied about chucking little old ladies overboard from the Apollo
              He lied about the structure of The Bridge – the entire thing is a gross violation of the Auditor’s Code and consists entirely of evaluating the preclear’s case prior to inspection
              He lied about how much money he was getting from the Church
              He lied about forgiving six million dollars of “debt”
              He lied in KSW1 about being off the lines – in reality, he had never been anywhere else
              He lied about the Mission Holder’s Conference – he orchestrated the whole thing and approved every action
              He lied when he told you pc folders were sacrosanct and would never be used against you
              He lied about all the major incidents in his life, as evidenced by his own papers found by Gerry Armstrong and to be used in an official biography by Garrison. When Garrison insisted on writing the truth backed up by his actual contact, Hubbard set his attack dogs loose in the form of the GO

              If you want to know his real intent for his life, read his Affirmations (freely available online). They are probably the most accurate description we have of the man, and they are in his own hand.

              [1] Only two cases are known when this “scientifically proven science of the mind” was put to real objective tests. Both times, it failed miserably. Scientology has never been subjected to any objective test at all, and as far as we known there are no research records in existence at all.

              So tell me again why I should take a single word Hubbard ever spoke seriously and why I shouldn’t bring his actions into the light of day?

              Ball, meet court.

            4. Bla bla bla. Same shit different day. The tech works for me and always has. That’s the long and short of it. Tough guy.

            5. You still haven’t answered any simple questions, bar one (setting up NOTs).

              I smell a troll.

              And you have very very carefully omitted any data that might identify you.

            6. Jay, you seem overly worked up here. My observation: you barge in here, not doing any homework At All such as reading about the owner of the blog, throwing lots of general opinions around while pointing fingers at others who voice theirs, asking very few questions, avoiding amswering questions, speaking your virwpoints in a loud and often rude way. Why?

              Funny that while our old trusted Scientology Defender, Marildi exits the stage to the left, and promptly after, you come barging in on the right 🙂

            7. Wow. And we’re off to the races with the shame and blame. If you would apply your own Scientology standard own conduct here it would give you pause. Your rigorous accusations are only pointing the finger at yourself. Why are you so fired up?

            8. Because people like you foment an air of suppression on me as Scientologist.. I was walking in a prking lot a while ago and saw a guy pull up in a pick up truck. He had a bumper sticker on the back of his truck. It said “KILL ALL SCIENTOLOGISTS”. I talked to him at length and he was never a Scientologist never read a book. He said he got his info from site like this one. After talking to him for about an hour I clarified several things and we parted as friend.

            9. That’s a nice anecdote that I don’t actually believe. Re-read your posts and tell me who writing here is bringing the friction? I’m speeding you as a Scientologist? Please! I’m just a guy sitting quietly in a reclinerhaving a chat with my friends. That OSA nonsense of, “You’re suppressing me!” Has long ago worn threadbare and is of no interest any longer.

              If you want to be here and discuss, then discuss and listen to others. If you’ve worked out your place in the world and have no more questions or issues to sort out, then congratulations.

            10. Displaying emotions truthfully can raise tone….in my view, at least 2.5 is necessary to ‘go exterior’….(anyone who studied about it?)

            11. True but then again someone can blow a persons head off and they’d be exterior for sure.

            12. Ok Jay, who do you know who has attained exterior with full peception. You said you know many people.

              First let me say I believe that state is attainable.

              Here is where we discover the truth. I am not concerned with being right. I don’t care if I am right or wrong. I only care about the truth regarding this.

              Please send one of your friends over to this blog and I will do a test. It will be fare as I have no agenda other than meeting someone who is exterior-stablely with FULL perceptions.

              Our texting ideas and beliefs mean nothing. If I knew someone who could do this I would certainly invite him here to back me up.

              Ball back to you Jay

            13. And Jay if you don’t trust that I’d be honest, I’ll devise the test and you can do it.

            14. You are in any position to test me on anything. Perhaps in the squared circle and see how many round you can go other than that you couldn’t carry my jockstrap.

            15. Hubbard was more exterior than interior all of his life. Forget the drugs the wogs says Hubbard takes, exterior is a state that can be achieved!

            16. ok Jay, thanks. Stable Exterior with full perceptions is just that. If I go from my present room into the kitchen, i can tell you what is on the table. I am stably exterior from my bedroom and I can see perfectly what is on the table. It is impossible to see incorrectly what is on the table. Because I am looking at it.

              So here is the test:

              1) what color is the ceiling of the room that I am in?

              2) I have two pictures on the wall. What are they?

              3) is there a statue in the middle of the room?

              4) How many windows and doors?

              5) hovering above my house discribe my surroundings.

              6) do I live in a single family house or apartment complex or a green bio house with a stream running?

              You can leave your body and tell me the answer. It is easy.

            17. @ Chris 🙂

              Reason is not the friend of blind faith. It is it’s mortal enemy, because reason challeges the very foundation of blind faith.

              And because blind cannot see, sight is mistrusted.

  8. This is interesting and oddly corroborates, in a way, a particular interrogatory that was sent out to orgs many years ago (I believe before the big PTS/SP Course evolution) that asked staff to make a list of all the org public that were not doing well, known to be PTS, struggling in life, etc.

    OMG, I should have run for the hills right then! It was such a huge list I thought, “wow, what’s wrong with this picture?” but, alas, it didn’t shake me enough at the time. My thoughts were how wonderful it was that something was coming out to handle this mess. Oy vey!

    As an aside: I absolutely hated the PTS/SP course. It was a paranoiac nightmare for me.

  9. Of course it has. Thats why people stay even for decades. Hope dies last. becoming free. However, DM crossed the line, too long, too hard and ruthlessly.

    1. I see tremendous pressure on people everywhere in life. When one starts ANY spiritual practice, one’s life has to be more or less beyond the need of ‘survival’, that is ‘ethical’ and one needs to be that so that ANY practice can have an effect.
      In Buddhism, sila(ethics) is a prerequisite and has to be imroved to perfection.’Higher’ states or well-being in life, professionalism as a ‘human’ cannot be achieved without that.
      Ethics is COMMON sense. The underlying sensitivity-perceiving ability of the one-life-force.

      1. When I ‘hate’ someone, its energy can be ‘felt’ even at a distance by the one I hate. When that energy is released, as by ‘miracle’, the other reaches out for me. Calls me up etc. It’s the power of the COMMON sensibility of Life…PLACEBO=as one PLEASES, Life will give that….Life is like ONE Heart moving…in-out-in-out….with the ‘information-wishes’ of the ‘ones’. My view.

  10. I was studying and auditing in scientology for six years and stopped it six years ago. I have counted up 30 people in about 10 minutes. I probably know more. I hadn’t known them before, so I can write down only what I observed and what they told me during that time. The common thing is that their reach (activity in life business, studying, sport, job) significantly improved in 26 cases. In case of 2 persons there were ethics problems in their personal lives. 2 people, after coming back form the Sea Org, were in a much better physical and mental condition (emanating more theta) than when they had left two years before. I know about three divorces with mutual consent and no ‘broken’ families. I draw this statistics
    based on the mission in the quiet city of 160.000 people where I live. When I studied
    in the org in the capital, I didn’t know many people there (for half a year) and didn’t
    hear about ‘major’ problems, big ‘crashes’.
    In my view, it is in the nature of the mind that one feels pressure sometimes which one has to face and overcome. So did I on occassions, when there was a big pressure to buy some materials or a service. Interestingly, when I faced that, there was always a bigger ability (reach with new solutions). Due to my previous ‘case’, the ‘high ranking’ people was one of my buttons. So I ‘pulled in’ some. When they put ‘pressure’ on me, buy this or that, I always came out ‘more alive’. And so did they due to my data knowledge and presence. In retrospect, I don’t mind it, it was like in sport, previously. I believe in honesty and clean hands, the power of ‘theta’.
    I believe, one is responsible for one’s ‘theta or entheta’ in one’s life – that is that matters more because due to this will appear manifestations in one’s life.
    As I wrote previously, I had continuous gains during my studying and auditing.

  11. Just Human,

    “…with gains worth the “side effects”.
    This is a very good way to look at it.

  12. Nice graphics and some food for thought but otherwise somewhat misguided and grossly flawed in methodology and differentiation.
    First of all where is the definition of ‘success’ and how it can be measured? If one does fall for the sales pitch of the Flag service rap “you can go into debt, as you will be so much more able to pay it back after”, yes than one would look for success in terms of material gain or similar achievements.
    So measuring against that objective with “success in life” (where success is not even clearly defined in any way) is somewhat of a confusion unless one wants to debunk the lies used by the COS, its registrars and management in their way of selling and marketing Scientology as a tool to success in the materialistic sense. And if that is what you intended, it would be a fitting analysis to debunk those lies.
    But that was not what was promised in the title.
    If one wants to measure the success how Scientology has an impact on lives shouldn’t one foremost look at first at the goal of Scientology processing?
    “to bring an individual into such thorough communication with the physical universe that he can regain the power and ability of his own postulates.”
    Now one would come to see success defined as a freer and more self-determined person. That success is not necessarily identical with anything manifested in the physical universe. It can most reliable measured at a subjective level.
    The goal of some processing and almost all ‘admin” and ‘ethics” tech in the COS can be defined as “to bring an individual into a state of obedience and deluded state of mind, that it can be used as a resource for the COS.”
    Therefore the next question to answer before one can proceed to measure success is under which goal was this Scientologist processed?
    See, ‘Scientology’ does not work any longer as a somewhat accurate generalization. I once asked the question: “What is Scientology” in a Scientology forum and nobody did answer it. The problem is ‘Scientology’ is so diluted in its definition, it means all and everything and something different including the opposite to different people.
    If one wants to see if individuals have success with Scientology tech one will need first to establish with what purpose the individual took Scientology Services, with what purpose the processing was done, how standardly that processing was done and then proceeds to ask the individual to determine success or no success.
    Without doing such a detailed and differentiated survey the fact alone how long many people stick with the COS even with the abuses should be an indicator that there was something working for them subjectively. Between all the lies and deception there was something that made them hang in there.
    I know what it did for me was quite great. It got me out of a bloody mess and helped me to be more successful in my life in the sense that I am running my show rather than being run by my past and stuck ideas. At the same time the Brand of Scientology of the COS complicated my life and threw some challenges my way. Other things helped me as well, a good education, friends and family but very uniquely Scientology training and processing as it helped me to find myself. I do not measure this in the size of my bank account, or other material objects. I would measure it in terms of personal growth and greater ability to live my life.

    I personally attribute therefore great success and beneficial impact of Scientology tech when it was used with its defined purpose.
    That success has nothing to do with the cars I drive or the house I live in or any other material attribute of my life. It has to do with the quality and my livingness as a spiritual being.
    So I am sorry, I feel your essay missed the point of its title by orders of magnitude.

    1. It is easy enough to see if a person fares better or worse in life. Just like it was so easy to rank your fellow students in your class in the various subjects when you were 10. I remember it very well – when I was 10, Tom and Tore was best in physical sports, Stine was the best in Norwegian, myself best in maths, etc. And I could easily have ranked the whole class from to to bottom in any subject. And then when we get older, we’d like to think such evaluations are so much more complex, etc. But it is not.

      Scientology is there to “make the able more able”, remember?

      Well, from my experience as related in this OP, I can say that if you are “able” when you get into Scientology, you stand a greater chance of getting your life ruined than become significantly more able through it.

      Some more details:

      When I report people having gotten Awesome results, I can see that they are doing much better in life. Of the five I have seen, two came in as drug addicts, one in danger of losing his life – and they ended up with decent, normal lives. One was on the verge of mental break-down and is now doing great. Another was in serious mental trouble and is now leading a normal life. The last one was leading a good life and is now doing great.

      When I report people having been ruined in Scientology, I see people whose life is in shambles. One came in doing great and is now in financial ruin and with little spiritual or mental gains. One was quite successful and ended up homeless and as a drug addict. Another was doing good and ended up in a mental institution. Yet another was leading a normal life and is now a wreck and has also been treated in a mental institution. Another was leading a normal life and got financially ruined almost living on the street. Another attempted suicide. And the last one ending up with serious mental and physical issues.

      When I report having seen negative results, they range from financial troubles to mental issues to having difficulties leading a normal life.

      When I report people with neutral impact from Scientology, I see both good and bad results in the person’s life – like the person report being more happy but struggling financially, or earning more and living better while being sad or troubled mentally, etc.

      When I report people with positive impact from Scientology, I see people who are doing clearly better in life – being more happy, more spiritual, doing well in their families, enjoying the life they want to enjoy, etc.

      It is actually not that difficult to see if a person has had gains or losses in Scientology. If you let yourself look honestly at the people you know well.

      1. Yes, and each one has it individual “why”. It all goes back to how they were guided by the staff in the first place. If the registrar is a con man and they are not aware of this they can be sold things they do not need. I have seen reges rip people off and ruin their credit. However I also seen reges that really did care and sold them what they really needed and they won. Ethics is the operating word here. Unethical people have gotten on various posts in the orgs and wreaked havoc. This applies to any organization as well, Scientology or not. I have been in Scientology for 37 years and have had many trials and battles. But I never compromised with my own reality, even though it was hard at times I made it through despite the rantings of some madmen and women.

        1. What I see is a hyped-up subject that is so complex that few can get consistent good results and no one can use it to handle whatever a person in front of them wants handled (despite that it is touted to be able to do so).

          1. Well that is a mouth full of nonsense! It is obvious that you don’t know didley about the subject of Scientology. How much training did you ever have if any? Where did you train at. How many pc and students have you taken up the bridge? Or are you just a “natterer” just looking for attention? Give me a break Mr. know it all!

            1. And here we go. The proof that you don’t know what you are talking about is that you have a differing point of view. This inconsistency is of no material importance to the true believerwho had it all nailed.

            2. You write with to many generalities. Which is the #1 Anti-Social characteristic. You did not answer any of my questions which is a way to avoid the truth. Answer the questions or stay off of my lines. I do not like having written data like this as it is 1.1 on the Tone Scale.

            3. You don’t have questions as have stable data. I’m ok with you letting your ideology do your thinking for you, but this is a thinking person’s forum so bullying and fixed ideas won’t win much applause here.

            4. I know there is a lot of bank agreemnt amongst the minions. Carry on. You have no way out and not success to talk about just natter and inval of a religion that you possibly claim your “motivators” but behind you negative rantings there lives the things you did that you have hidden. So we will not continue to entertain you on this as you have no idea that “Clean Hands Make a Happy Life” You have my deepest sympathies..

            5. The writers here are not “some clowns.” We are people with names and valid opinions. Your bullying is part and parcel of the ideology that you are promoting as having a positive impact on your life. This is something for you to look at and consider. Your writing style is having an effect, but not in the direction that you hope.

            6. Having no argument for what Geir writes, you attack him personally. This is transparent in the extreme to any of us writing here. Especially for me, this shows a failing of depth. Almost to a person, anyone anywhere who has ever had any kind of contact with Scientology at all has left it behind. If you choose to stay with with and be true to this ideology, you will have to do it within the boundaries of Scientology, because brother it doesn’t wash once you leave the cult.

            7. Jay you are a sleep walker trained to think anything critical of scientology is bad. And anything critical is an enemy needing to fight.
              Thank you for being a good example of a Scientologist. You certainly are. Attact, attack attack. You have understood Ron well. And my praise is not sarcasm. It is honest.

        2. Jay, I used to feel that way. It kept me from having to face up to the idea that scn might promote this kind of unethical behavior. Ends justifies the means… whatever it takes….. etc. And the stat emphasis, too.

  13. Very Interesting….Those that I had contact with, while involved, seem to generally be “losers” in the memory of my experience. To this day, I remember more “non evolved ” persons in the “group.” The whole idea of “exchange” for deeds or actions poisons the “golden rule.”

  14. I believe the reason why almost every person that gets into Scientology leaves, or why no amazing people seem to emerge from Scientology or why Scientology doesn’t seem to able to produce much visible results, is that Scientology usually doesn’t handle what the person wants handled, it handles what it thinks the person should handle.

    1. You are right about that. But to leave and not get handled is foolish. That is why one should study the tech and find the real why for ones self and not “compromise with their won reality”. I got the training after I was abused. Since then I have handled what I came into Scientology for. There is always someone who is going to attack you overtly or covertly on this planet.If you are doing anything worthwhile in any group besides Scientology. If one is trained in the tech to handle it you will make it through.

      1. True for you and true for me. But if you were a person that got your life ruined through Scientology, would you stick around to get even more of it?

        1. Iwa in that positon at one time and knew that it was not the subject that ruined things for me it was the scum-bag assholes who worked at ruining my life. I followed the policy called “THE SAFE POINT’ AND WENT FROM THERE. bUT IF i WERE NOT TRAINED AS MUCH AS i WAS i WOULD FEEL THE SAME WAY SOME OTHER PEOPLE DO. The thing for them to do is find an auditor and who really can apply the tech and get it handled. When I found someone I could trust the first thing we did was called an L-1C correction list and from there I sailed up the Bridge. In the independent fielD, a great standard tech auditor I highly recommend is Trey Lotz or Chris Black. They are both excellent.

          1. Would you say the same for Psychiatry? … that if the person is treated with Psychiatry, he should stay the course until his life gets handled even though he see he gets worse and worse? How about the if the person gets involved in shamanism, should he also then stay the course regardless?

            1. Psychiatry is a DEAD END. There is no workable tech there. Electric Shock? DRUGS? You can not drug a man nor beat a man into sanity. You are way off base on that one and your true colors are showing. Are you a secular humanist? An atheist? Do you even believe in the human spirit? If not I have nothing more to say to you Mr. Meat head.

            2. Isene’s true colors are always showing because he doesn’t hide behind an ideology and then take pot-shots at anyone disagreeing with him. He discusses. This is a different concept to a person steeped in the rigorous belief system that has him seeing evil everywhere and shooting from the hip at anything that doesn’t toe the Scientology party line. You are going to have to try hard to quell your fixed ideas and discuss. But you could, you know. Just lay them down for a bit. They’ll still be there waiting for you if you want to pick them up again later.

            3. I am not hiding behind anything. I made it through the mine field and some clown is saying the path does not work. This leads one to contemptuous laughter! People who fail in Scientology all have the same battle cry. When someone attacks my religion my reaction is the same as any Christan, person in Islam, Buddhist, or Hindu. Disrespecting the religious beliefs of another is very dangerous indeed You can say what you please and what you have to say does not have to please but just be careful not to make to many people un-pleased. I started my comm to this thread with affinity but it was belittled and disrespected. I did not start this childish games condition.

        2. Geir
          What is the result of agreeing or disagreeing with WHAT another is saying from the aspect of creation? Reality? Responsibility? Its result for oneself? For the other?
          For Life lived?

      2. bla bla bla, i hope one day you see the SCN mindfuck. What do you think we are? DIV 6 ers with a one week comm course?
        Have fun in the prison camp, keep going.

  15. I have thought about this on and off for a long time. It is hard to say what my life would have been. I was always a searcher and some of the awareness I gained in scn prompted me to stop looking elsewhere. I always wonder if I would have become an ascetic in the east, starving myself in my attempts to find enlightenment. Although I don’t feel the need to do that any longer, I am now free to look elsewhere and learn more. Scn was a part of this journey, an important part. Even seeing the negative aspects of scn when I was exploding my stable data, has helped me be stronger and definitely wiser and more tolerant. Have I achieved the state of WILL NEVER AGAIN BE FOOLED? No, but I will be a tougher mark.

    One area that would have been much better without Scientology is is helping a particular person in my life who suffers from severe OCD. Before I became free of the church, I did not look outside for answers. I have learned soo much about so may things since then. I have found many answers to help with the OCD and other things by learning about and using “other practices”. There are good peopole in the world of psychology and even psychiatry, who do not try to drug or shock their patients, but work with nutrition and lifestyle. Sometimes I am angry with myself for my lapse in this area, but I am doing it now. If I had all the answers in the beginning, what fun would it be.

    1. Ah, but you didn’t have all the answers in the beginning 🙂

      You’ve also grown older, wiser and matured since the beginning. And maybe this helps:

      Do you like the place you are at now?
      You had to walk the path you walked to get to that place.
      Any other path would have taken you somewhere else.

      I made that up about a year ago, and maybe I’m just fooling myself but it helps me 🙂
      The place I’m at now has an awesome girlfriend and two kids in it, and I’m not giving them up for anything! If being in for 27 years is what it took, then so be it.

      1. Alan: I made that up about a year ago, and maybe I’m just fooling myself but it helps me 🙂

        Chris: Congratulations! I feel as you do that it’s good to be happy with what we are doing.

    2. Well written. I also use nutrion and homeopathic medicine to treat things as well as my pcs. There has never been a closed door to learning other ways. Just the other a day a student showed me a book he was reading. It was one of the many Cantos in the HINDU religion, I believe it was the 17th. A great read. We also go to a temple and “break bread” with some Hare Krshnas a couple times a month. I was given a very good book called “The Science of Self Realization. incredible book. What I learned from Ron was to explore other faiths as well. I know PEOPLE in the last 20 years or so have become very dogmatic with Scientology. That is not the way I was trained.

      1. I admire your ability to look. When I was in the church, it was even disallowed for my son to do eye exercises directed by a chiropractic neurologist.

        What is your current status with the church?

      1. Who was it that said recently the VFP of Scientology is ex-Scientologists?

        I have hunch it was you Chris 😉

        1. Yes, on to the rest Chris!

          Ha, the final VPF is an Ex Scientologist . Indeed Splog.

          And the rest is so amazingly wonderful. So much to learn and all the time in and out of the world to learn it 😉

  16. @Jay & @

    Jay; Thank you for your comments above. They serve well as an example of an average “true believer” scientologists. I may use this thread with your posts as relevant linking in the future.

    I can’t see any specific questions you have to me in your comments above. If you do have any questions directed at me or are willing to discuss any specifics, please respond to this comment of mine, OK?

    1. Your are welcome for my comments. I do have some questions for ou. How long were you in Scientology, if at all. What specific training did you have. What actual states of being did you achieve? Dis these states last. If you do not use Scientology in your life now, what path do you follow and how many people have you truly helped on your new path?

      1. Every question you ask of Geir has been answered in detail right here on this blog.

        Geir documented his changing attitudes right here in real time, inviting comment, contribution and discussion from anyone who cared enough to type a response. It goes back 4 at least years, and continues to this day with detailed descriptions of what games he currently plays, including the name and contact details of his consulting company.

      2. Short form, so you don’t have to do any homework as in reading the top pages on this blog:

        I was in the CoS from 1984-2009 and an independent scientologist a few years after that.

        Training: Lots of admin training, including Exec Status 1, several hats. Pro Trs, Upper Indoc, old HQS, Interned course Sup, E-meter course, Pro Debug course, PTS/SP, several OT Hatting courses (Secrets of the MEST universe, Human Eval, Perception of Truth, State of Man, Time Track of Theta, Route to Infinity and a few others), lots of smaller courses. Solo 1, OT 6.
        Processing: OT 8 (2006), L11 (2011)

        I have had gains on everything I did in Scientology – especially the TRs, OT 2, OT5-7, OT 8 and L11. All major gains lasted at least up till now (from shy to extroverted, artistic abilities, ability to not give a fuck, no attention on past, very free of shame/blame/regret and more)

        I see Scientology as a set of tools, nothing more. I use that and many, many other tools. I use the tools needed to achieve good results for others whatever those tools may be.

        I also see Scientology as a religion. As opposed to a science. I am all for science. Religion, nope.

        How about you?

        1. And, I am on my own path to my own truth. And I help people almost every day.

          Now, just out of curiosity, how come you didn’t bother to read at least the “About me” page on this blog?

            1. ‘I help people almost every day’. Yes, you do. Me is one example. I have been gaining a tremendous number of valuable insights by reading your works, posts, by communicating with people on your blog. Thank you for that!
              ‘I am on my own path to my own truth’. Thank you for sharing your views on this path. Based on what you write, I see that a path of adventure and a display of truth
              all the time. No more to say now…..Namaste.

        2. Thank you for your answers and VWD on your progress. Sciens and religion are born of the same basic truth. It was the Darwin theory and other ilk like that who tried to make them different. You should know that it was a Thetan who created those things in the first place. There is much data on that in the Hindu religion makes for a good study. The Vedic Hyms Which there is estimated to be around 50,000 of them .which have not all been translated from the original language. I did the Bridge both original OT levels and the N/OTs Rundowns. I am OEC FEBC trained and a Class V interned auditor.

          1. from mystery to mystery, along the mysticism
            gets off your misery and reborns the ancient myth
            as the clusters meet with the sacred sword
            the know to the mystery scale has began
            as if it is science what on you heart may be found
            the static with many faces will be gone

    2. I was thinking about systematize some process to handle “cognitive dissonance” and sell it to the Office of Special Affair. 😀

  17. This is from a book (Personal, Career and Financial Security, by Richard Maybury) tha I read which helped me to see. It is about success and I feel gives a big reason why Scientologists do not succeed:

    “….humans are very relucatant to throw out their models. They will throw out data very quickly, but not models.
    Once they have been taught a model, even a false one, many will throw out tons of data before they begin to question their model. Cognitive dissonance.
    The inability to make a paradigm shift can be especially serious when ethics enter into the subject of models.
    If your model is corrupt, it will produce corrupt results automatically without you realizing it. And it will do so in a mass-production fashion, like a factory rolling cars off an assembly line.
    I am sure Genghis Kahn thought he was doing an excellent job. Hitler and Stalin, too. Horrible models lead to horrible behavior.
    When you see good people being harmed, question the underlying model>”

    That last sentence is what really got me looking. I saw lots of good people being hurt.Ron even talks about this himself in The Wat to Happinessunder the section Learn.

    “Humans

    1. Ron talks about ending up in the trash bin of incompetence if “one blindly accepts ‘facts’ or ‘truths’ just because one has been told they must, but this is exactly what he asks us to do in numerous other places. Most Scientologist have ended up in that trash bin, to a greater or lesser degree.

      1. Maria, splog, Alonzo, Geir and others have posted quite a bit about this incongruity. It isa very interesting study. When put together with your post on models, we get to the layer of notice. In the case of Scientology, it looks like not a good motive at work.

        1. Data vs Models. Yes indeed, that has the aroma of a vital piece of the puzzle about it.

          Susie, thanks so much for that quote, it’s an amazing find. It’s probably worthy of a complete blog OP of it’s own. If we ask Geir nicely, he must just do it when the current topic has run it’s course.

          1. I am glad that you found it useful. It jas been one of the most important concepts that I have come across in this life.

            Here’s another quote from the book that is really helpful to me:

            Cognitive dissonance can be so powerful that if you have a fact or idea that disagrees with a person’s model, you should be gentle and polite when you present it to that person. . You are likely to cause some pai, perhaps even physical pain; so be careful. I have met people who are so wedded to their models that when they encounter something that challenges them they become violent.”

            Have we not seen this time after time with church people. They feel very threatened.

            1. This is how the John Allenders of this world come to be. In their minds when they look at us, we don’t just threaten our own eternity, we threaten their’s as well. And the feel pain, usually in the gut/midriff area.

        2. I believe that the motive of almost all the people in scn is good. My motive was good, but I still did bad or stupid things because I bought into the model. In my opinion, the basic model is, “do whatever it takes, no limits.” As they say, “the road to hell is filled with good intentions.”

          1. Susie
            Right you are, in my view. ‘Cognitive dissonance’ is a ‘dichotomy’. GOOD intention, implies its opposite, that something is viewed as BAD. Help can imply that ‘I know better’, there is ‘something wrong’ etc. Behind ‘save’ there is Danger….the no ‘evaluation or devaluation’ principle is valid, in my experience.
            (cognitive basically means perceiving and knowing…when it arises from consciousness, without the ‘ I ‘ filter, there is a response, proper to the situation….my experience)

            1. Hmm. I just don’t know about that. I don’t know what his motives were. His actions were a mixed bag.

            2. That’s my point. His actions were so ambiguous as to need an additional layer to understand the man. That’s why I pick motive. Result? Unholy motives. Reason? I don’t think he flipped back and forth in motive.

            3. Chris: “That’s my point. His actions were so ambiguous as to need an additional layer to understand the man. That’s why I pick motive. Result? Unholy motives. Reason? I don’t think he flipped back and forth in motive.”

              The Affirmations.

            4. I’m not sure what you mean in this context. — I’m saying that Scientology as a doctrine is ambiguous. It is contrary. It is impossible to reconcile outside its own model which defines it as right all of the time. To understand this, I am looking at what motive could bring such a conglomeration to manifestation and saying that what I see undercutting this model is ugly. Did Hubbard order one of his messengers to go out and buy birthday roses for Mary Sue when they were due? Probably. So that is a good intention. But my overall point is not whether Hubbard could have a kind thought, but what unholy hell was Scientology born out of? I think that motive must have been something consistent for it to have dragged on so long with such an outpouring of beautiful public relations proclamations from Hubbbard, while coincindentally consistently and vigorously lying about what Scientology was really doing — ripping people and families apart ideologically, socially, politically, and financially. So in summation, I no longer think of Hubbard as a good man.

            5. Chris, I agree with you, mostly. My uncertainty stems from his having developed/synthesized, (or whatever he did) something that does help people when it is free of the control garbage. No doubt he was a power junkie and did whatever was necessary to maintain his power. I would not call him a good man, but I can’t see him doing what he did without wanting to help people get better. I guess it’s possible, as a means to an end, but from what I have heard from people who knew him, he was really straight when it came to unbugging a case and his C/Sing. I guess it does not matter what the intentions were or were not.

  18. Geir,

    I am having trouble with my posting s. I am only able to view a few lines of my post and then I am writing blind. Am I doing something wrong?

    1. I think that is local to your browser… Can you grab the bottom right corner of that text area and drag it down to make it bigger?

        1. Susie,
          maybe – try it with pushing “enter” (that works for me when I copy texts and see only some lines – don’t know if this is applicable for your situation).

  19. Mixed stuff for me Geir. Some positive, and some negative. The positive can make you accept the negative too, if you get logical with it, and think something like “oh if this and that is good, then the other is good too”. So, some silly ideas can have impact on you. I had some wild good stuff with SCN, and so the stupid stuff could have an impact on me too, as I adopted some that I encountered, to some degree, for a while. I suppose one can take the positive stuff alone and have a very good time with it –maybe it depends much on who you associate with. If I had never joined any SCN group and had just studied SCN by myself, it would be great.

    1. I think it’s sad when you have people who know better about you, than yourself. That stands true for psychologists, scientologists, random people as well as anti-Hubbardians who know better than you that the only reason why you don’t acknowledge the bad Hubbard has done to you, is that you’re too brainwashed (dumb) to know about it. I guess if I deny myself and accept another’s point of view instead of mine, I will no longer be brainwashed… 😛

    2. I know that feeling, and I attest you could have a very good time on your own for the time you want. But, when we treat with groups and other people, that’s when the phenomenon hits you. For me was like feeling disappointed over and over and over again, by the people that at first took enough of my attention, admiration and trust (Hubbard included). Taking all the good, by ignoring or forcely not looking into the bad things is stretch as is looking all the bad things and not a single good one.
      My major gains between all this stretches was “to stop maximizing my disappointments, by preventing or avoiding let them getting me down”. So, in bad things you could get good learnings, and that would mean cogs and VGIs. 😀

      1. Yes I did that too. But that disappointment was mine and was there for a reason (if it was at all) and I invalidated it thinking it was banky. I no longer invalidate myself for being ‘banky’. That’s a great win for me –out of SCN. My emotions, feelings, thoughts etc are my own, and they’re not wrong. Of course SCN is not the only group that asserts that about wrongness. You know if you don’t adapt well in society everything about you is wrong 😛

    3. for me, after reading dianetics I just wanted to go clear. I was sold on the state, that it could be achieved in some hours of processing.

      I never intended to join some group or religion. I always had a button, if you will on religion. I grew up being non-religious, I didn’t believe in a god nor disbelieve. I grew up neutral or just didn’t know.

      But somehow I became a part of this group, religion called scientology. And the next thing you know, during my 26 year journey and being on staff to help,

      why I’m not “clear” and 26 years later after getting the deb cook email, I’m like WTF, so I started doing some due diligent on the subject of scientology on the internet.

      And what’s the bottom line, the books and lectures I have read, sure they helped me, and the processing I got helped me, I don’t have any doubts about that,

      but, by golly, it sure has been a long journey for the reward not being equal to the time, effort, emotion (good & bad), fixed ideas installed vs the results. Just to go “clear” and I’m not even that yet. LOL

      I’m done with the self sacrifice for scientology. Hubbard says we can handle any case, yah right. I think he means any case that has money and potential to earn money (ie celebrities at the beginning of their career). LOL

      And I don’t believe in “case” anymore as in engrams.

      1. I grew up in some religion, but I started to look at Scientology after I was neutral about “any” religion. From the beggining I was It’s quite difficult to separate a group from its ideology or doctrine, like separating some VIP club from its leader or elite members. From the beginning I was interested in the concepts and philosophy, but somehow I ended up on the staff too. How was that? I recall it was “emotional coercion painted as professional coaching”. I didn’t know what was happening while being coerced.
        I believe everyone has a “case”, but is a generalization like saying “everyone has a profile”, and my actual view about that is not the same as when I was a book 1 dianeticist.

      2. Yes, I joined the group because of DN too –to become Clear. Before that, at younger ages, I had more ‘supernatural’ quests which were pretty much aligned with SCN, so SCN awoke that inside me again.

        Yeah you need $ to do SCN in the group…or a good twin to co-audit with. I haven’t observed the second happening though.

        1. when I look back, you know,

          I was “programmed” as a “case” (human) all per the C/S and all per the Bridge to total Freedom. Of course this is evaluation, or telling the person what he must do next.

          Yep, I was programmed, to go up the bridge

          and hubbard did use the terminology of computers and the clear button in his dianetics.

          But maybe the correct term might be “reprogrammed” to follow hubbard.

          1. Like in psychology, the first interested are the people who want to solve and help their own cases. Looking back, I see what’s happening now and ever:
            – people in trouble need help
            – people know more about his own case
            – people need money to help and be helped
            – people join staff because they will do more help and get more help
            – people get deceive themselves
            – people get blamed and some go insane

            Why should I join to the staff? One thing is “my case” and how it could be helped or improved, “physiological, psychological, familiar, economical”, and another thing is how I could be recruited by my case and how much good I could do.

  20. I feel this is a very hot topic, and I see 2 things:

    1- Despite this may be some anecdotal and personal opinion put in graphics, it seems to be an attempt of an objective reliable statistic from an inductive and extrapolated procedure. In order to be more reliable, we have to add more and more people to the stats. If we think this is a low number to call this “objectively reliable”, we have to consider the number of little more than 200 people (from Dianetics, people tested by Ron himself, or merely invented).
    2- From an honest viewpoint, this is a counteract for all the false statistic from the CoS Management, and all the LIES about numbers and how big and bright that Scientology grows and hits over the entire world. If that is not brainwashing, we can call it simply: LIES. (I would suggest the acronym CLS, i.e “chronic lie statistics”)

    So, about making an objective stats over the Free Zone, I think that may be quite impossible. What I can say is that there are pros and cons in delivering Scientology outside the church, and the negative effect is the desorganization, more subjective management and even the same fanatism. The positive would be that they are “free” from suppresive managements, so they can “adapt or combine the standart tech” for good. I guess it’s quite impossible to make an arrangement of reliable data about gains with field auditors, and it would be as reliable as could be the data from the “nazi regiment” inside the church. For what I attest, the freezoners escape from the church, they split out, then they organize again and they build another church but now with changes from their experiences inside the official church, and supposedly they’re correcting all the mistakes they attested.

    I can’t deliver an opinion over what I see is a wide open field where I don’t know all the things that are going, and it also would mean to take the speak on behalf of others.

    But in order to make this more interesting, I will say that every scientologist (that proudly refers himself as a scientologist) from the free zone I have met, or partially have known, has a case far from Clear and was PTS even on their own terms. Some of them were assholes pretending to be very trustworthy over the tech and against being polite embracing up “big and adult babies”, while pisses out of their own cradle. Some others were average and above average people as they were not too involved on the staff scourge or they were detached enough from that mindset in order to deliver better results or just being better persons.

    So to speak, I would suggest if there are any field auditor from the freezone, please respond honestly to the call about making a stat of their results on people.

    And I also say that the organized church outside the official church that I refer is “Icause”, founded by Tommy Thompson on Los Angeles. 😉

    1. Prior to SCN I had undergone through some conditioning and had become sort of realistic and apathetic. Although it wasn’t what I really wanted, I had stopped even trying to have things be the way I wanted. I was trying to adapt instead. Although I did go through conditioning inside the COS as well, LRH’s ‘crazy’ materials helped me snap out of both the COSes and others conditioning. Generally, although I don’t seek -I believe I dont- harm others, I don’t compromise with my will. That might as well be one of my biggest wins in SCN, although the group SCN tried to take that away from me, to make me a disciple.

      1. I am on the 16 % neutral. I was warned about the fanatism of scientologists before knowing them. I read everything I could, officially, about Scientology before I went into an org. Was it lucky? Even with that shield, I got very very restimulated by what I attested inside the org. I mean, the scientologists themselves were restimulators for me. If it’s suppose that the strongest implants are the deceiving, lies, hypocrisy, betrayal… then, I was effect. A funny anecdote is when I offered to help testing the e-meter, and then she ask me about something that bothered me, and while the needle was jumping to the right, she asked what was I thinking about, and I answered the name of one of the staff members, our colleague. lol
        I think I almost did what I wanted, while I was adapting, they couldn’t take that away from me. I mean, that’s something that can’t be taken away because that WAS me, and I was there, and HELLO, I persisted on my own space, I utilized everything I could learn to my favor, before “flying away” to assimilate what I had experienced. I suffered abuse? They were so mean? A little bit, but nothing worse than usual, I was masochist. I know other people didn’t get warnings, or advices, or vital information, and they stayed in that masochist conditioning for too long. That people went over the strangest and attested the weirdest situations. I could name a dozen, but it will sound like I will be debunking and suppressing scientologists gains, and some touchy egos would mourn. The point is that I am on the 16 % neutral, after all the good and bad.

        1. Yes, I had warnings too –more than many. But the prob is that although some critics criticize Hubbard’s sci fi, they engage in sci fi themselves when they don’t have a story to write. You know, stuff like SCN is the cult of Satan and black magic and such stuff. So I didn’t get to meet any Satan’s disciples in the Church and definitely figured out that critics wrote/talked trash. I’m not feeling abused by the COS. I guess the worse they can make you do is to make you harm yourself, and your life in general. But you need to agree for that to happen. Part of the fake statistics was the measurement of SCN by hours/material quantity delivered, and not by what impact those services had on people. So stuff like watching the orientation film was considered good production….my arse 😛

          1. I mean in the end what matter -since we deal with such a Bridge- is ‘have you helped somebody?’ (even yourself), and ‘how much’? If you can do it in 5 mins, it doesn’t make less help than if you did it in 50 hours. That’s how I see it. A ‘Bridge to Total Freedom’ -by the definitions of the words- would set thetans totally free…or at least untill they reach the end, they would reach a very good point of freedom. Does this happen? This would be a nice statistic for the COS, as they deliver Total Freedom. Yes I know, ‘dream on Spyro…’ 😛

            1. What exactly is the arguement, the SCN slang or something about the meaning?

          2. I think I share with you that, knowing all the warnings and related stuff, I went to the field of empirical discoveries to know what part of that had more truth. And I started to understand everything and every point of view that I known, from scientologists, to dissidents, to anonymous, etc. By any chance, did you scored “I factor” as the higher on your OCA? 😀

            I know what you’re saying, there are cycles that compulsively were completed to reach stats, even fomenting the cheating as on every office or bureau. I recall something by this:

            I was on October 2009, for the 25th anniversary of the IAS, on the mission on Argentina. They were all crazy, because there were low stats and “daddy-org” (Mexico) would be sending the money. They send a CEO (I think from Venezuela) to check the entire mission and solve the cause. All of the staff members were freaking out and pretending before the BOSS LEVEL arrival, and when the PES-business look like women arrived, the staff members becomes PTS in a pathetic way (the best of them were pretending so good that you can’t almost notice the stress and terror they were in). I was the special case of “who is she? what am I doing here? I has gelpz” total lost. Beyond the fear and tense atmosphere they flows trough me (I was effect, remember), I was sad for what I was seeing. Then she spoke and brought a motivational talk (it suppose to be motivational) and then started to keeps all cycles working and even speeding them up, pushing and pushing. A part of her speech was:

            “You know how the outside world is, there, behind those windows. Do you want to come back to that world? SO KEEP YOUR TONE UP AND AS HIGH AS POSSIBLE”.
            (I felt that she was trying to give us reasons to be happy, or reminding us that we were the happiest people over the world and we were in cause or something like that, as you could imagine)

            Funny incident. On the same event, the president Gustavo Libardi gave a speech where he was asking “Why Argentina is not working? What happens Argentina?” (it’s not the same in english, on argentinian language was more funny). And, yes, I was there, all the video proyection and PR attention to reach people with higher status. I wouldn’t change my experience for anything. lol 😀

            1. Hi Petteko. Interesting experiences. I think -according to SCN data I have- when ‘the world out there is bad/horrible/out-ethics’ etc, then you’re close to SPness. It’s ‘strange’ how some proudly pounded it over and over (mr Miscavige too). What problem do they have with the press, then? 😛

              I don’t know what the ‘I factor’ point is on the OCA, wanna tell me?. Generally, I haven’t studied about it –I’ve just been told some stuff about it, and filled some tests. But the case analysis that I got was very accurate, in my case.

            2. A good post of a pathetic situation and a relevant example of how for “Argentina to be working” defined as bringing loads of cash to COS.

            3. “I” factor means “reality”, and implies your ability to see other points of view, implies your ability to understand and help people. But, when that factor is the highest, it means that you have some kind of “self-sacrifice disorder” (being too good), and if “J” factor is low, that implies you have a propitiation syndrome. There are many lectures, but points to that. It’s one of the most important factors, along with D and H.
              But, talking about OCA, what do you think it could measure today? Do you think it will be accurate? If you are interested, I could take you the test again, and then give you another case analysis like if we were on the CoS. If that so, give me your e-mail or something. 😀

            4. Thanx for explaining Petteko. I had people who found out stuff about me such as a fixation over a PTP once, and another time that I didn’t accept anything from anyone (both while I was on staff 😛 ) and some other time one found out that I knew that I could cause an effect, but I only caused what I liked (that was in my latest OCA, about 10 years ago). I don’t know what the OCA could do now. The thing is I am not always in valence and I cannot give a sincere answer to all questions. For example, in the questions about whether I eat or sleep late, I cannot answer, as I -as a being- neither eat nor sleep. But anyway, if you like we can chat about this and that and anything… 🙂

            5. Oh I forgot. About the ‘I” factor: Yes I let people be and comm and most often I try to understand. Some confuse it with what you said. But I do it self determinedly. So, I don’t have to do it. And I can also roar and bite, to some people’s surprise (they wouldn’t expect it from me.) I think it’s nice to grant beingness, and it will be quite a different world if we do.

  21. Geir I was definitely a 10%’er. My wife, well she is in the 50% or overall negative. She did get wins, but she has had issues that came out during Scientology that have not turned off.

    I once read someone post that 2 of the best things they ever did was 1) get into Scientology, and 2) get out of Scientology. Perfect description of my experience.

    I find that I use something I learned or cognited on in Scn every day of my life since. Like you Geir, I would do it all over again, but I am glad to be out of the madhouse.

    Based on my experience, and those I’ve known….I believe if you get into Scn and then don’t get out, there is absolutely no way you can be in the 10%. Guess I am a lucky one.

  22. I remember (all too well) my wife waking me up at 3:00am in the morning completely panicked and freaked out about what was going on in her head. I would take her outside for a walk doing a locational. It was such a difficult time for her, and I just couldn’t understand why I wanted more and more auditing for me and her.

    My wife didn’t want to go back. I remember her telling me how scared she was, not just because of how she felt, but because she didn’t want to continue on the Bridge and I did. She knew deep down that if I continued and she didn’t that our relationship was in big trouble. And like always, she was right. I had thoughts of saying “screw everything” I’m going up the Bridge.

    What honestly made my decision to leave become easier was the Ideal Org nonsense, and subsequent visits to the Org or Flag just got worse and worse. That and starting to find these blogs (Marty first, and then found you from Marty).

    I no longer have an interest in calling myself in Independent Scn. I may get some auditing again in the future but I really don’t know. I can definitely die a happy man if I go no further, but I guess time will tell where I go from here. Until then, I continue to use what I learned and enjoy reading the experiences of others.

    Thanks for your brilliant work and allowing myself and others to share and heal together.

      1. You are MOST welcome. I promise one day I’m coming to Norway for a meet and greet. I’ve always been intrigued by your country since I was a young boy.

      2. Hey Tom,

        just continue to do your due diligence. We were not afforded that in the beginning you might say.

        I totally understand your story. I can’t say why, but I do understand. My wife is much higher on the bridge than me and she did things like your wife did who was lower on the bridge. Go figure, and that’s what I did, I went and figured by deciding to search the internet and read real stories of people involved in the church. The debbie cook email message got me to look.

      1. Thanks Gib, I forgot to mention Debbie Cook’s email. Funny thing is all her email did was validate what I already knew. You know how Scn is masters at isolating your thoughts to make you feel like you have the problem. Debbie’s email confirmed what I knew, and from that point forward, I grew some balls and didn’t take any more shit from the Church. My personal integrity came up to a new level, and didn’t falter.

        My wife is doing much better than she used to, but as fate would have it–last night she woke me up at 2am and was convinced she was having a heart attack. It’s all psychosomatic but very real to her at the moment. I have to try to convince her its not her heart, and at the same time try not to lose my cool with her.

        I still am grateful that we (and everyone on here) got out with whatever wounds we have and can progress with each others help.

        1. jeez Tom, believe me, I know what you experienced last night. It’s hard to deal with, I’ve had similar sits, several.

          Your’e right about the deb cook email, it validated what I knew and gave me too the balls the look, that is a better way of saying it. I was actually nervous and scared when I first started researching, but my stable datum was like Leah Remini, nobody is going to tell me I can’t look. Shoot, LRH says in the beginning lectures one is supposed to question everything. Even in New Slant on Life or FOT I believe.

          It’s also when I says to myself, “self, you idiot, you never did do some due diligence”. Duh.

          1. So sorry to hear that Gib….I guess regardless of the shit we all have to deal with–either personally or with our family and friends–we are all in a much better place than stuck inside “The Grand Illusion” that is the Church. Just having a forum like this where we can share our stories allows to take a step toward healing every day.

            I’m laughing reading your post about the “balls” part, because the one thing being in the church gave me was balls. Not arrogant, not trying to be right, but I grew some big ones one standing up for myself and not compromising my reality.

            Great point too on how many LRH references are proof positive that they themselves don’t follow the tech unless it suits their needs. Keep healing my friend, and glad to be chatting with you.

        1. Thank you Tom, and get your wife a real medical checkup and put her mind at ease or else locate an organic problem which gets addressed in time to avert a catastrophe. Jus’ sayin’ — even when we don’t think we’re thinking with the old stable data, we sometimes are. I’ve had an experience with this myself and was surprised at the logical and simple medical explanations that put my own mind at ease and got me looking at a problem in an entirely new and constructive direction. The Scientology way is to say its all just a consideration and then to do nothing about it. Again, not directed at you but for you and anyone with niggly to big physical complaints.

          1. Great advice. She has had a pretty good workup including an MRI of her brain (few months ago) and all is good. She has made major strides over the past few years but still has a few things that scare the crap out of her. When things kick in, her nerves get going and everything downstream responds.

          2. Tell me some day why no real scientist ever let me know that I could regenerate my teeth just by providing them with the necessary substances they need (mostly vitamin D, calcium, phosphorus) and by not consuming absorption inhibitors such as wheat (google the subject matter. I can confirm it definitely worked for me). Tell me why they preffered to drill holes in my freaking teeth instead, and why after I brushed with reccomended-by-destists tooth pastes my teeth worsened.

            1. …and how come people in grave need of an operation need 10s or 100s of Gs of $s before they can get it. That part of helping people too? Does mr surgeon need to have a real vila before he can operate?

              And how much those drugs that are sold more expensively than gold by pharmaceutical companies cost anyway, cents? Cents. I bet it is impossible to sell them cheaper. I think the state needs to invest some more in scientific experiements, like they aid the bail-outs of the poor bankers.

              And an unreal Q: How come my gums were ejecting xylocaine during some of my CCHs sessions?

              ‘Food for thought’? No, I’m just trolling. Yet, I speak what I’ve seen. If a doc wants to help, he can help alright, and then he will have my gratitude. But please, don’t play masters of the field and ‘science says this and that’ and ‘reality…’. That’s more dogmatic than middle ages christianity –and dishonest in a similar way too. If one wants to help, he helps. And if I can help with mambo jumbo or whatever, I will. I will not ask for a license from any masters.

            2. Because of a long-standing vendetta against you personally. There’s nothing the medicos enjoy more than a patient howling in pain and deteriorating physically.

            3. I thought it was because after years of rapid technological evolution, healing through torture is the only was to heal a body. Of course it is, because if somebody claims he can heal a body, without having close ties to pharmaceutical companies, he immediately gets ‘justice’d by the law.

            4. LOL. Good one. I do not deny some arguments against pricing, etc.,. Price of healthcare is a pet peeve of mine. However, I’m not too in the corner of the Scientologist who is conditioned by Hubbard to believe that “medicos” (derogatory ad hom terminology used by Hubbard to degrade all first responders, care givers, nurses, doctors, etc., working in health care). I’m not in Tom Cruise’s corner either ranting the party line that only a Scientologist can help an accident situation. I view this point of view as flawed in every respect. I have two personal examples of children and mothers being saved during childbirth by orthodox medical doctors, the most recent being a week ago. I have a high opinion of modern healthcare. Combined with an educated and cooperative patient, I see it doing miracles everyday without help from Hubbard, Tom Cruise, or Jesus.

            5. I think you and Alonzo has way too much interest in my being brainwashed than in the subject that is being discussed. If I was as ‘civilized’ as you two, you would have had -at least- stopped talking to me a long while ago, the way I would talk to you. On one hand you’ve been here preaching about compassion, tolerance, decompression etc. You’ve told me off for using bad language. And you’ve suggested I shouldn’t be mad at the people that attacked me in the COS, and I should let them decompress. That while you continuously fire at Hubbard and occasionaly those who agree with him. You can do it alright. But do you play by your rules?

              I defended this blog against critical SCNist for it’s neutrality, but it seems you aren’t willing to allow SCNists or somewhat SCN-friendly people to have it their way. I consider it an overt if I force my ideas on you, to match that. So, no game.

            6. See? And I thought I was agreeing with you! LOL. You have to admit that you came onto the blog stomping around with heavy boots? But you quit that and just joined in the fun and I’ve really been enjoying your comments for some time now. I like your points of view and they are varied quite a bit which seems healthy and flexible to me… Anyways, just to be clear, I do enjoy your writing.

            7. Chris: You have to admit that you came onto the blog stomping around with heavy boots?

              Chris, I had a fight with Alanzo twice and thenI mentioned that @#$#$ from the COS and some 2-3 times and some stuff that applied (always according to me) reversed SCN . But when I fought with Alanzo you saw me being bad and you didn’t see Al calling me brainwashed and dodging what we were discussing –you said he did it because of good intentions, ok. The second time that I called him a #$@$# $#$$#, was because I misunderstood what he had said and I apologised. Most of the time I sit and read and really I can’t agree with you all as you don’t all have the same point of view, but I don’t belittle any one of you because we disagree. I only don’t like it when I’m not allowed to have my point of view too. (Actually, I’m always allowed, but I mean in the blog.) I rarely get a match of many consequitive considerations. But I agree to listen. I think the basic SCN philosophy is alright and that LRH meant well. I think most of you disagree, and some times I say something about it, but I don’t tell anyone ‘don’t say that because it’s baaad’. Actually, that’s what pissed me off when some reacted against Geir’s ideas about the reactive mind and Clears –he wasn’t allowed to have his ideas freely here by some people. Anyway, thanks for your kind words, I will consider sparring you from getting stomped…for the moment! 😛 🙂

            8. LOL good one. Most of us blogging here do so because we are well trained and processed Scientologists and find that in common with one another. I think many of our disagreements might stem from our individual impressions of Hubbard’s motives. For me, I vacillate between thinking Hubbard was ill intentioned, one of the biggest con men of the 20th century or thinking that Hubbard was well-intentioned and crazy. Net result of my experiences in Scientology? I found it was something I needed to “get over” like an illness. My self-evident proof is that I am doing much better away from the subject than near to it.

            9. If I thought that all the SCN I experienced was Hubbard’s intention, then I would agree with you. A reason I dont think so -as I’ve mentioned before- is that I’ve had arguements with SCNists about basic stuff, and that I think my ideas are more alligned with LRH’s texts, and they don’t include fascistic ideas such as to save the world by conquering it.

            10. We’re on the same page. I don’t agree with you about Hubbard’s lack of fascism but as I wrote above, I do respect your right to have your own opinion toward it. It is an important dividing line for me as I look as how people do and how long people take to decompress from their unhappy experiences with Scientology. As you continue to look and to study about this subject, it is my opinion that you will find scriptures and recorded lectures that do indeed reveal Hubbard’s eye on world domination but that would be fodder for another thread. If you don’t agree, I don’t have a problem with that — I can see you are a person who is studying and thinking and intending to get things right. That is enough for me.

            11. Yes Chris, I read from time to time and I read what you think about Hubbard. That’s OK. I am not here to convince anybody either. I think sometimes the blog wonders and seeks for answers. Maybe it seeks a subjective truth, but I cannot offer such a thing. All I can give is my ideas about things that I have some ideas. I just throw them in to see what happens 😛 I no longer study SCN nor about SCN, as I don’t practice it. But that doesn’t mean I have hostilities with it. I just say it’s not the only way to take responsibility. There can be unlimited ways or no ways (methodologies).

            12. *I’ve also met many nice SCNists. In my pointing out my disagreements with other SCNists, I don’t put stress on that.

            13. Anyway, just to make it clear I don’t have any thing against medicos, scientist, science. It is about the term ‘real’. A medico that can heal is real for me –a real medico. One that can heal without demanding a fortune, my respect, without exhibiting non-sympathy is very real for me. A warehouse full of diplomas and honorary thingies is of no interest to me, and doesn’t make one real for me. Not that diplomas and honorary acknowledgements are bad anyway. The pharmaceutical and healing monopoly has more to do with domination and profit than with healing. If it can heal, it’s relatively good. If others can heal too, doesn’t make them less real if they don’t have shiny titles. Just to make my point clear to whomever is concerned. And I think a civilized discussion is one in which people discuss, not pound their ideas over and hard so as to be accepted. I guess that’s how reality becomes real, even if it sucks.

            14. Like Scientology and Scientologists, medical conglomerates are organized as business for profit but the individual practitioners can have very big hearts and good intentions.

            15. I have read that some of us got stuck into some paradox.

              1. We have good intentions. We don’t care if nobody believes that.
              2. We rely upon some systematic admin that will convert our good intentions into more efficient products.

              Thus, we got fucked up.

              Where was the issue?

              As Spyros, I’ve seen many “neutral” scientologists that understand the tech and basics in some ways that doesn’t fit with the general scientologists. They seem to align with some higher understanding of Hubbard intentions. Most of them becomes case supervisors, as they could redirect and “do creative stuff” with whatever, sometimes even squirreling Hubbard statements and policies. I see those people as “above average persons” as they are everywhere, when something doesn’t work, they make it work by pushing themselves and even by their own creativity. In that way, even medicine and psychology works, as everyone apply what they think is bringing better results.

              How is this related to the KSW rules?
              How is this related to squirrels and standard tech?
              How is possible that admin tech (group-thinking) ruins personal integrity (individual-thinking) so bad?

            16. I agree, if you want to make something happen, you can go with your responsible creativity and make it happen –even without any method. And I believe there are cases that you should better… If you think that people are baaad, instead of handling them (generally, I wouldn’t enjoy to get ‘handled’ by somebody who considers me baaad), you should handle it within yourself. That’s the essence of taking responsibility –as-ising something.

              You can give some method to somebody to deal with it, not to make others deal with it –that’s irresponsible. A person with problems ‘out there’ isn’t fully confronting what’s ‘in there’. I’ve read about processes (by LRH) that dealt with things that are out there, by handling what’s in there, but they’re not as popular anymore. I guess they seemed too unrealistic? So, if people wanted realism, they got scientific methodology…as scientific as spiritual matters can get. But bottom down a spirit is not bound by any rules.

            17. And this is an issue among independent scientologists, they even need to beat down Hubbard’s figure. Some of them keep fanatical on their interpretation of Hubbard intentions and basic principles, some other got trouble out there with SCN and remain PTS to the church. Hubbard remains like a valence sometimes. If I have to summ everything in one word, I would say “Innovation” as a constant iterative evolution. Hubbard was creative, as all we are. Creativity is the inherent ability, and the “end phenomena” in every therapy you could think about. How does creativity fits with squirrels? I am now used to see that every single person is some kind of squirrel, according to SCN dogmas. So, if we are squirrels that no longer support the desperate church, we need to fix everything that may be useful in an open-adaptative-innovative multi-disciplinary way. Sounds big. And the first problem I see, is the objective, closed, specific, scientifically-like… use of internal slang. Back to the basics: dictionary. New paradigm? New dictionary. Do we need to keep scientology terms? Sounds debatable in some specifics.

            18. Yes, creativity didn’t have much to do with applying ABCD procedures letter by letter. It seems it was decided that SCN shouldn’t change –maybe because some who tried to change it screwed it up. SCN is Hubbard’s creation and he can do whatever he likes with it, I say. But he couldn’t (and I think he didn’t) inhibit the creation of other spiritualities/technologies. Everybody’s free to make their own game, as far as I know. If the COS (or others) calls techs that resemble SCN ‘squirrel’, it’s because -like some who want to have the copyrights of God’ they want to have the copyrights of spiritual tech as well.But they don’t really have any ethical right for such a thing –specially if you consider the incomplete Bridge, and other things.

              I would quit using SCN terms because it happens from time to time that some other people use other definitions for the same words. Maybe I will.

            19. Petteko: “Creativity is the inherent ability. . . ”

              Chris: Take a look at “iteration” and tell me if this not an inherent ability. As I look at this, I sometimes think the game is much larger than we lay it out and that there is a possibility that iteration is the inherent ability.

            20. One of the things we (as improvers) really need to fix, is the mental fixation. A procedure could be dogmatic and rigid, or could have just a guide with more or less correctness in the ways of delivering. There are some formulas and interesting enterprise improvements, as do with staff management. But, all seems to rely upon our external field of interest in alignement with our internal belief system (that will be evolving based on experience). As a career, there is too much to choice, too much to improve, too much to be aligned with and to achieve some goal upon it. At this point, there is too much information already, too much sources, there is a big confusion. In the game viewpoint, is like having to start some game, and not being able to choice what and where. So, despite we all have a filter that I call “stable belief system”, as we operate based on filters, we need filters as tools. A spectrum of filters. Like a frequencies sweep, if we filter Scientology with many tools, there will be some parts that will be useful, some other that may not be so useful but could have another fresh viewpoint, and the rest will be discarded. The point is that Scientology is a filter too, and as far as I know that filter is not fair with many phenomenons and other tools on other field, interesting and reliable fields. How many scientologists are scientists? How many scientists are philosophers too? How many are the three? How many of them are good enough on that field?

              A spectrum of filters. Like a frequencies sweep, if we filter Scientology with many tools, there will be some parts that will be useful, some other that may not be so useful but could have another fresh viewpoint, and the rest will be discarded. The point is that Scientology is a filter too, and as far as I know that filter is not fair with many phenomenons and other tools on other field, interesting and reliable fields. How many scientologists are scientists? How many scientists are philosophers too? How many are the three? How many of them are good enough on that field?
              It’s like Scientology outside Scientology, What would that field be? I know there are some philosophy projects, they are interesting as they are on that field about metaphysics and philosophy. I’m sure that’s not for everyone. But, in a pragmatic viewpoint, all of that mental gymnastic is taken like a cognitive masturbation (when compared to factual worldwide crisis to resolve). So, it’s valid to say “try to produce more of high-quality delivering and minimize the jerking off around”. The religious part of being pride of being part of something, and being happy with his toy and belief system in confort zone. I think that we will agree that this part lies on the trash can we already need to filter.

              So, even if the terms won’t get misused in future, according to the evolution of information and argots, we will get either some other slang (maybe new clean concepts), or either the present used terms will be there so degraded because of the actual PR mechanism, that we will need to discard them to survive. Maybe that’s what is happening already. Why Dianetics didn’t use the same terms from the psychology of the same time? Only because of the copyrights? Because it was a misguided construction that couldn’t be improved? Because it wasn’t the very same concept and it was needed to avoid having the public get confused and keep them believing that it was so innovative and it was the future? I may be thinking that the time iterates itself. So, Chris, I realize the iteration (if we like the fractal terms) is the same essence as change, as is movement, as is time, as is choice, as is entrophy, as is negentropy, as is adaptation as evolution, as is complexity itself. Yes, is pretty much so. Is an ability. I didn’t look on that way, but was close enough conceptualizing that “the ability to change our own belief system at will” as a very high and valuable process. Even I tried to schematize that, and relate it to effortless and vectors. 😀

  23. Geir, in addition to those who come to Scientology with their lives in shambles, there is another group that is likely to always benefit and that is business owners who require their employees to use admin tech. That tech was developed for Orgs to get the maximum production from their staff for minimum exchange, and it functions much the same in a secular business.

    However, I don;t know that Scientology has given them much benefit on a personal level. Business owners tend to be in fairly good shape to begin with.

    1. My experience is that introducing admin tech, while it may lower the cost of personnel cost, it usually also introduces more bureaucracy and lower sales. So my net advice is “stay clear”.

      1. My own experience with the admin tech is limited to niche technical firms like Executive Software and Micro2000. It’s difficult to find direct comparisons with “wog” companies but I suspect you are right about the lowered sales. There is certainly an ungodly amount of administrative overhead, almost all of it unnecessary.

    2. This is where I have a ton of experience…using Admin tech in the business world. What I came to realize is that if you expect to use LRH tech in the workplace and with your employees, they all have to be Scn too. It is absolutely not in the reality of the average employee that if their child is sick that they should not worry about it and still come to work to get their product. It’s total BS if you are not in Scn.

      Trying to make staff keep stats wasn’t that difficult, but the conditions just do not make sense to them at all. I have learned how to use what I know in my business and to get the best out of my staff without using Admin tech. And the truth is, I exchange in abundance with my staff. They love working for me, and I love having them.

      I agree with Geir wholeheartedly…that I would not use admin tech on non-Scn staff or in sales…I know a husband and wife who are still in and use LRH tech to the letter in their business. Every time I speak to him (every 2 months or so), he tells me about an SP that was in his office. He uses the PPA test (business version of OCA) to make sure he is selecting the right staff. What a friggin joke. I don’t use any of that stuff and I haven’t had an SP working for me in 15 years. He has a new one every two months. The last one, he said “yeah there was an SP working in my office and caused all my staff to leave. She was really hidden too.”

      Man, when you are “in” you can’t see two feet in front of your face. Closing the books and opening your eyes is the best management I could ever recommend.

  24. After all these kind of testimonies, what about some justice? Is there any case of Scientology top manager (I assume this word) who went to jail? Ever?

    1. No. There isn’t. If there was justice then those responsible for the policies, greed and mismanagement that allowed the BP oil spill to happen would never see the light of day.

      It is easy to claim causation on a superficial basis but not quite so easy when rules of evidence must be followed. i.e. it is one thing to claim that “were it not for…” then “predicted outcome” would have been the case, but in reality one can never truly say what would have happened if an individual had not associated in the first place.

      And while LRH loved the simplistic cause and effect model, it has been my experience that there usually is no single why, who or cause of a series of events, good or bad. There are only prevailing and dominating conditions, attitudes and choices.

  25. Hey Marildi,
    Your friend Marty, queuing again from this blog today wrote, “To date there has really only been a couple of paths for Scientologists and ex-Scientologists; . . . First, one can cling to his firmly held Scientology religious beliefs and continue with the installed cognitive dissonance that entails. He or she can be guided to pretend that it is all ‘over-there’ in the church and play the ‘I am the resurrection of the real Scientology’ game. That ultimately leads to a sort of bitter, secluded ‘victorious Confederate soldier’ megalomania and melancholy. Second, one can be guided to redirect the implanted Scientology need for an enemy and spend years in a state of suspended enturbulation, senselessly flailing at the church or Scientology itself. The latter route leads to much the same state of mind and consciousness as the former . . . . The Scientologist and ex-Scientologist adolescent pack mentality can be graduated from. It opens up to view a wonderful horizon of possibilities and futures. I think first and foremost it entails getting over the implanted need for enemies.”

    Would you agree with his synopsis?

    1. Yes, I do agree. However, no matter what I say or how many times, you continue to characterize me in the “first” of his two descriptions and refuse to see that while I remain positive about core Scientology (that’s where your held down seven comes into play) I do not agree at all with later aspects of Scientology and thus do not fit Marty’s description of having the cognitive dissonance that would come with those who still uphold all of it.

      Did you agree with the second part, regarding the need for some to have an enemy and “spend years in a state of suspended enturbulation, senselessly flailing at the church OR Scientology itself”?

      1. Marildi: “Yes, I do agree. However, no matter what I say or how many times, you continue to characterize me in the “first” of his two descriptions and refuse to see that while I remain positive about core Scientology (that’s where your held down seven comes into play) I do not agree at all with later aspects of Scientology and thus do not fit Marty’s description of having the cognitive dissonance that would come with those who still uphold all of it.”

        Chris: That is a lot of writing to NOT say that you are not a true believer. And it is a lot of writing about how you disagree with “later” Scientology without saying what you don’t like about it. You’ve well documented your agreement with what Scientology says. I on the other hand do not divide what Scientology says from what Scientology does.

        What I truly agree with and appreciate about this is comment of yours is that you wrote it in the first person and that does much to defuse the “walking dead” characterization and perception of being a true believer.

      2. Marildi: Did you agree with the second part, regarding the need for some to have an enemy and “spend years in a state of suspended enturbulation, senselessly flailing at the church OR Scientology itself”?

        Chris: Marty is a work in progress. In his post, I do not consider his generalities of two categories to be either complete or consistent. I don’t particularly agree with what he writes. For instance, I don’t consider the fight against corrupt Scientology to be either “flailing” or “senseless” but what I particularly agree with is the vector that he is on. If what I’ve been seeing for months (I scan his new posts by email but don’t follow the comments as I am not allowed to post my opinions there) indicates a long-term vector of self-discovery, then my confidence is growing that he is going to do alright by himself and others. Previously, I have worried that, true to Scientology form and training, his front was pure shore-story and that underpinning this was a dark agenda in keeping with his unsavory past as DM’s top henchman and involving power struggles for the papacy of Scientology. I am not leaning this way anymore. I may be wrong either way, not that it matters as our paths will never cross, I am just filling in my attitude about it. I hope that answered your question.

  26. The weirdest aspect of this topic for me is the confounded inability of COS to front up to its mistakes, apologize and change. Instead, they use LRH’s bastardized “public relations technology,” to falsely position themselves next to any perceived popular person, positive personal attitude, attribute, or characteristic; and to deny any wrongdoing anywhere ever. This fails because it is ingrained common knowledge that people and organizations are flawed, inconsistent and everyone knows this. We make mistakes. The notion that there is a cult of 100% workable technology out there that consistently commits public relations faux pauxs while claiming the Mecca of Technical Perfection is weird and false. Everyone except true believin’ Scientologists know this. The COS would rather use subterfuge, plant spies, and commit underhanded dirty tricks from mild to extravagant to win their imaginary battles with their imaginary enemies.

  27. i’d be interested to know HOW Scientology ruined someone’s life, although I can see the damage done to many people – made so tiny, confused, not able to be themselves anymore and can’t reach for anything or emotionally bond with people, often lashing out in anger. I see this in OTV’s, Ls and Power completions. What a joke that the EP of ARCSW is “Knows he won’t get any worse”. Then a lot of the Bridge just makes you worse, but you can’t say that because then you are PTS and the whole thing is your fault.

    I got a lot out of Scientology, but it came at a huge price. The CofS is incredibly abusive. The whole thing is a cult set-up: You can’t criticize, just write it up. These write-ups of out-tech at the CofS are used against you. They can tell how big a sheep you are, or if you are thinking person with integrity (which they must stop!) It takes a while to see that’s what’s really going on.

    I met some great people through Scientology. It attracted many intelligent and compassionate and highly literate people. That was one of the best benefits.

    The duress of dealing with the cruelty of the staff was total insanity I would not have put up with had I not been dumb and in my 20s. I understand what these poor Sea Org Slaves were going through, now. It was confusing because everything was the opposite of what they said, just like any abusive relationship. Like this – Bob was so nice on our first few dates. He didn’t really just punch me, did he????

    Trying to point out the problems in the CofS to active Scientologists is very amusing! They are so indoctrinated into not criticizing, not getting involved, blinders on, don’t care about friends declared and families torn apart. They don’t mind that this road of spiritual freedom is littered with corpses! These days, they A=A Miscavige with Hubbard. He’s the new infallible prophet, above all accountability, doing no wrong. How dumb, to agree to only listen to CofS church PR and never anything else? Mention Debbie Cook and see how anxiety-filled people get.

    A cult is the ultimate abusive relationship because it is organized and controls many people.

    1. Hello Madora! I’ve put the same question one or two times and except Anette and Geir, nobody answered in any way. Maybe you’ll be more persuasive. PS. I’m not Scientologist, I’m here just as a guest and a vivid reader. Nice to meet you 🙂

    2. There is one word which is coming up over and over in the discussions:
      INTEGRITY. What does It mean?
      definitions:
      2. an unimpaired condition: soundness
      ( sound 1b: free from flaw, defect or decay
      3a: free from error, fallacy, or misapprehension
      3b:exhibiting or based on thorough knowledge and experience
      3. the quality or state of being complete or undivided.
      (Merriam-Webster)

      ‘a thinking person WITH integrity’ does not make any sense to me in the view of
      the above. One IS INTEGRITY (which looks to be buddha nature, complete life, the dynamics, whatever it is called) or one is not yet in a condition of thorough knowledge and experience.
      One challenge can be: to observe ‘impersonally’ and not evaluate or invalidate….
      yeah, idealistic…me is smiling here….I love being on the journey where I still err, there is something new to experience…

    3. Hi Mandora, I totally agree.

      This kind of SCN you described tries to make a person flat. I guess that’s the EP. Flat being a person that no longer ‘reacts’, like a drugged hospitalised ‘insane’ person no longer reacts to external stimuli. In both cases the self determinism of the person is nulled. Like “Do you disagree? You have charged! So you are wrong!”…that kind of thing. I have found TRs headed towards that direction in my experience. Cheers.

      1. Flat is one possible description, but I would say the effort is more to be impervious and invulnerable to human “manipulation” and “games” that distract one from one’s “true” being and purpose.

        1. Hi Maria,
          Yes, I see the effort the same way. What you mention as ‘manipulation’ and ‘games’
          I see as ‘old’ patterns of collective consciousness which may have functioned well in the ‘past’ for certain use then but have lost their validity and most importantly their ‘aliveness’. As I see it, when a child is born, it is born with full aliveness and creativity, which, due to ‘conditioning’ is gradually lost. When this ‘aliveness’ is allowed to function again (like Geir said that on OT2 his creativity started to flourish
          again), I view it as certain patterns of conditioning which have blocked and thus stopped the creative flow of Life just fall away.

        2. Yes, I’ve had disagreements discussing about TRs with others. It seems not all experienced TRs the same way. I personally had both gains and loses. And if I was back then I wouldn’t do TRs again.

          Among other things I have encountered a misinterpretation of confronting as being something like ‘having to experience something’. Which also means to agree to experience something. I don’t agree with that.

          Also I agree with not being manipulatable and restimulated etc by what others do. But it is not the job of TRs to achieve that, in my opinion. TRs are drills for auditors —to audit comfortably. To not be the effect of other’s bullbaiting etc goes hand in hand with knowing what you are (not), and has nothing to do with ‘being there’ as a body or anything of that sort.

          1. Yes, Spyros ‘it seems not all experienced TRs the same way’. For me it all boils down to being immaculately trained. Which is based on CLEARING the words of the piece of tech one is doing and it is also the job of the SUP to make sure that it happened so before e.g. the TRs start.
            Confront: BE there COMFORTABLY. BE. It does not mean that you ‘have to’ experience anything…but of course one does….e.g. all the previous ‘enforced’ (have to-s) which one accepted in life and as you write ‘agreed’ to will start to be seen – felt by the student. Yes, TRs are drills for AUDITORS. An auditor is basically a person, who, as it is written in TR0, is able to confront the PC only by AUDITING or without anything. In plain language it means PRESENCE and LISTENING (= perceiving). Being present and listening is a basic ability of/in life.
            If one IS that AWARENESS which is PERCEIVING, it can explain the phenomenon that in some cases the ‘PC’ may not need any auditing question at all as s/he spontaneously comes to ‘present time’. And of course there come different auditing abilities from TR1 on…

            1. Marianne, if your sup prematurely acknowledges you and repeats the same over and over untill you apathetically agree with it (out of session) and her student use TRs in a similar and robotic manner, what word clearing do you expect her help her students do? Who’s going to word-clear her own MUs? Most probably not the guys in those ‘advanced orgs’ that taught her.

              Other than that…hug (confront is nowhere defined as to be there –that’s a different TR 😛 )

      1. After reading numerous comments on the Sea Org, I would like to put a little balance here. I concluded for myself that it is a complex question. I certainly can’t see it in its depth. The balance is for those Sea Org members with whom I communicated and who were genuinely theta. I had a great number of phone-calls from some during which they did not want anything from me, just showed pure interest in my well-being…also, I could feel a huge flow of theta from kind of coming from the whole field. Also met some who held seminars where I had huge insights which brought about a change in my life and consequently in the lives around me due to my new, different actions. In short: I see a huge theta power coming from certain Sea Org members, also the field.

        1. I certainly don’t want to play being whatever….I believe in the power of theta in bringing about change.
          Before I wrote the above comment, I had been recalling and observing situations.
          As: 1. life poses problems for its own solution. 2. truth is the exact time, place, form and event. 3. truth is theta 4. theta can resolve problems on the dynamics. So there is Change. In my view, the more theta, the more and the faster changes occur.
          Axiom 49 is very interesting: to solve any problem, it is only necessary to become theta, the solver, rather than theta, the problem.

  28. Spyros
    I get what you mean. That ‘sup’ you are writing about is not a ‘sup’. Won’t go into what a ‘sup-s’ post is. You write: ‘out of session’…the course-room is for training and not for auditing (session).
    If you open e.g. the Upper Indoc coursebook you will find the definition of confront there. Which is: to BE there COMFORTABLY and PERCEIVE (without flinching).
    Other than that….you have been PRESENT-ing your TR abilities in our exchanges many times flawlessly so far…just recall it! HaHa…How are you doing these days?

    1. That sup was a good person. What she did with TRs was no more or less what I saw others doing (some not in the greek org). My point was she was not up to handle my MUs like that.

      Eh you forgot the perception part before, that why I said it’s a different TR. 😛

      Yes, when I talk I like to understand and be understood. I don’t like rhetorical tricks. And I try to be honest. But I don’t think I use TRs. Sometimes I even eat, drink and smoke while I type 😛 But thanks for liking my comms. I like yours too.

      I don’t know what to answer. I think more or less -to generalize- I’ve been busy finding out what I’m creating (nice and un-nice people and other stuff). How are you?

      1. Love your answer! Shining, it has made me smile! Thanks, a bit relaxing, a bit busy.
        Will soon be very busy as the school year will soon start ( one of my jobs is ‘teaching’ in a school). Going back to what you write, when one is honest (speaks from the Heart, rather than using the mind) for me that is natural TRs in action. One does not ‘use’ TRs, as one is there listening, perceiving, asking and answering spontaneously and creatively. Like you in this exchange! It’s getting late here, sleep well and have a beautiful day!

        1. Hehe nice 3D cartoon.

          Thanks!

          Well, if you think of TRs like that, then alright. I think of it differently and the whole thing about being in the MEST here and now…nothing wrong with it. But to get stuck there is so meeeaaaan 😛 Creativity lies nowhere inside any skulls. 😉

            1. ‘I think of it differently and the whole thing about being in the MEST here and now’.
              Do you want to explain how differently? What do you mean by ‘get stuck there’?

            2. Yes, are you familiar with the theory of the 3 universes or with the theory of the home universe?

              Although they’re not the same, Plato had asserted that the physical universe (MEST) is a mere reflection of the actual universe –the so called word of forms (thoughts).

              “Plato’s theory of Forms or theory of Ideas[1][2][3] asserts that non-material abstract (but substantial) forms (or ideas), and not the material world of change known to us through sensation, possess the highest and most fundamental kind of reality.[4] When used in this sense, the word form or idea is often capitalized.[5] Plato speaks of these entities only through the characters (primarily Socrates) of his dialogues who sometimes suggest that these Forms are the only true objects of study that can provide us with genuine knowledge;”

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_Forms

              As per the PDC, after one had dealt with his reactive mind, the next case to be handled was the MEST universe. As per me, MEST is case for as long as it’s created irresponsibly. And if one thinks he is also ‘part’ of it (by identifying with bodies, objects or I don’t know what else), then he is ‘stuck’ –at effect position.

              🙂

            3. TRs and Objectives were entrance level. Obviously not meant to be processes to end all case.

  29. Thanks Spyros, very interesting post! I am a little familiar with the theory of the 3 universes. As for Plato, my view, at this point, is that consciousness has different layers and what he is saying is still part of the mind, kind of subtle conceptual layer.
    In my experience, genuine knowledge, or knowingness, or intelligence have nothing to do with the mind, I guess they are abilities of Life, which as it looks now, has access to finer and finer parts of the mind and I don’t see how, but can kind of re-create. I might be mistaken.
    Yes, any thought when one identifies with it can make one ‘effect’…more about it later. Yes, the Objectives are entrance level. In my case, they were very powerful…again more perhaps later.
    If you have personal insights, experiences, please share them if you like. About to find a video for you! Sleep well, talk to you later!

    1. Hihihi thanx. When you sent it I was already asleep. Now, I’m up again for a while 😛

      I also had at least one big ‘gain’ with the Objectives –the final EP. But in my case it was very spiritual. One may ask how spiritual in the Objectives? I answer that theory that if one can waste something, he can also have it, and also the other way around. If you can have MEST you can also not have it. I didn’t mean to reduce the Objectives. I meant that to be in MEST here and now and have it, was entrance level –as the Objectives were advertised in the COS as processes to bring a person in MEST present time. That’s alright. It’s an ability to be in MEST here and now, but it’s not the endgame.

      You said: As for Plato, my view, at this point, is that consciousness has different layers and what he is saying is still part of the mind, kind of subtle conceptual layer.

      OK, it depends on how you define ‘mind’. For me not all thoughts relate to minds. Mind relates more to logical or illogical thinking.

      CU tomorrow… 🙂

  30. ANYTHING MAN (HUMANS) TOUCHES AND TRIES TO REGULATE IN RELIGION HE ENDS UP TRYING CONTROL AND CAPITALIZE ON. IF WE JUST FOLLOW GOD,s SIMPLE 10 COMMANDMENTS THEN YOU CAN ENTER THE GATES OF HEAVEN AND HAVE EVERLASTING LIFE. HUMANS DO NOT DO THINGS SIMPLE AND EASY. COMPLICATED IS THE WAY OF MAN AND GOVERNMENTS.
    CONTROL OTHER PEOPLE WITH FEAR OR RELIGION IS AN ON GOING HUMAN TRAIT THAT WILL NEVER END

  31. There are a lot of useful tools within the Knowledge of Scientology that can increase one’s power and abilities (or the awareness and realisation of abilities) that can absolutely exceed all the measurable benchmarks that are presently available.

    The Church however is an absolute disaster. It may have been appropriate to be dogmatic and one-dimension-ally closed minded back in the centuries before the general population have developed effective critical thinking skills at large.

    But in the modern age of empowered living and highly developed abilities for the average joe to take almost an infinity of viewpoints, the admin tech of CoS is almost obsolete and irrelevant for mature and intelligent individuals who are able to instantaneous take many, many differing viewpoints and are intellectually honest enough to confront and critically think about their own stable data (and to handle randomity) in order to improve upon them with greater efficiency.

    It is a very normal (and animal) response to immediately craving to attack anything that seem to be a threat to one’s comfort zone (whether objectively or subjective, externally and internally), as one can easily observe in most animals both domestic and wild. The engramic impediment is still intact as a safety net to keep us safe before one develops the greater abilities.

    However, the blind attempts to follow rigid mechanics without being flexible in one’s infinite ability to create considerations in present time, and to ignore the easily calibrated-able context and environment to both integrate and to originate, is surely a crime to the very goals and purposes that one has so endeared to protect.

Have your say

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s