Scientology: How delusional can you get?

This is sadly how off the rails one gets from remaining in the Truman Show.

First a definition; IAS = International Association of Scientologists, an organization created to facilitate donations from Scientologists for no service in return. Scientologists are required to donate huge chunks of money to remain in good standing with the church as they move on up the Scientology levels.

Here’s a quote from an e-mail intercepted by Mike Rinder:

…”what would the planet be like if there was no IAS?”. Great question, isn’t it? When you really take a look it does not take long to realize that without the IAS the world we live in would be way worse than what it is today, that probably the majority of the population would be on psych drugs and maybe worst of all, there would be no hope for the future.

When you start believing that Scientology in any context has a real impact on society outside of being a media joke, you are delusional.

60 thoughts on “Scientology: How delusional can you get?

  1. Geir “”When you start believing that Scientology in any context has a real impact on society outside of being a media joke, you are delusional.””
    you just erased, nulled every win you ha, others had, the good it has come out of it… Wow…. or you admit that you are too belong into the Delusional group . Since each person who had a win to that extant do influence others.
    But again what do I know since I am just a delusional old bag.. but My wins -gains will not be erased by any title given.

    1. I have no delusion of my gains from Scientology having any real impact on society. Does your gains have a real impact on society? If so what and how?

      1. I believe I have posted more than once what COGNITIOS ARE and that is not only my reality but every one who had more than lets say end of every level attained and attested to. ughh I am bad… but you still not answered my question.

          1. again you want solid evidence and for that you need to look for your self and it is you who have to recognise those SO CALLED NEW BORN WHO ARE HAVING NOW Incredible abilities and that includes every field .

            1. can you prove it otherwise? what make you so sure that those “young bodied Entities” who have so suddenly incredible abilities are not cleared Entities? Remind you that your reality is not better than mine, your reality has equal validity as mine has.. awareness is very different from Entity to Entity.

            2. It is not up to me to prove a negative. You claim. You prove. And extraordinary claims (such as yours here) require extraordinary evidence.

              Just like if I claimed to be able remotely read the title of the book at your bedside, it is me that would have to prove this – and not you that would have to prove that I can’t.

            3. Not in this case.. no can do and to me it is real, very real. I am sorry to say that we dont share such on reality! To bad..

            4. I have a nagging feeling the 1000 who you have interviewed not one would have the same belief as I and most of the readers of my posts in my blog.

            5. PS; it seems you need to bang your head on the wall to realise “” oh that hurts” solid evidence was supplied by two so called solid object to collide =Force!! and here I know if I would be doing something like that I would be creating something new: a 3rd element =unpleasant sensation but of course each Entities awareness is different. This post I call is, ”le fureszeltem as agat amin ultel.” ask MT to give you on English translation. 🙂 🙂

            6. solid? like made out of something like wood, or stone or knitted out of wool? if not carved into solid item than all realities are just illusions Just because 1 Illusion collects thousands of agreement that is still not Evidence that they are agreeing on the same but agreement means only as LRH would say” allowing beingness” Here is the Black Cat thingy”” you really cant see, cant know how I see that Black Cat and the same goes for me about how you see that blooming Black cat. Assumptions enter here that WE see The same! and we agree on that assumption. 🙂

            7. oh but I am totally on the other side from where you are at.. and if I would start to re-educate my self in the ways of man to me that would be going backward and that can not happen because that track is gone forever and I never ever want to be or will be human again and dont ask for evidence of my beliefs since I only KNOW and that is all I need.

            8. “Human beings are perhaps never more frightening than when they are convinced beyond any doubt that they are right.” (Laurens van der Post)

            9. yes sure frightening to know that you need solid evidence to believe in anything. sure sign of a human 🙂

            10. These are the relevant definitions to use for “solid here” – especially the first one obviously:
              8 adj Solid evidence or information is reliable because it is based on facts.
              We don’t have good solid information on where the people are…, He has a solid alibi.
              9 adj You use solid to describe something such as advice or a piece of work which is useful and reliable.
              The CIU provides churches with solid advice on a wide range of subjects…, All I am looking for is a good solid performance…
              ♦ solidly adv ADV with v
              She’s played solidly throughout the spring.
              10 adj You use solid to describe something such as the basis for a policy or support for an organization when it is strong, because it has been developed carefully and slowly. (=strong)
              …Washington’s attempt to build a solid international coalition.
              ♦ solidly adv ADV adj/prep, ADV with v
              The Los Alamos district is solidly Republican…, So far, majority public opinion is solidly behind the government.
              ♦ solidity n-uncount
              …doubts over the solidity of European backing for the American approach.


            11. HEHEHEHEHE… very human ! sorry mate…every one of those I have taken into session and early similar and you never ever ever believe this but they are on the Track in past life and they are implant material.. but of course I cant supply evidence. You see Geir I believe in Fairies, Gnomes, existence of Ogers and I see without looking with the ”eyes” incredible wondrous things, and most are holographic images. calculators-machinery are not on my list I like, but I sure enjoy music the kind which can not be heard by the ears. Now, I am totally fine as I am and I am absolutely fine as you are.. How is sound to you? My Universe is filled with magic.. and I would not have it any other ways! 🙂

            12. geir you have changed your picture or miracle happened and the picture it self changed and reverted to a much younger image !

    2. I read the same and have understood that the reference is on Scientology as a corporate entity, at least a general social movement with impact as that, and not the relativism of any person individually who may have or had an identification with it, and even less about anecdotal evidences or free-speech on personal realities.

      Seeing what you want to see pretty much?

  2. Oh, there are lots of possible examples, but obviously they are at best “anecdotal” or “subjective”, which doesn’t fly with the ‘scientific’ types. By those standards, there is really virtually no measurable results or “proof” that any kind of psychotherapy or self-improvement has any impact on society. Nor politics, for that matter.

    What is measurable as far as the CoS goes, is that they are not actually contacting and in any way engaging very many people into betterment programs, or spending much money on doing so, or getting people off drugs for any length of time etc.
    Scientology’s ‘impact’ on society is practically non-existent. We might ask Vinnie if this is an exception to his postulate that “absolutes are unobtainable” – perhaps it is possible to be “absolutely deluded”? 🙂

    1. Hey Val, since you are the most well-read person I know on various methodologies for psychological or spiritual improvement, let me ask you a question: Do you know of any that have scientific evidence of their effectiveness? And if so, please give some specifics, whatever you can.

      1. I actually never look for stuff like that so I don’t have any recommendations about it, but you might try researching “The Relaxation Response” site. Herbert Benson is an MD who published the book in 1975 and has since published others. He claims to have been doing ‘research studies’ ever since about the benefits of inducing the ‘relaxation response’ which he first spotted by observing Transcendental Meditation.
        Google the relaxation response.
        I mention this only because Benson has bee at it a long time and may have done studies that demonstrate some benefits to individuals, but not necessarily to society as per the OP.

  3. I love this COS video as a nice clean representation of where I was before emerging from this frame of reference. I could have been one of these adherents acting in this video and I was one of these true believers when I began blogging with Geir. (click here).

  4. We seem to be able to able to process information coming to us from our environment in such as way as to produce any metaphor, any story at all into an abstraction of those processes that is utterly real to us personally regardless of any fact to the contrary.

    1. And in there is the (in)famous Confirmation Bias. Of which this and the last few blog post discussions offer some interesting examples of.

  5. Read The Intention Experiment by Lynne McTaggart, highly scientific and proof that thoughts do influence others and society as a whole!

          1. The first 3 examples you give have been around 2,600, 2,000, and 1,500 years. What impact have they actually had on societies anywhere? Good or bad?

            Psychology has not been around that long, depending on what you mean by psychology – I suppose you mean the Western approach? I think what impact psychology has had is entirely moot. Those older “movements” or whatever you think of them as, well, come back in say 1,500 years and ask about Scientology’s impact then. Perhaps a closer to home example might be Marxism/Communism. I think the effect these kind of ideas have had on society are somewhat indefinable, except that for the most part, people have used them for destructive purposes, often defined by number of people killed.

            By the way, did you hear about Schroedinger’s Cat? He is apparently laughing because he knows the box he was supposedly put in, does not at any given moment exist?

            1. Regardless of whether the impact of psychology, communism, the All World Gyatri Pariwar and many other modern movements is measurable in any specific way, it is hard to argue that they did not have a noticeable and real impact on society. Scientology, on the other hand… nope.

    1. Despite the author and the book, that is a pretty interesting premise

      “the thoughts do influence others and society as a whole”

      , because there are many interesting consequences, philosophically speaking, that would be derived from that.

  6. I had wondered what happened to Michael Roberts the actor who played a pimp informant on the ’70’s TV detective show “Baretta.” I guess he is in the Sea Org as he is right here “batting cleanup” in this video. Does anyone else recognize the actors in this video?

  7. Add this to the million dollar challenges

    show me a clear?
    show me an OT?
    show me a real ias impact on the world?

  8. I would suggest reading You Are The Placebo by Joe Dispenza, and Biology of Belief by Bruce Lipton. I have read these two books and now look at the field of medicine and the field of religion in a whole new way. You believe that this process or pill or prayer or religion or god or space alien or (fill in the blank) fixed your whatever and gave you some great insight or gave you some new super power of perception so be it. Someday you might graduate up to the realization that it was all you. You are the problem, the reaction, and the solution. But, what a great experience you had and can talk about.

    1. I would also suggest The Demon-Haunted World by Carl Sagan as elementary complement for anything later, then The Selfish Gene + The Extended Phenotype + Unweaving the Rainbow by Richard Dawkins. Then, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Khun, and then I may suggest psychoimmunology authors, a paradigm which is very interesting as it’s not pseudoscience. I believe people should be very well informed and trained on the basis of social reality and inter-subjective scientific validation before venturing into the swamp of fringe science and sensational disclosure on hot topics.. Because that’s the reason why basic skepticism works fine with any kind of person but there is a hell of a lot to know when we guess we know so much already.

    2. I would qualify or modify that by adding “not YOU alone”. You’ve done whatever you’ve done for a reason that has to do with others.

  9. Geir, what a gorgeous green in this new theme! Plus, it balances out all that red we looked at for so long! 😉

    But are you sure you don’t want to include having the poster’s name at the beginning of the post, in larger letters than the tiny ones at the bottom?

    Oh, and I like the new “Geir Isene – uncut” on the email notifications. Just the right touch.

    1. I spent a few hours last night experimenting with themes to try to find something better – but after having tried all the themes there are, I fell back on this one The placing of the poster’s name is unfortunately something I cannot change 😦

      1. Thanks for filling my request!

        Btw, I’ve nominated you for the Blog Host of the Month award. 🙂

  10. Basic skepticism is seeking out or asking for positive evidence in support of a claim. And then evaluating the soundness of that evidence.

    It is not giving out evidence that counterclaims are false, or giving out evidence that all similar claims “do it too”.

    It is simply looking for or asking for positive evidence in support of a claim.

    Of course, this requires being aware of what a claim is, and being able to recognize evidence that is being used to support it.

    These are not skills that L Ron Hubbard taught Scientologists.

    All he taught Scientologists was this:

    “What is true for you is what you have observed yourself. And when you lose that, you have lost everything.

    What is personal integrity? Personal integrity is knowing what you know. What you know is what you know and to have the courage to know and say what you have observed. And that is integrity and there is no other integrity.

    Of course, we can talk about honor, truth, nobility—all these things as esoteric terms. But I think they would all be covered very well if what we really observed was what we observed, that we took care to observe what we were observing, that we always observed to observe. And not necessarily maintaining a skeptical attitude, a critical attitude or an open mind—not necessarily maintaining these things at all—but certainly maintaining sufficient personal integrity and sufficient personal belief and confidence in self and courage that we can observe what we observe and say what we have observed.

    Nothing in Scientology is true for you unless you have observed it and it is true according to your observation.

    That is all.

    L. Ron Hubbard”

    This is Truthiness Galore. And because of the feelings it gives a Scientologist, they will never spot the logical problems inherent at the core of it.

    They just go with what makes them feel good, and latch on to any information they come across that confirms what makes them feel good.

    Some Scientologists have been involved in Scientology for many decades, and are at the end of their lives. So to begin applying basic skepticism to the claims in Scientology will invalidate everything in their life that they have built for themselves.

    And they feel that threat too – real strong – whenever some evidence gets close to questioning a claim in Scientology..

    Those Scientologists, like the ones over at Milestone 2, are too far gone. They are the “Dead-Enders” who will never make it up and out of Scientology, and will die Scientologists.

    If you don’t want to be a dead ender and die a Scientologist, just seek out a claim in Scientology, and search for, or ask for, the positive evidence in support of that claim.

    Then examine and evaluate that evidence and ask yourself whether it is strong enough evidence to base your life and self-identity upon.

    For an example of how to evaluate evidence for something in Scientology, ask yourself: “just because an emeter read once on it, is that good enough evidence for the truth of a claim?”

    Even L Ron Hubbard says that emeter reads are not evidence that anything actually happened.

    Even L Ron Hubbard says that.

    So don’t die a Dead Ender.

    Apply basic skepticism and start building a life based on good evidence and sound reasoning.

    You’ll be glad you did.

    This has been a public service announcement from Alanzo Critic Enterprises. If you would like more information about our services, send a stamped, self-addressed envelope to Alanzo Critic Enterprises, Cornfield, Illinois.


      1. I learned what basic skepticism was from Michael Shermer’s book “Why People Believe Weird Things”.

        Basic skepticism is very simple, very powerful, and entirely reasonable.

        If Scientology really does what it says it does, it should stand up to basic skepticism, right?

        Good to see you still writing, Geir.


  11. By the way, Geir:

    The lighting in the new picture of you at the top of your blog makes you look like a dashing Lieutenant in the British Air Force.


Have your say

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Connecting to %s