Here are some quotes from L. Ron Hubbard about Scientology:
“When somebody enrolls, consider he or she has joined up for the duration of the universe — never permit an “open-minded” approach… If they enrolled, they’re aboard, and if they’re aboard they’re here on the same terms as the rest of us — win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half minded about being Scientologists.”
“We’re not playing some minor game in Scientology. It isn’t cute or something to do for lack of something better. The whole agonized future of this planet, every Man, Woman and Child on it, and your own destiny for the next endless trillions of years depend on what you do here and now with and in Scientology.”
“Scientology is the only workable system man has. It has already taken people toward higher IQ, better lives and all that. No other system has. So realize that it has no competitor.”
“We’re playing for blood, the stake is EARTH.”
“In all the broad Universe there is no other hope for Man than ourselves.”
“If attacked on some vulnerable point by anyone or anything or any organization, always find or manufacture enough threat against them to cause them to sue for peace.”
“There is no more ethical group on this planet than ourselves.”
Scientology insists on being the Only True Way. Scientologists buy into this and are convinced that Scientology is Right and that other paths are Wrong. Scientologists becomes adamant on defending Scientology regardless of opposing facts. It is the opposite of Science. When a Scientologist starts admitting Scientology is wrong in some area, he has started to move away from being a Scientologist.
Scientology is a self-perpetuating ideology insisting it is right. It is The Borg of ideologies.
The Borg
“You are an imperfect being, created by an imperfect being.”
“We only wish to raise quality of life for all species.”
“You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.”
Geir Isene - uncut 
🙂 reading this post scares the hell out of me… I am off moving to a different planet before the baggers take over, on the other hand I stay… after all the above post was LRH’s reality and so far not much happened -materialized regarding this quotation. Still just a quotation.
But it seems triggered off some fears-worries OH, caused re-stimulation. 🙂
Elizabeth Hamre.
PS; I an delighted that you have finally posted some fun stuff! After all who could take something like that seriously?
I think that the most destructive thing about Scientology is not “Disconnection” and “Fair Game”. Scientology’s most destructive trait is its invalidation of ANY other path or “Other Practices” as it is called by LRH. It is the most destructive trait as with it knowledge is totally barred from the individual except that contained within the cult itself. Knowledge that if the Scientologists were to have it ; most of them would just walk out the door.
Anyone educating himself in history of philosophy, scientific methodology , Human Rights , and cultic studies ; would consider Scn the works of a spoiled child. When you read the works of those ancient Greek philosophers , totally ignoring LRH’s invalidation of them , you find them so much more advance than LRH. Do not take my word for it , but just read Will Duran’s “History of Philosophy” and see it for yourselves. Scientology is a “Thought Stoping” ideology while cleverly attempting to look the opposite. I’ve never seen any other subject that call itself a “philosophy” that possesses more “Thought stopping” parts as Scn does.
That’s why that even when I use Scn frequently in my own life , I just can’t recommend it to others in an unreformed state. And I do not necessarily mean reforms in the Tech itself ( as to auditng and C/Sing Tech is concerned) , but a reform of several Admin and Ethics policies , that totally makes the subject not only unworkable but very suppressive.
But ALL my attempts to get Indies to reform it have been in vain as they can not -the majority of them – publicly accept that LRH ever did anything wrong , nor that he lied about a a great many things. And that’s why the subject will eventually die. Its fate is sealed because the Scientologists themselves WILL seal it with their fundamentalist approach to it.
Yes.
Scientology is dangerous for the reason that they aren’t trying to get along with others except and only as a “shore story.” (Telling a plausible truth for present company and present situation)
Another reason Scientology is dangerous is because its adherents are conditioned into the doctrine of “greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics” and any solution including murder is allowable if the 4th dynamic “mankind” trump card can be played. Individual Scientologists are conditioned away from having a conscience in the usual sense of decency and withhold destructive solutions only to the degree that they cannot be gotten away with by the law of the land and justice system. (“she there with the pink legs sticking out didn’t like me. Don’t worry, no one at all will suppose “you” did it.)
Scientology doesn’t give a damn about the law or social contracts as they view themselves as building a better society beginning with their orgs and then expanding them outward assimilating as they go.
A Scientologist, a Borg, and a radicalized Muslim have every attitude in common.
Spot on.
” A Scientologist, a Borg, and a radicalized Muslim have every attitude in common.”
Actually, in that case A DOES = A=A , and not in any reactive way.
:-)))
A true Scientologist = A Borg = A radicalized Muslim 😉
That’s right! 🙂
Hi Chris, do you think the idea of the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics is false per se, or is it just that Scn cannot end war, insanity and criminality like it says it can? If it really could do these things and produce a heaven on earth, would it be right to murder someone to bring that about? (I’m thinking out loud here :))
That is an excellent question.
“If it really could do these things and produce a heaven on earth, would it be right to murder someone to bring that about? (I’m thinking out loud here :))”
It is of course an age old question. In my opinion fallacious since the opportunity to save does not present itself through “murder.” But that’s one of the three questions.
The other question of “greatest good” and its corollary “the least harm” is a more serious question that can be genuinely complex to consider. As a solution, it has been abused by every despot such as L Ron Hubbard. Yet China enacted limitations on the size of families as a solution to its overpopulation. In recent years I believe these rules were relieved however, YUPPIE chinese have continued to voluntarily limit the size of their families. This is an example of the greatest good solutions. Ethnic cleansing is another distorted example. But it seems reasonable to notice that many in the world go hungry each night and everyone everywhere pollutes. Do I think it is false? Not exactly, I probably think that it is a tautology, a dangerous one because it is so very left open to subjective interpretation by anyone attempting to apply it. Does man truly consider what is best for God when deciding what is best? I’m going to say no.
Scientology never aimed to end war, criminality, nor insanity. These have ever been only PR (public relations) positioning slogans. Scientology has ever existed solely for itself.
I don’t think its fallacious – murdering Hitler (which they tried to do several times) would have prevented much death and suffering and I believe would have been the right thing to do.
The idea of greatest good has similarities to Utilitarianism which has its own problems but is still used as a basic framework. I see much of Scn as a workable framework so long as one is discerning about it.
Chris, why are you certain Hubbard never believed in the aims of Scn?
AOTC : “I don’t think its fallacious – murdering Hitler (which they tried to do several times) would have prevented much death and suffering and I believe would have been the right thing to do.”
With all due respect to your views , AOTC, only a very desperate and defeated mind would think of murder as a “solution” to anything. This society is dying because of “bright” solutions like that. Man frequently thinks that the end justifies the means , and that EXACT thought has lead society to enter into states of heavy intolerance ,violations of Human Rights , and just a general insensibility towards our fellow beings.
There are only 2 exception to the rule “You shall not murder” ; two and only two. Why? Because I took it out of some philosophy textbook ? Not at all , but because that happens to be the way this game called Life was very wisely designed. There are RULES to this game called Aware Existence ; rules agreed upon in a way and in a time I have no clue of , but that I have an intuitively psychic perception of , with an unshakable certainty about it which gives me an incredible peace of mind as regards to criteria to sort out right from wrong.
Those two exceptions are :
1. When your own life is in danger because someone is DIRECTLY aiming a weapon at you over which you have absolutely no possible control of at the time of the attack. And even in that case , all efforts should be made to neutralize the attacker by all POSSIBLE means first before striking any deadly blow as such. One can always shoot at a leg , shoulder, etc, you know ?
In my own personal case – w/out expecting others to do the same as me , nor demanding that of them – I rather die attempting to defend my own life , before striking any deadly blow at anyone which I was even trained at doing many , many years ago. The life of my attacker isn’t less valuable than mine in my assessment of the situation , no matter the “evil” intentions that he might be manifesting at me. I can perfectly confront evil as all evil is , is stupidity , ignorance , and a succumbing to the pains inherent to life. An “evil” person just couldn’t take it anymore ; that’s all. I rather bring him back to being alive instead of destroying him. That’s my philosophy of life ; my OWN one , regardless if it is shared or not by any one philosophy. It is MY philosophy of life ; one where the welfare of my fellow beings is a lot more important than mine , regardless of who they are or what overts they have committed in life , and regardless if they kill me while trying to save them. Everyone dies sooner or later.
2. When the lives of others are DIRECTLY at stake , as in any individual or group directly attacking other individuals with deadly weapons.
But even in that special case , my heart would be broken in a thousand pieces for all those I had to kill to save others , and I don’t think that I would ever recover from that experience. For me , every life is sacred even the lives of those who take other’s. That how I like to live my life ; one that is very simple for me to understand as I am never baffled at what others do. Not for very long at least , at those times when I dramatize being a victim , which happens with more frequency than I would like to , but with much , much less frequency than most people. And I always come back to an state of admitted cause.
Hitler wasn’t the cause of the Holocaust. The cause of the Holocaust was the collective stupidity and ignorance of a million souls , specially Germans. A cult mentality that made this planet become a Hell on Earth at so many periods of history. The seed of destruction lies dormant inside each us humans , insidiously growing and just waiting to germinate at any given time in our lives. The bells always toll for ourselves , I am afraid. And I am glad that it is that way.
“Chris, why are you certain Hubbard never believed in the aims of Scn?”
Because AOTC, Hubbard was a congenital liar. And he was a coward. He wasn’t brilliant in any technical sense. He was however an unrepentant con man who threw everyone who ever loved him under any available bus to save his own skin. He was a first rate sociopath who believed in the Aims of Scientology to the depth of the con and that is all.
Ok, thanks. I just tend to be suspicious of black and white certainties whenever I see them.
The more history I read the harder it is to separate things into neat packages.
“The more history I read the harder it is to separate things into neat packages.”
You are welcome. The more history I read, the more certain that mankind cannot learn from it. History seems to only provide the seed iteration for an apparently random future through mechanisms which are unchangeable to current man. I sincerely hope that I am mistaken about this.
“Ok, thanks. I just tend to be suspicious of black and white certainties whenever I see them.”
Hi aotc, I wouldn’t describe my opinion of Hubbard as a certainty. It’s just an opinion based on relatively countless stories of the Old Man’s dishonesty. (Click Here) Do you suppose in this linked example that Hubbard was confused about his role as a psychologist or was he telling a bald-faced Messiah lie?
“Chris, why are you certain Hubbard never believed in the aims of Scn?”
Here’s Hubbard’s letter written in my home town of Phoenix, Arizona, identifying himself dishonestly as a psychologist, a doctor of divinity, and a doctor of philosophy:
L. Ron Hubbard, D.D. Ph.D. 1826 F. St. NW Washington, D.C. Sept. 6, 1955 County Attorney, Phoenix, Arizona My dear Sir; You have expressed a desire to “get to the bottom of Scientology and Hubbard.” May I suggest that you write a letter to me, setting forth the various things you want to know. May I also direct your attention to your public library where in “Who’s Who in the East” and “Who Knows and What”, the standard American reference of technical experts, you will find my background. You might also write the U.S. Navy in which I served as an officer throughout the war. The books will inform you that I am a writer, a scientist, and a psychologist and the Navy will inform you of an honorable record, an American record. As for Scientology I invite your attention to the library or to whatever books you may have to hand. Now in your turn I would like some information. I would like to know who complained to you about the various organizations and myself and exactly what was said to you to cause you to take the course and action which you did. If you do not care to give me this information, please give it to the F.B.I. when they request it. It would assist me considerably if you would be very specific as we are having for the moment a small amount of trouble running down the exact instigators of the lies and defamations which were spread in Phoenix. We are engaged at the moment in collecting enough funds to continue this matter as long as is necessary to discover why the only entirely American development in the field of the mind should be so attacked. May I request that you dismiss the charges against Mr. Edd Clark and cooperate with us in following up this situation. It may interest you that in five years of Dianetics and Scientology in every quarter of the world there has never been a similar charge or arrest of any of thousands upon thousands of practitioners and that having been suffered and condoned for many years by any and all authorities and even healing interests and having for a very long time existed in Arizona that the practice of Scientology has become by this face acceptable. May I also have your cooperation in discovering and naming the persons who sent individuals with pre-Scientology records of insanity into the area to harass us and in naming the persons who offered the bribes in return for evidence or complaints against Scientology and its organizations. The huge sums of money must have had an important source. In that Mr. Edd Clark did not contravene any law of the State of Arizona, may we have your assistance in locating rather larger game, much more interesting to the Federal government than Mr. Clark. Sincerely, L. Ron Hubbard
Hubbard was status-crazy as evidenced by his many lies and tall tales about his own background. He explained all this in his series MISSION EARTH wherein he explains (as the hero of the story, of course) that he had to lie about his degrees or else no one would take him seriously. I guess he found a way to get around that.
I suggest you read up on the greatest good in other texts on philosophy. This is not something Hubbard invented and it has been debated and discussed by some very smart fellows. But, in a nutshell, this ethical principal is flawed and does not provide a good basis for ethics. You can find discourses on it that fully go into why.
If you think about it it is similar to the concept of democracy. Another flawed concept which leads to limiting freedom on select groups not in the majority. Something the authors of the US constitution were well aware when they chose not to base the USA on a democracy.
freebeeing, I think the way the principle of “greatest good” is different in Hubbard’s version is that same way that it differs from democracy. That is, it’s not a matter of the greatest good for the greatest number – it’s the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics, and then qualifies it further as the relevant dynamics, the ones directly involved.
Which is exactly what makes his concept so dangerous. It puts one person on equal weighting as the whole of humanity. And it’s the rationale behind making the 3rd dynamic of Scientology of equal value as the whole universe. Etc
I don’t see how you figure. What plausible situation would “put one person on equal weighting as the whole of humanity” and with those two dynamics as the only ones directly involved?
Let’s say four dynamics are directly involved (1-4), then they have equal weighting as default and thus 1 and 4 are equally weighted.
Nah. You’ve just restated the same abstract statement.
Hasta manana.
I am sure any reader can come up with dozens of concrete examples where the 1st and the 4th dynamic both were involved in an evaluation. Are you saying that this has never come up in any of your own evaluations or doubt formulas – that you had to look at the fourth and the first dynamic? Or the group of Scientology against mankind? Or the second dynamic versus the third? Or the Universe versus Scientology? Or global warming versus your 1st dynamic? Or all life versus your soccer team? Or God versus your Tea Party? Or your children versus Scientology? Or Scientology versus your education? Or Mankind versus Life? Or Scientology versus whatever?
Where Scientology begins to resemble The Borg, is how it operates on the individual and all he holds to be valuable.
Assimilation occurs from the inside with the planting of a single idea. That idea germinates and takes root as more and more Scientological concepts are introduced. If allowed to continue, it will supplant previous ideologies and thought processes, and eventually become the framework that defines and dictates the person’s reality. You have become a Scientologist.
Once you are part of the collective, you become a source of energy. You will be asked (coerced) to turn over large amounts of money. Because the collective understands your new mental framework, it can leverage that to eliminate any resistance.
Next you will be asked (coerced) to spend all of your free time in the collective. This encourages those roots to mature, while depriving any outside interests or activities from being established. Soon it will be eat-sleep-work-org.
Eventually you will be asked (coerced) to surrender your offspring to the collective. Collective-born subjects are much easier to control and manage.
Your new mental framework will have proven to be dysfunctional in the world at large, encouraging you to spend more time in the collective where it appears to “work”. The world is flawed and aberrant, Scientology collective becomes the preferred environment.
Assimilation by the Scientology Borg can take months, even years. As the process continues, an erosion of mind and soul and heart occurs. Previously held notions of charity, empathy and compassion, will have been replaced by “unreasonableness”, ruthlessness and no-sympathy. Your sense of humanity has been corrupted.
In the end, your time, your money, your family, your heart and soul will have been consumed by Scientology. If you cease to be of value and not cause much disturbance, you will be tolerated. If not, you will be ejected from the collective, for the good of the group, of course. Past contributions hold little value, while past transgressions do.
In the world of Scientology – Scientology is ALL, the individual NOTHING.
A good extension to my post. Thanks.
“In the world of Scientology – Scientology is ALL, the individual NOTHING.”
This is a good example of why Scientology is similar to The Borg. If and when hooking up individuals to the hive as are the Borg became available, I feel confident that the efficiency and oppressiveness of it would appeal to Hubard.
I am sure The Borg runs LRH Admin Tech.
…and like the Borg, no other fish to fry.
Here are two notable replies from the cross-posted thread to Facebook:
Egil Moeller: “This (the no-exit-clause) is the same in many religions. Together with a call for violence against non-believers, I personally consider this strategy one of the most damning characteristics of an ideology, by itself enough to categorize it as evil.”
Josh Hopwood: “There are so many of these types of quotes from Hubbard.
One human giving permission for other humans to be less than human.”
Here are some more lovely quotes from LRH the “humanitarian” :
“Show me any person who is critical of us and I’ll show you crimes and intended crimes that would stand a magistrate’s hair on end.” – L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Bulletin, 4 April 1965
“Somebody some day will say ‘this is illegal.’ By then be sure the orgs [Scientology organizations] say what is legal or not.” – L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, 4 January 1966, “LRH Relationship to Orgs”
“People attack Scientology, I never forget it, always even the score. People attack auditors, or staff, or organisations, or me. I never forget until the slate is clear.” – L. Ron Hubbard, MANUAL OF JUSTICE, 1959
“There are only two answers for the handling of people from 2.0 down on the Tone Scale, neither one of which has anything to do with reasoning with them or listening to their justification of their acts. The first is to raise them on the Tone Scale by un-enturbulating some of their theta by any one of the three valid processes. The other is to dispose of them quietly and without sorrow.” – L. Ron Hubbard, SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL, p. 170
“Now, get this as a technical fact, not a hopeful idea. Every time we have investigated the background of a critic of Scientology, we have found crimes for which that person or group could be imprisoned under existing law. We do not find critics of Scientology who do not have criminal pasts.” – L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Bulletin, 5 November 1967, “Critics of Scientology”
“ENEMY SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed.” – L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, 18 October 1967
“A truly Suppressive Person or group has no rights of any kind and actions taken against them are not punishable.” – L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, 1 March 1965, HCO (Division 1) “Ethics, Suppressive Acts, Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists”
[Distorted electronic noise ] “LRH to the Scientologists , LRH to the Scientologists , come in please ; resistence is futile. You’ll be assimilated. You’ll become part of the collective group of the most ethical minds in the galaxy ; there is no Self, only ONENESS. We are THE ones. We are The Borg”.
The Experimenter is a movie starring Peter Saarsgard, who protrays Stanley Milgrim, an experimental psychologist. In 1962, he performed “obedience experiments” which demonstrated how powerless 65% of us are to resist following authoritative orders even against our better social judgement. The 2015 movie is a good watch, worth the investment of time and left me wondering what lessons if any I have learned in my life and whether I truly think for myself.
It is interesting to look at how this belief in the tech is brought about.
It is similar to a method of hypnosis (or sales) You begin by getting agreement on simple things. Then keep building up those agreements. Then you give them some “wins” to further back up the agreements so far established. You keep doing this until you’ve established yourself as a trusted source. Once you’ve done this you can then introduce ideas that are less credulous, without proof. The person has lost his judgement at this point having bought into the earlier indoctrination. The cognitive dissonance is handled by sticking with the established trust: “Well he was right about this and of course everyone is messed p and everyone has something to handle and for sure the world would be a better place if everyone had all theirs screws in proper place, etc. It all sounds so right and reasonable and beneficial and humanitarian and…”
Hubbard was always so invariably certain about things. He wrote with great conviction. Early on Scn was the science of certainty. He never let up on it. KSW #1 is the pinnacle of the trap. IMO it marks the point at which Scn became a cult.
+1 post FB.
When one googles hypnosis and agreement what comes up are several articles on how agreement has to gotten first for hypnosis or conversational hypnosis to work.
http://hypnosistrainingacademy.com/4-covert-agreement-tactics-to-set-a-yes-mood-in-hypnosis/
http://www.powerfulpersuaders.com/how-to-use-agreement-tactics-in-persuasion-and-hypnosis/
I have a theory, don’t know if others have presented it before. I know Arnie has said dianetics and scientology is hypnosis. I couldn’t quite get my wits around that, but I think I have now but unsure.
Hubbard stated ARC = understanding and said communication was the most important. But, now I’m looking at it like this RCA = hypnosis where R = agreement.
I don’t if anybody here listened to the podcast by Ross and Carrie over at Tony O blog. I relistened to it using the filter RCA = get one involved into scientology. It’s quite interesting. At about the 65 minute mark Ross talks about his learning some basic concepts of scientology and talks of the ARC triangle which he likes. But Carrie doesn’t and even mentions it’s RCA not ARC and the folks at the org haven’t corrected themselves.
Theory is scientologists think in terms of A, then R, then C is supposed to get people involved. Hence the love bombing at the beginning. And this works sometimes, but behind the scenes we have hubbard applying RCA in his books and lectures.
http://ohnopodcast.com/
Of all the critics of Scientology, Gordon strikes me as one of the nuttiest, avengeful and weird cases around. That guy really bears a grudge and seems mentally derailed and damaged by his involvement in Scientology. Just sayin’
who is Gordon? Never heard of this critic.
It is interesting to look at the untruths being put forward here that no in-good-standing scio would ever dare question:
Lie: “The whole agonized future of this planet, every Man, Woman and Child on it, and your own destiny for the next endless trillions of years depend on what you do here and now with and in Scientology.”
Lie: “Scientology is the only workable system man has. It has already taken people toward higher IQ, better lives and all that. No other system has. So realize that it has no competitor.”
Lie: “In all the broad Universe there is no other hope for Man than ourselves.”
Lie: “There is no more ethical group on this planet than ourselves.”
Good points all, freebeing
What sometimes suprises me is how insidious the mindfuck of Scientology can be. When a scientologist comes online and starts discussing the subject with fervour and a gung-ho attitude ready to blast those pesky critics and armed to the hilt with Scientology Tech and LRH quotes, it often takes thousands of posts back and forth before that gung-ho attitude fades a tad and the person, in the face of blatant facts, must admit there really is SOMETHING wrong with Scientology and Hubbard. Mot much, but a tiny something. Another set of debates, thousands of exchanges later, and the person feels he must admit to something SPECIFIC that is wrong with the subject and the man. But it takes another couple of years before the person might be willing to admit there is something wrong in the FUNDAMENTALS of Scientology. All the while it is obvious to any outsider that there is plenty wrong with Hubbard, Scientology, Dianteics, his research or lack thereof, and yes – the very fundamentals of Scientology contains holes, lies and garbage.
As the person starts to see that there is indeed shit in Scientology, then the person should realize how much it took for him to realize just that. And it should make him wonder… “If it took THIS much to change my viewpoint into what I now consider to be the right viewpoint, then the mindfuck must have been amazing. And with this amazing hold it has on me, could it be possible that it still holds me off from seeing more shit in Scientology?”
But I have never seen anyone wonder about that. Why not? Perhaps because the mindfuck is über-amazing?
So Geir …
What does an unmindfucked being look like?
What does it do?
How does it live?
What practices does it find helpful?
My personal answer is to add ONE word to the classic Zen instruction.
“Just sit. Nothing special.”
TO …
“Just sit BATSHIT. Nothing special.”
***
Gudo Nishijima talks a lot about “dropping body and mind” and what I think he is really saying is “drop time.”
Because a mind requires TIME to work. We think in time. We write in time
But batshit is outside of time, science and rational thinking and those three would be the subset of batshit according to my famous book “Guanotology: The Modern Pseudoscience for Dealing With Being Fucked.”
***
Babies are born crazy. They have no logic or rational ability. THAT comes later as they grow.
So if the BASE self of humanity is a baby, and we are all born crazy, then reason is an addition to that base.
***
Reason, science, and the ego are but a thin patch of bubbles atop a vast sea of crazy. And that patch of bubbles wants to rule it all. But it doesn’t want to admit that it came from the sea in the first place.
So, yeah, I’m hoping reality is nucking futts, as it is the only way I can see a free will soul to exist and will.
If anyone reading this thinks I’m crazy, then they are actually getting the point.
kg, I must say that I find your posts on your view of existence very insightful. I was just reading the https://isene.me/2015/12/12/scientology-is-hubbards-attempt-to-kill-science/ post where you laid it out in detail. Really quite good. Rational a subset of irrational. I’m not sure I’d call that a subset, but both are certainly encompassed by the infinite.
Geir, you are right, there are a great many problems with the fundamentals of Scn. While they might be a theory that can be used as Hubbard did, they do not embody truth, at least not my truth nor that of many others. The egoistic nature of the entire subject at once marks it as seriously flawed. It wouldn’t have been so bad if he hadn’t presented it all as “science” and “proven correct”. One really has to look outside the subject and study other philosophies to really see how boxed in one’s viewpoints have become by buying into the “only we have the answers” line. So far it has been 8 years for me and I’m still sorting things out.
Thanks FB. I don’t BELIEVE that actually. I use it mostly out of desperation.
Regarding your point about the claims. It all becomes very clear when you see this video. Go to 19:50 and you will find a haunting piece on how cult leaders are often narcissists. At 6:15 you will find the 9 traits of a narcissist.
It will take less than two minutes with someone who knows Hubbard’s history to find examples of all nine.
Here, I’ll take two minutes now:
The 9 Traits of a Narcissist
1. Grandiosity (tells false histories)
2. Arrogant and Domineering (Yup)
2. Obsessed With Success and Power (“Smash my name in History”)
3. Lack of Empathy (Chain lockers?)
4. Believes of Being Unique (“Never before have such discoveries existed”)
5. Requires Excessive Admiration. (He constantly held court in social settings and would say almost anything to keep it)
6. Sense of Entitlement (How many people did he owe money to that he never paid back when he had money? Example: Forrest Ackerman)
7. Exploitation (Sea org)
8. Envy of Others (Look what happened to Alan Walter)
It is very rare for someone to have all nine traits. So in THAT, Hubbard did get some uniqueness after all.
Oops. I Didn’t post vid link and my computer died.
Go to 6:15 and 19:50
TITLE: Narcissists – Full Documentary
YOU TUBE ACCOUNT: Zenman5910
Stood bye laptop!
“Babies are born crazy. They have no logic or rational ability. THAT comes later as they grow.”
Yeah, “Original Batshit.” I think they taught me about that growing up.
“Reason, science, and the ego are but a thin patch of bubbles atop a vast sea of crazy.”
That’s a good metaphor. Pimples on a skin of Consciousness… works for me.
Perfect moment today.
I took my grandson to see my mom. He just learned to say words like “backpack” and “balloon” and other things, and my mom asked me five times WHO was the baby’s parents?
I answered the same every time like she never asked it before.
“Well this is the first time I saw him!”
And then she wondered why his toys and books were there.
But he put on that charm of his.
He made her smile. He made her laugh. It was a win. She felt alive.
From batshit we emerge, to batshit we return.
“Find the consciousness you had before you were born.” – Lojong Proverbs
Geir wrote:
“When a scientologist comes online and starts discussing the subject with fervour and a gung-ho attitude ready to blast those pesky critics and armed to the hilt with Scientology Tech and LRH quotes, it often takes thousands of posts back and forth before that gung-ho attitude fades a tad and the person, in the face of blatant facts, must admit there really is SOMETHING wrong with Scientology and Hubbard.”
It takes an incredible amount of effort to get through the mindfuck of a small few individuals. Just as you said, the back and forth can be thousands of posts, over the course of years.
But you can not underestimate everyone in this way. MOST PEOPLE do not take thousands of posts to begin to smell the bullshit. All they need is a few thought grenades, little explosive idea-seeds that get inside their bubble, and get them thinking for themselves again.
And the best way to deliver those thought grenades to dozens of people at the same time is an entertaining debate with one of those recalcitrant Scientology dead-enders. Others watch the Scientologist come up with one fixed idea after another from L Ron Hubbard, and they see it make less and less sense. And they just start dropping like flies.
Seeing L Ron Hubbard’s ideas get questioned up on the computer screen, rather than inside your own head, is almost always a crucifixion for L Ron Hubbard’s ideas.
Almost no Scientologist who left the Church from 2009 is a Scientologist any more, and I believe that was thousands of people. And that trend was well under way by 2011 at least.
In this way, posters like Marildi and Valkov have been incredibly valuable in deprogramming hundreds, maybe even thousands, of Scientologists.
Alanzo
This.
+1
Alanzo, I agree. I tend to forget that in the heat of a random moment. I forget to be thankful.
Thanks Alanzo.
Thanks Marildi.
Good to see you still hammering away at it, Geir.
And Marildi, too!
I hope that everything is going well there in the Nordic regions. We here in the United States are looking to try to elect a Scandinavian-style democratic socialist and be more like you guys now!
It’s the second Viking invasion. You should get a hat and get on a boat and come over here! You’d be a rock star!
Alanzo 🙂
Or you morons end up electing the psycho clown.
Oh my God I hope not. But we RE-ELECTED GEORGE BUSH. So I can not speak for the American electorate, I’m very sorry to say.
If they elect Donald Trump, I’m moving to Norway. Or Sweden. I hear people are more civilized and intelligent in Sweden.
Alanzo
There is a narcissist reeking havoc in my family life right now so I’m reading a book on Narcissism and dealing with their bullshit. Guess who is the poster child in chapter one?
Trump.
Right :-O
Alanzo wrote: “In this way, posters like Marildi and Valkov have been incredibly valuable in deprogramming hundreds, maybe even thousands, of Scientologists.”
I wonder how many critics would be willing to admit that the reverse is just as true.
I have seen so many instances of critics stating obvious inaccuracies about the basic philosophy and tech – and when the inaccuracies are pointed out, they almost never refute it with facts or even stay on the subject. Instead, they resort to Ad Hom and other logical fallacies.
Seeing this has been – as you put it – “incredibly valuable” in confirming the actual value that exists.
Marildi wrote:
“I wonder how many critics would be willing to admit that the reverse is just as true. “
So you are saying that critics actually turn people into Scientologists?
If that were true, there would be thousands more Scientologists since the birth of the Internet.
So why would any person, critic or otherwise, want to admit to something that was so obviously untrue?
(Ha! Hi Marildi!!! Got you to answer me!!! HAHAHA!!!! 🙂 )
Alanzo
Hey Marildi –
What happened to the South African BackinComm blog? It’s a dead blog now, with no explanation or even a hint of what killed it.
–At least that I have seen. And I will admit that I am so low on the tone scale that I am almost blind, and stuck in a sticky kind of oily black paste in a hole deep in the ground. We don’t get much word of such things down here.
So could you fill me in?
Alanzo
Al: “What happened to the South African BackinComm blog? It’s a dead blog now, with no explanation or even a hint of what killed it.”
I have no data either. It’s strange that they wouldn’t have given some small R-factor at least. Makes you wonder if OSA in Africa had anything to do with it.
Amazing.
I’ve had a blog for a long time, and I fully understand the sentiment of just walking away, but I would tell SOMEBODY what I was doing.
I was banned from posting there because I was told that I was too “low-toned”. But I’m pretty sure it was actually because I criticize Hubbard and Scientology technology directly. I mean I am the highest toned thetan to hit planet Earth in Quadrillions of years!
Anyway – enough about me.
Where is it on the tone scale to just abandon your blog and go hide, never telling anyone about what happened?
Thanks for your answer, Marildi. And for coming so far down the tone scale to interact with me. 🙂
Alanzo
Alanzo: “I’ve had a blog for a long time, and I fully understand the sentiment of just walking away, but I would tell SOMEBODY what I was doing.”
Yes, it was pretty weird. Another strange thing is that your post above was the first on any blog that I’ve seen it even mentioned. I would have thought someone would ask the question or comment on it. But maybe I missed it.
And I don’t think you’re down-tone!
Maybe a little delusional… 😀
But I like interacting with you, Al. And that’s not just because there’s a win a minute in it for me – I love your humor too. 😉
LOL!
A win a minute!
It’s like shooting fish in a barrel for you! 🙂
That has to be so satisfying, and self-affirming, too. I’m glad I can perform at least this small function in this big world of ours!
Alanzo
“I’m glad I can perform at least this small function in this big world of ours!”
You’re the best. 🙂
According to Hubbard, Alanzo has hideous undisclosed crimes; “We do not find critics of Scientology who do not have criminal pasts.”
Do you agree with Hubbard here, Marildi?
Or an even more precise quote from HCOB of 5 November 1967, CRITICS OF SCIENTOLOGY:
“Never discuss Scientology with the critic. Just discuss his or her crimes, known and unknown. And act completely confident that those crimes exist. Because they do.”
Do you agree with this Marildi?
I bet you she won’t answer that question directly. In the BIC blog she would always Q&A with ALL my Qs similar to that one regarding specific LRH’s suppressive policies until I just got tired of her game. And I can easily find 3-4 examples of those to post here.
“Do you agree with this Marildi?”
Of course not, Geir. That HCOB was written in 1967 – half a century ago. The situation now is radically different from what it was then.
Also, the HCOB was written in a certain context that had to do with what was going on in that period of time – which Marty documented in his “Memoirs” book. You probably remember the quotes from it that I’ve posted here regarding the heavy attacks on Scientology at the time, by both private interests and government agencies – now fully documented in FOA records.
And as I’m sure you know, in another context LRH wrote the Dissem Drill, which gave an entirely different way of handling someone who is antagonistic towards Scientology.
Hubbard present the above as a technical fact and not as a temporary truth, though:
“And we have this technical fact—those who oppose us have crimes to hide.”
And as it is a Technical Fact according to Hubbard, and you so clearly dismiss it as untrue, would you be willing to question other technical facts presented by Hubbard half a century ago?
I bet to you that she would not answer the question , didn’t I ? , but that would twist it in her VERY peculiar ways just as she always did at BIC. With Marildi , there are always “historical context” to “examine” a situation that has absolutely NO justification whatsoever ; not today , and CERTAINLY , not back then as well. Welcome to the world of the most fixated FUNDAMENTALISM , Geir.
Geir: “Hubbard present the above as a technical fact and not as a temporary truth, though.”
Yes, but it was in this context:
———————-
“Now, get this as a technical fact, not a hopeful idea. Every time we have investigated the background of a critic of Scientology, we have found crimes for which that person or group could be imprisoned under existing law. We do not find critics of Scientology who do not have criminal pasts. Over and over we prove this.
“Politician A stands up on his hind legs in a parliament and brays for a condemnation of Scientology. When we look him over we find crimes—embezzled funds, moral lapses, a thirst for young boys—sordid stuff.
“Wife B howls at her husband for attending a Scientology group. We look her up and find she had a baby he didn’t know about.
“Two things operate here. Criminals hate anything that helps anyone, instinctively. And just as instinctively a criminal fights anything that may disclose his past.” http://www.suppressiveperson.org/sp/archives/278
—————————-
On the other hand, LRH obviously did fall prey to the pitfalls of organized religion – as have other organized religions – and eventually started targeting any dissenters. So as an organization Scientology, in terms of the way the church practiced it, became a cult.
I see you are pulling a kata #4. I repeat the question: “And as it is a Technical Fact according to Hubbard, and you so clearly dismiss it as untrue, would you be willing to question other technical facts presented by Hubbard half a century ago?”
Geir: “…would you be willing to question other technical facts presented by Hubbard half a century ago?”
Of course.
Why didn’t you just answer right away? It’s a bit tideous with all the Q&A.
How long did it take for me to answer? It looks like it was only about half an hour. In any case, I think I was replying to other comments too.
And it looks like you didn’t complete the last sentence of the post just above.
It’s the amount of nudging and specifying and querying and general Q & A with most of your exchanges that makes it tidious. Could you please do less of the Q&A?
Okay, since the reply to you apparently wasn’t an example of that, you should give me one so I can see what you mean by my “Q&A.”
I will grant that I don’t always answer right away, mainly because I’m not always at my computer when a reply to me gets posted, and also because I might be replying to other posts.
It’s not about the time it takes you to answer simple yes/no questions. It’s about the number of iterations and clarifications and specifications etc. And no, I will not give you examples for you to Q&A about. You surely know what I mean. Please consider this.
Okay.
Thanks.
Marildi;
1. Did you read my latest post (How does a Scientologist dodge a bullet?)?
2. Did you learn something from it?
“On the other hand, LRH obviously did fall prey to the pitfalls of organized religion. . . ”
LRH was the abuser. He didn’t “fall prey” to anything. His hubris and megalomania were his own to own.
Marildi : “On the other hand, LRH obviously did fall prey to the pitfalls of organized religion. . . ”
Chris : “LRH was the abuser. He didn’t “fall prey” to anything. His hubris and megalomania were his own to own.”
It is ironic how Marildi always victimize LRH so much, but how she never victimize the REAL victims ; those whose Human Rights were abused left and right. This misguided conduct from Scientologists is what drive people away from the subject. They are Scientology’s #1 enemy.
“This misguided conduct from Scientologists is what drive people away from the subject. They are Scientology’s #1 enemy.”
Marildi was abused and did some abusing in her time. Now she enables LRH. It’s kind of a natural cycle that a person seems to have to get pissed off enough to say, “ENOUGH!” Then they will begin to unravel. Something or other down there at step 9. or greater of KG’s algorithm has to just break and the true believer says, “THIS IS BULLSHIT!” I still think she needs to follow her heart’s desire with a field scientologist and run this goal of hers on out to the finish so she can finish this cycle of action that is hanging fire incomplete. Rank eval, I know. Fuck it. She knows I love her and my door is open to her with a standing invitation. Mi casa su casa, Marildi.
Chris: “Something or other down there at step 9. or greater of KG’s algorithm has to just break and the true believer says, ‘THIS IS BULLSHIT!'”
Yes, that’s what I said, alright. But it wasn’t for the reason you are dubbing in. It was for the bullshit at the source of KG’s algorithm that I described here: https://isene.me/2016/02/19/how-does-a-scientologist-dodge-a-bullet/#comment-104308
Have you ever had an out list and experienced what it’s like when the right item is indicated? That’s what happened to me when Dan Koon unknowingly indicated the right item – i.e. being CORNERED.
Things just fell into place for me when I read that. Big win!
Thanks for the standing invitation. 🙂
Marildi; Are you saying that as you feel cornored, you start acting irrational in accordance to katageeks 9 defensive tactics?
“But I like interacting with you, Al. And that’s not just because there’s a win a minute in it for me – I love your humor too. ;)”
LOL! Me too Marildi, me too.
Hi, Alanzo.
You wrote: So you are saying that critics actually turn people into Scientologists?”
No. And that is a typical too – inaccuracies about what has been stated. 😛
I said that critics have “CONFIRMED the actual value that exists” – which would obviously not be referring to non-Scientologists
This is a good example of why you get me to answer. 😀
Unfortunately I will be away from my computer for most of the day. But I will check later on for the latest inaccuracies. 😉
I SWOON whenever I am told that I am prone to inaccuracies by Marildi!
“I said that critics have “CONFIRMED the actual value that exists” – which would obviously not be referring to non-Scientologists”
So what explains the Biblical Exodus of Scientologists into the Promised Land of Ex-Scientology if critics just CONFIRMED the actually value that exists in Hubbard’s ideas?
Wouldn’t the Exodus be explained by Scientologists seeing the ideas of L Ron Hubbard being questioned and taken apart by critics – many for the first time – on the Internet?
I think so.
In fact, I know so.
Alanzo
A reference here could be Occam’s Razor 😉
Alanzo: “Wouldn’t the Exodus be explained by Scientologists seeing the ideas of L Ron Hubbard being questioned and taken apart by critics – many for the first time – on the Internet?”
I see you’re still doing an A=A on Scientology and the CoS. No wonder you still come up with wrong answers. 🙄
But it’s good to see you after so long – and to know you’re still swooning over me. 🙂
Marildi – First of all A does equal A. Logically, what you mean to say is that I am doing an A=B on Scientology and the Cof S.
And then also – no. I very specifically said “seeing the ideas of L Ron Hubbard being questioned and taken apart by critics.”
I’ve even created words in italics for you so you can see what I am emphasizing.
And, as always, it’s the italics which makes my statements true.
Alanzo
Alanzo: “I very specifically said “seeing the ideas of L Ron Hubbard being questioned and taken apart by critics.”
Yes, that’s right – the IDEAS of L. Ron Hubbard. This is what makes up Scientology – which is NOT the CoS. Equating the two is making them both equal to “A” and becomes an A=A.
And my caps trump your italics. 😀
How can lying about something confirm that something is true? Or how can lying about something confirm that something has value?
Gier wrote:
“How can lying about something confirm that something is true? Or how can lying about something confirm that something has value?”
A fantastic point of logic. Well spotted, G.
Alanzo’s Clairvoyant Prediction: Marildi will ignore this question.
Alanzo
Alanzo’s Clairvoyant Prediction: Marildi will ignore this question.
Geir’s Clairvoyant Prediction: Marildi will twist the question and/or an answer into something that she believe will help save the face of Hubbard of Nebraska and his Holy Tech and coincidentally impress scientologists reading this enough to stop them from walking away from the subject.
Alanzo: Wanna bet? I’ll buy the dinner if you’re right.
“Hubbard of Nebraska”
That’s hilarious!
“Alanzo’s Clairvoyant Prediction: Marildi will ignore this question.”
Sorry, Al, but I’m gonna have to answer and make Geir right for a change. 😀
It’s actually the other side of the coin to what you and Geir said about pro-Scn posters being valuable in “de-programming” others.
To wit, when critics assert something that is supposedly wrong with Scientology itself (i.e. not the CoS), it gets me to take a look at what they are saying, and maybe even review the relevant materials – and most of the time I find that they have misinterpreted them.
Also, in reviewing materials, I have often found additional valuable data or tech points that I had either forgotten about or never got in the first place.
At times the point in question simply comes down to whether or not it works, and I look at my own and others’ positive experiences. Which are undeniable.
These are the reasons that critics for the most part have confirmed what was already true for me. See?
So what you’re saying is that critics tend to help you reinforce your indoctrination so that you become more certain about your rightness and will appear even more hung-ho and indoctrinated so as to drive more scientologist away from the subject?
Alanzo; damn we were both right. She answered, but she didn’t really answer the question. We’ll have to share the tab 🙂
“So what you’re saying is that critics tend to help you reinforce your indoctrination so that you become more certain about your rightness and will appear even more hung-ho and indoctrinated so as to drive more scientologist away from the subject?”
This is called spin. 😉
Well, there is documented evidence that your insistence in defending Scientology has helped push people away from the subject. The rest of my answer was yours. I just linked the two. Hardly a spin then?
What “documented evidence”?
People who have been helped away from the subject by your insistence on the rightness of Scientology and Hubbard have come forth and testified to that.
“Come forth”? And I suppose you can’t name them right? So this would be a meaningless point to make.
Talk to you tomorrow (“this evening” for you).
I can reveal at least two. And then they can probably chime in and verify that you have indeed helped them on their path out of Scientology (the subject).
Geir : “I can name at least two.”
Make that three. 🙂
Ok. Three.
Marildi, are you interested in the names of the other two or were you just hoping I wouldn’t be able to answer your challenge?
No, I’m not really interested because it’s still rather meaningless since there could be many variables, including how much they have probably been influenced by you – or whatever other variables there might be.
Just wanted to quickly answer that question for now, but I won’t have for more posting until later in the day. I only had time to reply to KG so I’ll respond to other posts later.
So the fact that they can testify that you specifically helped them move away from the subject is of no interest? You have in all other cases that has been discussed accepted and even promoted that personal testimonies are indeed valid evidence for something working or not. But not in this case? If such evidence is not in fact valid, then we can certainly throw LRH tech out the window as personal testimonials are just about all we have going for it.
Geir : “People who have been helped away from the subject by your insistence on the rightness of Scientology and Hubbard have come forth and testified to that.”
I testify to that myself , Marildi. It was strict KSW followers that got me out of Scn , and so many of my friends got out because of it as well. Your many posts validating Scn gave me the necessary arguments to write sensible essays on the subject -and to beat you 🙂 – that in the blog BIC , which was mostly a pro-LRH site , made a lot of people change their minds about it , or to modify it. You were there ; you saw that happening. It has happened at Rinder’s very frequently as well. Just go there and examine in detail Theo’s recent posts. Do not take my word for it , but just go there , and see it by yourself. Scientologists defending Scn as infallible , and LRH as a good man who only had the best of the interest for others , it what wakes up many Indies finally. I can attest to that.
And just to clarify , it is not that I want you out of Scn or out of anything for that matter. That’s your life , and you do with it whatever you want to do with it. But when you decide to ignore so , so , so many Human Rights abuses DIRECTLY by LRH , in an attempt to tone it all down , and to sweep all dirty laundry under the rug , I know then that I am facing fundamentalism and cultism. And that helps me to drive away even more from the subject. To say that you have not helped me dismiss Scn even more , would be totally untrue ; you DID , I promise you. I had been following for some years.
Peter: “Your many posts validating Scn gave me the necessary arguments to write sensible essays on the subject – and to beat you 🙂 – that in the blog BIC, which was mostly a pro-LRH site, made a lot of people change their minds about it, or to modify it. You were there; you saw that happening. It has happened at Rinder’s very frequently as well.”
Yes, I was there – and I don’t remember anything of the kind. I do remember you telling me just a day or two ago on Geir’s previous thread that you were sorry for the many times you were an asshole to me on those blogs.
But since you seem to think you “beat me” on those blogs – “frequently” – you should easily be able to give me some links. And I especially want to see where you “made a lot of people change their minds about it [Scientology], or to modify it.”
Marildi : “Yes, I was there – and I don’t remember anything of the kind. I do remember you telling me just a day or two ago on Geir’s previous thread that you were sorry for the many times you were an asshole to me on those blogs.”
Peter : Of course you don’t remember ; how could you , if “remembering” would defeat your purposes ? You CONVENIENTLY don’t remember , and I am pass the point playing the “Let’s convince Marildi of ANYTHING” game ; that’s an impossibility, and I know absolutes do not exist. But you are as close as it can get.
And YES, I was an asshole with you many times there, and YES, I was and AM sorry for it. But that in no way contradict or invalidate my original post to which you are replying now. You seems to have a “perfect” memory when that “memory” suits your needs. Yet , you forget other details about me , by assuming at some many posts that I lacked a specific knowledge of something you KNEW I had , to just derail the discussion and to “Dead Agent” the source. But you forget that I am always 3 steps ahead of you.
Marildi : “But since you seem to think you “beat me” on those blogs – “frequently” – you should easily be able to give me some links. And I especially want to see where you “made a lot of people ch ange their minds about it [Scientology], or to modify it.”
Peter : That would be a TOTAL waste of time because there is no worse “blind” than that who doesn’t want to be able to see, and besides , you would twist everything in your favor EVERY TIME using a “logic” that ONLY you “believe” on , but certainly not anybody else here.
You see Marildi , there is no “winning” with you , EVER. You certainly reminds me of my 2nd wife as much as I appreciate her. And because I had to learn to deal with her as we share a daughter together , so I have learned to deal with you as well , as you have great value too , REGARDLESS of your fundamentalist ideas about Scm/LRH. As I said before , I like you as you are. I still have great hopes for you , and I am a VERY patient man. 🙂
I seriously doubt that if there had been even one time where what you claim occurred, you would not have searched for days, if necessary, to find it.
At least you didn’t try to foist off some link that allegedly “proved” your contentions – and then, when I protested, claim that I just didn’t want to admit I was wrong.
Sorry, Peter, but you are fitting more and more into the category of critics I don’t even bother trying to have a comm cycle with.
Marildi : “I seriously doubt that if there had been even one time where what you claim occurred, you would not have searched for days, if necessary, to find it.”
Peter : God , you are such a child , my lady. I am not wasting my time in searching around for something you’ll dismiss anyway, and will twist it to defend your point. What part of “You can’t be wrong” didn’t you understand ? Did you think I was joking when I told you that ? I don’t see me laughing.
I have a PERSONAL friend who is an OT VIII class VI veteran C/S who used to post at BIC and who post at Rinder’s sometimes. He was so influenced by my posts at BIC that he decided to privately contact me. He was an extreme KSW follower, but as we have been exchanging comms back and forth over the months , he have cognited on the many destructive aspects of Scn , and the real intentions from LRH. I even helped him with some processes to handle some specific things , that “Standard Tech” wasn’t handling for him. By the way, he says that I possesses knowledge at the level of an original class VIII.
We can agree on something , you and me , but I am VERY SURE that you won’t agree to it as you are the most slippery poster that I have ever seen. You contact me privately , and I’ll get my friend’s agreement to share our comm exchanges with you, and I’ll even give you his e-mail address so you can contact him directly. I’ll also give you the e-mails of other friends of mine who had a similar experience with me as regards to having woke up with my posts at BIC.
You see, it is a win-win situation for you. You can then come PUBLICLY and tell “Peter is just full of bullshit”. But you know what ? You won’t do that because :
1. It’ll finally prove you wrong, something you can’t possible face.
2. You would have to come out of hidding as you’ve been all these years as just an Arm-chair “philosopher” reading all kind of books with no actual application.
I am Peter Torres from Bayamon, Puerto Rico, cell phone 787-345-5952 , email address thetaclear68@yahoo.com , Who are you ? You are just Marildi. Hey, may be you are not really a woman for all we know. Not that I care neither. You have turned down each and every one of my invitations to comm with me privately to just lose the formalisms and so you can determine whether or not I am worthy of being a good friend. I don’t hide behind names , my lady.
You want confirmations about my assertions ? Good! , I have them, but it is private information I can’t share publicly. But I can get their agreement to get in comm to you and to confirm this , If and ONLY if, you are a REAL person to them, and not a damn name on a blog. I don’t see Geir, Elizabeth, Chris, etc, hidding. Neither Alanzo. Why should I have more respect for you than I have for them ? You are just a name to me in PT. That’s all.
Marildi : “At least you didn’t try to foist off some link that allegedly “proved” your contentions – and then, when I protested, claim that I just didn’t want to admit I was wrong.”
Peter : I don’t need to “claim” anything. Most everybody here knows that except YOU.
Marildi : “Sorry, Peter, but you are fitting more and more into the category of critics I don’t e ven bother trying to have a comm cycle with.”
Peter : Sure, sure, blah, blah, blah, BIG YAWN. What were you saying, I am sorry ? ; I had fallen asleep. Most be an M/U. Some individuals just can’t be understood. 😉
thetaclear: “You contact me privately, and I’ll get my friend’s agreement to share our comm exchanges with you, and I’ll even give you his e-mail address so you can contact him directly. I’ll also give you the e-mails of other friends of mine who had a similar experience with me as regards to having woke up with my posts at BIC.”
So what if they do? My friends say just the opposite.
Sorry, but your reasoning is sorely lacking. And your comm continues to be abusive regardless of all the apologies. Let me know when you’re interested in having a more respectful exchange.
Marildi : “So what if they do? My friends say just the opposite.”
Peter : God , always the spoiled child , ah ? Always twisting the comms of others to suit your lousy and child-like arguments. I told you , that I HAD changed many hardcore scientologists (I won’t even capitalize the word as scientologists are not even worthy of it) into FREE THINKERS with my many posts at BIC. YOU , YOU , my child , told me that if I would have had any proof of that , I would have searched for it , and would have posted it. I , a full grown up adult , told you that I had such proof in the form of PRIVATE (clear that word , please) comm exchanges , and that I would be VERY happy to provide you with such proof if , and ONLY if , you contacted me by e-mail so that I could THEN , sent you their e-mails after I got their okay on that first.
They would have told you exactly WHO they were at the BIC blog ,and exactly HOW they got influenced by my posts there. I was giving you the PROOF you asked for. But what did you do after I put you in a VERY difficult situation of having to come out of hiding ? YOU CHICKEN OUT , my child , and posted a bunch of stupid spoiled child responses. Just grow , would you ?
Marildi : “Sorry, but your reasoning is sorely lacking.”
Peter : Lacking , my ass.
Marildi : “And your comm continues to be abusive regardless of all the apologies.”
Peter : You poor victim , are you going to cry on my shoulder now ? I just have one daughter , you know. But I am perfectly capable of taking care of two. 😉
Marildi : “Let me know when you’re interested in having a more respectful exchange.”\
Peter : When you stop being a fundamentalist , which to me that is NEVER. But if you don’t comment on my posts , I promise never to comment on yours even if I found them silly which I probably will. Otherwise I’ll treat you with the same respect that you treat me , which is NONE. Of course , this isn’t my blog , so I’ll play by Geir’s rules.
“These are the reasons that critics for the most part have confirmed what was already true for me. See?”
True for you!
Yes I see that.
By the way Marildi, you should know that I recently, in a fit of desperation, applied ethics conditions to an area of my life and it clarified things immensely! Big win, really.
I now know more about structural analysis – ways of analyzing problems that help to eliminate biases and over-emotion from the process of problem solving.
From this wider context (data of comparable magnitude) I see the ethics conditions as elementary structural analysis tools. And with my modifications to the formulae, they really helped to clarify and focus me on what needed to be done.
It was the ethics conditions that really helped me when I first got involved in Scientology over 30 years ago, and after 15 years as a critic, I understand them and can apply them EVEN BETTER now.
Needed to let you know that about Alanzo.
Alanzo
PS An example of my modifications: On Doubt, I replaced “Decide on the basis of the greatest good for the greatest number of blah blah” with “Decide on the basis of a cost benefit analysis” Huge improvement!
Interesting. However, I do not see the doubt formula being placed where it is by Hubbard. Doubt does and should happen everywhere on any scale and should be a data analysis tool “on the side”. What’s your take?
Right. It probably should not be called “doubt”. The operating state should be called something like “Fork in the Road” or “Decide on a beingness or direction”. What would be the word for that?
The “decision-formula”?
Yeah. Something like that. Because that is the operating state, and that’s what you need to do to move up.
By the way, I think Hubbard’s idea of “operating states” is valid. And while many of the formula steps are blatant trolls or brainwashing, other steps are also valid.
The problem is that if you had not been thoroughly trained as a Scientologist in the ethics conditions, and then never spent 15 (or at least some years being totally and militantly independent of any loyalty and ripped it apart every which way as an SP critic of Scientology) you would not be able to identify the booby traps that Hubbard sprinkled into the conditions.
So I would never recommend them to anyone else. But they have been working for me lately with my modifications.
New Table of Conditions by Alanzo:
Primordial Goo
Existence
Contemplation
Decision
Trust
Non-Existence
Danger
Emergence
Normal Operation
Affluence
Stable, Happy and Productive
The operating state should be called “DECISION”. And “enemy” should not be called “enemy”. It should be called “contemplation” or something like that and a few more steps added to assist in the contemplation.
Hey Al and Geir, you’ve given me two more examples of critics getting things wrong and confirming what I know about Scientology.
Here’s what you need to know about the Doubt formula: “When one cannot make up one’s mind as to an individual, a group, organization or Project, a Condition of Doubt exists.”
As you can see, it isn’t intended for any and every type of decision.
For decisions in general, the tool to use would be the Admin Scale. Virtually any decision can be made by basing it on that scale.
And you’re welcome. 😀
Not quite so. The Admin Scale is really not a good general tool for decisions. The doubt formula is in fact a better starting point, albeit broken by design, as it resembles more generally tested and accepted decision-making tools such as Kepner Tregoe. Read up on that if you may. And I think what we are seeing is you wanting so much LRH and Scientology to be right that it hinders you from looking at this and other subjects from fresh angles. What we see is confirmation bias.
” . . . it gets me to take a look at what they are saying, and maybe even review the relevant materials – and most of the time I find that they have misinterpreted them.”
See KG’s algorithm. (my best impression of Vinaire.)
LOL
“LOL”
Thank you. I knew you’d laugh at that one. 🙂
I meant the LOL on this part: “(my best impression of Vinaire.)”
Btw, I’ll get to your other replies to me later on.
“Seeing this has been – as you put it – “incredibly valuable” in confirming the actual value that exists.”
Unlike others here, I understand what you are saying. The thing is, I understand it contextually. Inside the reference of an ideology like Scientology, a person’s thinking is already consistent to the belief system in which they reside. When someone says a disagreeable thing about that ideology which isn’t precisely what the believer thinks, believes, or can quote, that disagreeable statement isn’t processed as a possible truth but rather as a confirmation of the believer’s bias. Disagreeable statements are simply processed as something bad born out of a bad person’s bad mind. If a disagreeable opinion erupts having to do with outrageous claims for the states of Clear or of OT, and the believer’s illusion of control becomes dissonant, the believer just shrugs, or has an irritable thought toward the source of the cognitive dissonance and clears up the whole thing by understanding that the perpetrator of that cognitive dissonance has crimes and is a criminal.
The degree of this seems to depend on the scale at which the believer is looking from. I have some very smart friends who are quite able in many ways and yet go to church every Sunday and believe outrageous things and laugh at science which disagrees with them. The viewpoint of science is the entire universe but the theist pretends their viewpoint is much larger and outside the universe when in fact their viewpoint is simply born of ego and is a very personally programmed invention indeed. As freebeing said, “. . . implanting.”
Chris: “Inside the reference of an ideology like Scientology, a person’s thinking is already consistent to the belief system in which they reside. When someone says a disagreeable thing about that ideology which isn’t precisely what the believer thinks, believes, or can quote, that disagreeable statement isn’t processed as a possible truth but rather as a confirmation of the believer’s bias.”
Ideology is defined as: “a system of ideas and ideals.” Everyone has an ideology, whether they are aware of it or not.
So I ask, when was the last time you processed a statement about Scientology as “a possible truth”? And was it in a new unit of time and not processed on the basis of your ideology (which would make it a confirmation of your bias)?
Chris: “The viewpoint of science is the entire universe but the theist pretends their viewpoint is much larger and outside the universe when in fact their viewpoint is simply born of ego and is a very personally programmed invention indeed.”
Everyone has an ego as well – and egos are indeed personally programmed. Have you also looked at this as just as much truth for yourself as the theist?
“So I ask, when was the last time you processed a statement about Scientology as “a possible truth”?”
I can honestly say that I’ve processed every statement about Scientology as a possible truth. This took years and I was successful at it. Peaking at “every statement within and about Scientoloty was a plausible and practical truth.” When I began unraveling from the truth of Scientology was approximately 10 years after leaving the SO and also after remaining both silent and true to its ethics rules. I was consciously careful to leave the justice door open a crack so that one day I would walk back in and take ownership of the upper level Bridge. During all those years I remained faithful to the Tech, neither squirreling nor practicing it outside the auspices of COS. Back then I would have described to you my inability to live within the confines of the SO while I yet had an adolescent daughter to raise and who had been abused and neglected during her years in the SO.
I never had an important ARCx with even the SO in terms of blaming the SO for their draconian rules and Spartan lifestyle. This was because within the context of the importance of the role of Scientology for the future of mankind, I understood and considered my personal troubles my own and not those of the higher mission of the Sea Organization. The unraveling began when I tried 3 times to do the ethics Steps A-E. The utter lack of empathy and un-listening ear that I received from the IJC’s office and the way in which it was demanded that I prostrate myself before the almighty rightness of the Church of Scientology was off-putting, gradually at first, and ending with my refusal to purchase $25,000 burnt offering of books. It was at this point that I began to read the internet about Scientology. Even then, a true believer in the Tech, I sought out and paid for auditing in the field to clean up and correct my case and to begin my life as an Independent Scientologist, since I knew that after squirreling in the field that the door to the OT levels would be slammed shut on me forever.
It was around that point when you and I met on this blog. You described me as fearless in defending Scientology and praised my eloquence in doing so, admonishing me to continue writing. Some here may remember this incarnation of myself. Back then I collected and re read and re listened to every tape in the LRH library, collected not from the Church but added to from purchases on the internet including the latest emeter. Still curious and panting to have a go at solo auditing, It was Elizabeth Hamre who encouraged me to take the matter into my own hands and proceed. That was all I needed and I did so teaching myself to run any process, any question on myself at all. This was a wonderful time for me in my history as a true believer. It was during this time when I achieved every goal of understanding about my mind that I had hoped for. It was also during this time when I began to become cognizant that the promises of Scientology were fabrications cut from whole cloth. It was a wonderful and empowering time for me for it brought me out from under the unworthy thumb of L Ron Hubbard. I began to understand my beliefs and why I chose them. It was during this time when I began to become cognizant and react faster than the emeter at reading my own thoughts. It was during this time when the emeter became a simple mirror of the creations as I created within my own mind.
Sorry that’s so long. I don’t like writing long posts as I don’t think others appreciate wading through them.
Chris: “Sorry that’s so long. I don’t like writing long posts as I don’t think others appreciate wading through them.”
It didn’t seem too long, and I got the sincerity in all you wrote.
You know, I never liked the approach of “Let’s agree to disagree,” but it’s looking a little better to me these days. 😉
“Have you also looked at this as just as much truth for yourself as the theist?”
Of course, but your example is “A=B.” Theism is the belief in gods. I no longer have that. I also no longer “believe” in free will, though I live as I do believe in free will. Looking at me and the way that I live, you cannot see a difference between a true believing free will-ist, and a true believing determinist. Like looking at the surface of the ocean. You cannot tell by looking whether there is life below its surface or not. The water continues to look the same. So yes I have an ego, or possibly I simply am one. You might be a thetan, but we can still be friends. When you look at us standing side by side, there’s no real difference between us.
Chris: “When you look at us standing side by side, there’s no real difference between us.”
I would agree with that, including how we both – equally – feel the urge to bat back the other’s expression of the ideology of their choice. 🙂
“I would agree with that, including how we both – equally – feel the urge to bat back the other’s expression of the ideology of their choice. :)”
I wasn’t aware that you disagreed with my ideology. Which points don’t you care for?
It’s mostly your idea that everything is “relative, conditioned and impermanent.” I believe the Buddha is the source of that phrase, but per my understanding he was only referring to “this world” and the soul – not everything. There may not be a permanent soul, but per my ideology and intuition, there does exist a permanence, an absolute, whether that is “spirit” or “universe/existence” (i.e. not the physical universe but all of existence).
There’s also your belief in no free will, which it seems to me stems from the more fundamental belief above (but I could be wrong on that). And, if I understand it right, the above belief is also why you claim that everything in Scientology is only true in its own frame of reference. All these things I think of as cynical and that goes against the grain for me.
However, as I said in an earlier post, I am now willing to “agree to disagree.” You were the ultimate test of it – kidding! 😀
Thank you Marildi. I did not know that about you. It’s enlightening for me and genuine of you to share with me. I appreciate it.
Alanzo: ”Seeing L Ron Hubbard’s ideas get questioned up on the computer screen, rather than inside your own head, is almost always a crucifixion for L Ron Hubbard’s ideas.”
Yes. It’s dissecting Hubbard’s claims and ‘truths’ and rolling back the indoctrination. I went through this process (mainly) on this blog because of it.
I came also to the conclusion that what is good in Scientology, is what goodness and goodwill people brought into Scientology (that’s also why the Missions were running so much better – and then got squashed) and mistakenly attribute that to Hubbard. To question Hubbard and ‘his tech’ can act like an attack on the goodwill of the person who has invested so much.
Also, Hubbard took ‘tech’ from others and claimed that he developed it himself (e.g. some of it – see link below).
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?40698-Probably-Cannot-Be-Emphasized-Enough
Now a question for you, ka: What contributed to you getting unindoctrinated. Could you name the top 5 contributing factors?
One of the major factors was Bruce Hines’ video about the Scn Truth Rundown. I think it is such evil stuff to break somebody and mess with their mind. It snapped me out of the “You can’t think bad about Hubbard” implant (I was 13 years in the Sea Org).
Alanzo’s questioning WITH Hubbard’s references again and again (fighting fire with fire). That helped enormously. I was disagreeing with many of Hubbard’s references/claims before but brushing it aside when being in (cognitive dissonance). Though always found the admin tech obnoxious.
Your (single) questions, the way you asked and your nonchalant way. Never too much at once.
The concise style of your writing helped me at the time, as it was contrary to the complexity and intricacies. Also it was cutting through the Scio contradictions which had me in a kind of spin which made it hard for me to think clearly and to sort out the subject (the contradictions are acting like a thought-stopper, IMO).
When I was at a point where I didn’t feel the need to defend “my wins” anymore, I could unravel it quiet easily. Then I could also look at the wins in relation to “Highs” and actual improvements.
Some of the rational dialogs with the people who commented here at the time.
Thanks, ka
“When I was at a point where I didn’t feel the need to defend “my wins” anymore, I could unravel it quiet easily. Then I could also look at the wins in relation to “Highs” and actual improvements.”
People definitely get stuck in “wins”. I am remembering a time in a psychology class in college – a few years before Scientology – when I had just returned from a year long trip to the middle east. I had seen so many things and my world was so much imprioved by this word travel, that I was talking about it all the time.
The instructor then took this as an opportunity to talk about “wins”, and how people get stuck in them. The context here had nothing to do with Scientology. It was a psychological principle that had been identified about human behavior.
Your statement above is useful, I think, in understanding the blocks to transitioning out of the ideological trap of Scientology mechanical thinking.
Alanzo
“Now a question for you, ka: What contributed to you getting unindoctrinated. Could you name the top 5 contributing factors?”
Can I weigh in on this question, Geir? I remember precisely the first crack in my true belief. It was the discovery of a “governing value” greater than my indoctrination into Scientology and that governing value was being challenged by my loyalty to Scientology. It was in fact seeing the deterioration of my eldest daughter who was in the Sea Org with her mother and I and we were split up and she was 8 years old at the time. She was unkempt, dirty, and wild. She could neither read nor write and hadn’t learned any Scientology either in the four years she had spent in the Sea Org. That was the first crack and the first moment that I had to defy in some way the Sea Org at least to the result of improving my daughter’s lot. I had already transferred from CST at Twin Peaks, CA to Pac Base in Los Angeles. I had not yet decided to divorce her mother but it did sway me to challenge her mother to transfer her job from Int Base to Pac Base so that we could continue on as a family. I remember her mother’s words on the telephone when she told me she, “. . . I can not decide that right now.”
Sorry to bust in, just wanted to remember that fact. The one where the Sea Org malarkey was a greater governing value to her mom than her motherhood and to our family. Reading that one could get the idea that I am bitter toward my daughter’s mother, but I am not and never was. I always understood the loyalties and strengths of the pull of the Sea Org. But my intention is to communicate the cracking point of my governing values to Scientology. I really wonder at that kernel of self determinism. I wonder whether it means that my ego was greater than my wife’s or whether her ego was greater than my own? Also wonder whether the question is applicable to the story.
Marildi is the perfect Scientologist:
All her reasoning comes from an absolute certainty that Scientology is always right
NOTHING can beat that.
I imagine her life is just gorgeous.
I do believe there is true bliss attainable through certainty – regardless of whether the certainty is based on reality or not.
Scientology: The science of certainty. What an amazing Job did Hubbard inducing certainty in his followers.
“Scientology: The science of certainty. What an amazing Job did Hubbard inducing certainty in his followers.”
Mostly we came on board already thinking that certainty was an all important thing. Hubbard offered us a diploma.
“I do believe there is true bliss attainable through certainty – regardless of whether the certainty is based on reality or not.”
Yes, I have been thinking that bliss; aka inner peace; aka harmony; opposite of cognitive dissonance — though a calm and pleasant state would not be a realistic or even valid life-goal. Cognitive dissonance is a valuable tool for analysis. The smoothing of which should be done through bringing facts into consistency, not beliefs. In other words, we should be careful not to yearn for bliss when searching for truths. Bliss can also be brought about by drugs, sometimes necessary for a needed rest, but not as an ultimate goal when correct knowledge is also the goal.
I’ve experienced the bliss of certainty but I feel that the bliss of uncertainty, of nothingness is much much deeper, if one can have it.
That is deep. And interesting.
“I’ve experienced the bliss of certainty but I feel that the bliss of uncertainty, of nothingness is much much deeper, if one can have it.”
There is a profound sense of wonder in uncertainty and maybe that’s the beginning and enduring attitude of a scientist, if as you write “one can have it.” Beautiful.
Nothing to be certain of, no stable data to hold on to wether real or imaginary, just awareness of awareness.
Now that I don’t Need no stable data to hold on to I feel much more stable
“Now that I don’t Need no stable data to hold on to I feel much more stable.”
Awesome.
We don’t need no stinking “badges”! 🙂
There is this one for you:
Hey Geir , where can I buy one of those ? I need like about 25,000 of them !!! :-)))
“Hey Geir , where can I buy one of those ? I need like about 25,000 of them !!! :-)))”
I would take a zero off the back end of that…then distribute!
And since I am on a roll, and since Marildi has turned some 5000 comments on my blog and she cannot see anything wrong in any of them, I’d say that qualifies for this as well:
I love it! Thank you, Geir!
I wasn’t going to start blogging until later today, but this and the other badge broke me down!
Busy with some other things first, but I’ll get back to all you guys….just you wait! 😀
There are in fact only two people I’ve met that has not been able to admit to being wrong during thousands of exchanges; Marildi and Vinaire.
Geir : “There are in fact only two people I’ve met that has not been able to admit to being wrong during thousands of exchanges; Marildi and Vinaire.”
You know , regarding that , I had been analyzing for the last months that “disease” of not being able to admit to being wrong ; and it seems to me that the people suffering from that “illness” just CAN’T be a receiving point at the end of a communication line. They CAN’T duplicate as they are totally UNWILLING to do so, regardless of how “clever” they might look. In order to duplicate one must first be willing to become an effect. But if one isn’t willing to become a willing effect , then there is no “Cause – Distance – Effect – Duplication” , and the cycle breaks down and bogs utterly. “Fear of duplication” is how I describe that manifestation. That fear translate into many things like “questioning motives” , “misreading intentions” , “Q&A” , “non sequitur answers” , “fixed ideas” , “make wrong” , “unexpressed hostility” , “out-pointy thinking” , “unusual solutions to problems” , “lack of empathy” , “being a victim” , “introduction of arbitraries” , “irreality” , “the use of ‘safe’ solutions” , “prevented confront” , “dub-in” , etc, etc.
The route out of that state of being can become very gruelsome from the ones being in it. They have many PTPs in their life , and frequently worry too much. They have many comm blocks even when it appears they don’t. They are seldom honest with how they feel. They alter-is facts to suit their needs ; to match their reality. They live inside their own bubble ; a force field they have erected to “protect” themselves from others. And it all come down to un UNWILLINGNESS to duplicate. Poor souls ; they can’t never see the light.
Translation: “Admit your wrong!”
Well if you can’t, you can’t.
My comment above was in reply to Geir’s comment:
“There are in fact only two people I’ve met that has not been able to admit to being wrong during thousands of exchanges; Marildi and Vinaire.”
Given that you, Marildi, and Vinaire are the only two people who haven’t admitted to being wrong on anything through thousands of comments on my blog, we have the following conclusions: Either you are incapable of admitting any wrongness, or you are in fact the only two people who have a perfect track record of only submitting right comments. But, since you do often disagree, we can conclude that at least one of you must in fact be wrong – but incapable of admitting so. Which leads to: You may still be that perfect poster who has in fact never been wrong, but in saying so, we must conclude that Vinaire is incapable of admitting any wrongness.
Conventional wisdom would perhaps indicate that you are both incapable of admitting any wrongness. And that thetaclear’s analysis is correct in that it indicates an inability of being an effect of another’s communication, which indicates a deeper inability or unwillingness to understnd another’s viewpoint. And that in turn would lead to questions about the value of your comments.
Perhaps it is time to reconsider strategies?
“Now that I don’t Need no stable data to hold on to I feel much more stable. . . ”
Brother, For me this was represented graphically in the movie “Contact.” (click link and watch from about 1:10)Jodie Foster is strapped into a chair that was never intended to be a part of the “Machine” whose plans were transmitted to Earth in order to build a mystical transporter machine. Jodie Foster has her teeth fairly shaken out of her head through the vibration of this “foreign” chair which is bolted into the spacetime craft. When she unbolts herself from the chair the vibration and disharmony stops as she floats free. When the anchor bolts finally come loose and the chair falls free, the disharmony ceases altogether. For me, this is metaphor of how forced it is for us to attempt to rigidly hang onto a “rigid” frame of reference. Better as Rafael says to stop worrying about holding onto stable data and float free. Just say, “I’m okay to go!” – Enjoy the flight.
I remember that scene from Contact brother one of my favorites just to the point
🙂
Quite a tail chasing exercise, wouldn’t you agree, Rafael?
Personally, long ago, I looked at this whole subjective aspect of being wrong.
i further discovered that the ol’ man had written extensively about it (being wrong)
Having ‘bashed into’ numerous people in my dealings (including me ❤ Marildi), I wondered what the hell all the fuss was about?
SO WHAT if you're WRONG? who actually NEEDS to give a fuck? Anyway?
I personally dispensed with that inability years ago. viz. a viz. IF you can admit to being wrong (effect) that immediately puts you back at CAUSE, since it was YOUR decision to admit being so! This is just toooooooooooooooooooooo steep a gradient though, for some.
……. Hence the avoidance (of being wrong / can't have it so) persists.
— nothing some p-a-t-i-e-n-t auditing can't handle, hey?? Or diving in the deep end, with ……. "Hey, everybody here, guess what? I've decided that IT'S OKAY TO BE WRONG." (as a gained ABILITY, even if I'm actually NOT!! LOL!! )
Only clue required — Get over it, for Gawd's sakes!!
Luv,
racing. 😀
You are right, Calvin. I guess I just don’t know my place when someone talks down to me or blatantly insults me and I dare to reject it. And if I have the audacity to disagree with their views, that is also disrespectful of me and it’s high time I realized it. Especially if continuous effort has been made to corner me into bending to their will – and others have joined in who are also resentful because I didn’t know my place with them either.
Yes, anyone with any self-respect would certainly have knuckled under by now and admitted to being wrong. I AM WRONG. Is that politically correct enough for the group think here? Or should I say cult think?
Marildi : “You are right, Calvin. I guess I just dont know my place when someone talks down to me or blatantly insults me and I dare to reject it. And if I have the audacity to disagree with their views, that is also disrespectful of me and its high time I realized it.”
Peter : You know , part of the unwillingness to duplicate that I was discussing in my reply to Geir – that comes from the unwillingness to become an effect point – also manifest itself as “dramatizing being a victim” most of the time. Of course , if one can’t ever be wrong about anything , if one refuses to duplicate others , then one must become a victim , as the ONLY way to become the Cause Point in life is by accepting past authorship and participation in things = “Admitting to being wrong”.
Marildi : “Especially if continuous effort has been made to corner me into bending to their will and others have joined in who are also resentful because I didnt know my place with them either.”
Peter : More ”Being a Victim” dramatization , I am afraid. I don’t see anybody here trying to get you to “bend to their will”. What I see is individuals who are in SHOCK at a the weird an incredible odd manifestation of never having admitted to being wrong in 5,000 posts !!! If someone were to tell me that , the LEAST I would do , is to go and take a REAL good look at my posts , and determine if that statement has validity or not , from an objective viewpoint. And my OWN personal experience with you and dozens of comm exchanges , points to that direction that Geir pointed out.
Marildi : “Yes, anyone with any self-respect would certainly have knuckled under by now and admitted to being wrong. I AM WRONG. Is that politically correct enough for the group think here? Or should I say cult think?”
Peter : Always the spoiled child , ah Marildi ? You almost made me cry.
I’ll tell you and others here a personal story , and maybe , just maybe , that will teach you some humility ; and you will finally understand that “Admitting to being wrong” is actually a VERY HIGH ability. It is THE best ability that anyone can ever develop. One that w/out it , there is only sorrow and despair , even if hidden from view and Not-ised. You see , this isn’t about you ; this is about others whose connection with you (or individuals who exhibit this malady) might affect their lives in ways that you don’t even suspect. Probably you won’t read my story , and will find it boring and TL;DR , but perhaps you’ll read enough of it to possibly get something good out of it. I hope that the readers doesn’t get bored with it , but just ignore it if you do so. I am mostly doing ITSA with myself.
I have a daughter who is the most important thing in my life. She became everything in my life. She is my only kid , and is 12 years old. I had her when I was already 35 years old. I am 47. I never wanted to have kids as I always wanted to avoid the loss inherent in loving others so much , as divorces happen , disagreements happen between the parents , and undue influences that might drive your kid away from you due to 3P activities , even if not intentional , but just out of being plain stupid. I doesn’t know how to “un-love” others that I already love , I honestly don’t know how others can do it so easily. But my daughter arrived unplanned , and so what was done was done. Now, I just hoped for the best.
I had been the school tutor/supervisor of my daughter since pre-pre-Kinder when she was only 3 years old. I took on that hat as part of my father’s hat , and mom fully agreed to it. We implicitly agreed on our corresponding hats , and I carried mine w/out much interference or bypass from mom with the exception of a few minor incidents here and there. With my help as a tutor/supervisor , I managed to keep her all these past 9 years with grades called here , “Academic Excellent” , which means 4.0 average in all those years. With hard work , I managed to get her to win several Spelling Bee contests in English , not her native tongue , while competing with students of much higher grades than her at the whole school level. The major of the municipality where she studied her 6th grade at , personally gave her a special medal for Excellent through all her school years , when she graduated from 6th grade. She had more medals than her neck could possibly hold.
That took a LOT of work , persistence and long hours from me , on a daily basis. My daughter is not that disciplined when left on her own. She has always had the intelligence , but not the Tone-40 intention. I assume that many kids are like that , though I was never like that myself. I was always the control factor in the equation ; a GOOD control , where I always kept a good balance between play/extroversion and study. I knew that it was a matter of time for her to gradually acquire her OWN discipline and interest , and worked towards getting her to increase her general KRC , which she has already to a reasonable degree , if we take into account her age.
But with the arrival of her preteen years , the interest for other things besides play , arrived as well. Beautiful boys , you know , looking beautiful (which she has always been , but don’t believe me) , wanting to hang out , that sort of thing. With the arrival of that normal life period , arrived as well a decrease in interest and/or attention in her school stuff. She disperse too easily , and many times forgets to write everything down , which makes it difficult then , to have all the needed materials to study for a given test. So basically my method was to let her examine her own notebooks , do whatever work she has assigned to do , then review as a supervisor the work done by her , and make sure that she had no M/Us on the materials , any lack of mass , and that she wasn’t being glib about it all. If I found her lacking at anything, I basically send her to re-study her materials and then would check her out again.
She knows about the barriers to study , but is a little lazy applying them sometimes. So I was always this “control factor” in her life , to make sure she stayed on the right track , patiently waiting for the day where she would not need me anymore , after she had matured enough. I am a VERY demanding Sup , but she never really had any problem with that as long as I kept that balance between play and school work , which I always made sure I did. Mom always trusted me , and gave me my space w/out interfering in my Tutor/Sup hat in any way. Why would she , if my excellent products where there to be seen , you know ?
When we were a couple , we always had disagreements about almost EVERYTHING , excepting normal stuff like what movie to see , what to eat , who would take the kids to school , etc. But specifically on my School hat , we never had any disagreements to amount to anything. That was the ONE area where we agreed as she knows that I am an excellent teacher and the Nerd type. She isn’t the Nerd type at all , and doesn’t have my Sup training , neither my accumulated knowledge in almost every field of knowledge way, way beyond than any school teacher has. She just hated having to sit with my daughter to study anything , and would always tell me , “You deal with that with her , I am too busy ,and this enturbulates me”.
Recently , mom decided to relocate to the USA ( I live in Puerto Rico) with my daughter. We agreed outside of court , as we always kept a good friendship for the sake of our daughter , to share both custody and Parental Guardianship when we broke our 2D. My daughter could freely choose who to stay with any one of us any given day. Because of school , she usually spent more time with me than with mom. Perhaps 3-4 days of the week with me , and the rest with mom. And that for the last 5-6 days that we have been divorced.
I never tried to stop her from taking my daughter with her , even though I could have done so if I would have wanted it as my daughter doesn’t command English well yet , and I was concern that her grades would drop because of it. So I wanted to stay with her here at PR , teach her enough English so that she could cope well enough , and then send her to mom. She wanted to be with mom there , and I have the opinion that kids do better with their moms , specially girls , for obvious reasons ; men doesn’t know much about girl stuff (although , I have always been both a father and a 2nd mother to her). Because mom didn’t agree (as is the normal state of affairs with her) with my strategy , and because my daughter wanted to go with her even if she risked lowering her grades (she was going to a new place , a new adventure , you know) , I said “Ok , whatever you two decide”.
But there was a condition to this ; an AGREED upon condition , that BOTH agreed to. My hat as her tutor/Sup would not be messed with by neither of them. I would keep carrying on my hat through Skype , cell phone , e-mails , photos , etc ; just as I HAD DONE before when I wasn’t staying with my daughter as she was at mom’s home because I had work to do , etc. I got her agreement , and prepared a document for mom authorizing her to take my daughter with her , and not needing my signature for school , and medical stuff , as my financial situation would not allow me to relocate near my daughter for at least 6-12 months. As I had had so many disagreements with mom before about SO MANY things that she was NEVER able to admit to being wrong about , I had this feeling , this intuition , that our agreement regarding school would either not be kept , or would be alter-ised in some way.
I knew that my daughter , all on her own , would not keep it w/out mom’s correct 8-C and discipline on her. I knew that , as she still lack enough KRC in the area . WE had discussed in LOTS of occasions that the reason why I wanted her to strive to be the best she could , was not in any way shape or form , so that I could be “proud of her” , as just her own existence and being there was enough pride for me. I told her that her birth was the most extraordinary gift that life had given me , and that I needed no grades to feel proud of my daughter , as just her existing was enough for me. That my love for her was unconditional. I explained to her that unfortunately , we live in a world that having diplomas , and where one graduates from , DOES matter in finding the best financial opportunities in her future , and the best career opportunities.
I gave her my own example of how I dropped out of engineering school to join Scientology , and lost MANY opportunities , because I never earned a degree as such , even though that I have the knowledge equivalent to any PhD. But unfortunately , just having a knowledge with no diplomas doesn’t count in most societies. I just didn’t want her to become a loser like his father became. I wanted her to succeed BIG TIME ; to have very interesting friends , to meet very interesting people , to study with the best , to be among the best. Is that so much to ask mom to help me with ? That our daughter were able to take advantage of the opportunities that her father let go by ?
And just as exactly as I had predicted it , once they were already there at the USA , the school comm line got broken or severely modified and alter-ised , by both mom and my daughter, but mainly by mom. My exact methods that I had been using for 9 years with 100% success , were no longer the one that applied according to mom , as she now “knew Best”. Instead of handling our daughter to keep that school comm line open and working – something VERY easy to do , and something that we HAD ALREADY DONE before – she got lazy as she had “so many things to do now” , and besides , “she needs to learn to work by herself now , and not ‘depend’ on you so much , blah , blah , blah” , according to her.
In the first place , I never ever did things for her , ever. In the 2nd place I had always been working in the direction of less dependence , and more self-determinism , but she is very far from being ready yet , and besides , it is MY DECISION to make whether she is ready or not , and not mom’s , as that has always been my hat. Mom NEVER , EVER studied with my daughter not even ONE single day of her life. And now is pretending to tell me how to carry out my hat ? Now is trying to impose her rules , when one thing that I have always been VERY careful of is that my daughter ALWAYS follow mom’s rules , even when I do not necessarily agree with many of them ?
My advice to my daughter every time that she wants to do anything that I know that mom wouldn’t approve (even when she is staying with me) is “No honey , I am sorry but I can’t let you do that as mom disagree with it”. And my daughter then says to me , “But Daddy , I am with you now , your rules are the ones that matters now”. And I go , “No , princess ; mom and me both have different hats and different set of rules regarding your care. I can’t just go against hers as I expect her to not go against mine. I don’t like to do to others what I don’t like others do to me”. Not ONE single time I have EVER allowed my daughter to violate any of mom’s rules. Not one single day. Over my dead body she will. But what is that I got in return ? Distrust , bypass , inciting insubordination in my daughter , no-help , ignoring my texts and calls until she has “time available” to answer them.
Now , my daughter is having problems at school. Problems with discipline that she didn’t have when she was under my care. At least nothing to amount to anything , not a situation enough to tell mom , “Next time she is out of here” as the school told her recently. Now her mom – a untrained Scientologists (Indie) with lots of study problems on her own , and lacking the academic knowledge that I have- is attempting to tell me – the one who studied with our daughter for the past 9 years SUCCESSFULLY – how to do my father’s hat. And in spite of all comm cycles that I have had with her about this , to fix this – all with VERY HIGH ARC – she just keeps holding on to her fixed ideas about it , and just CAN’T ADMIT TO BEING WRONG AT ANYTHING. I tried 3 letters (very long ones) of “God Roads , Good Weather” approach , patiently explaining everything to her, and making her realize how much this situation is affecting not only my emotional state , but my health as I am having now all kinds of maladies I never had as I seldom get ever sick in life. I always had this self-healing ability since I was 9-10 years old. I oddly enough developed it in some mysterious way.
My heart is broken now in a thousand pieces , and it bleeds every day, and all I feel is this immense sensation of loss and failure, and just because someone can’t ever admit about being wrong about anything. My daughter is ALL I have , all that really matters to me in life. W/out her , I have no life, I have no joy.
I could easily take mom to court , and force her to respect my rights as a father. Any judge , upon finding out what I have done for that kid academically speaking , wouldn’t think twice about ordering mom to STAY AWAY from my hat as her tutor/sup. But you know what , Marildi ? My ex-wife went through VERY shitty stuff in court with her former husband (the father of her 2 sons , my VERY dear step-sons) , who have no less than 8 SP traits. I mean, the guy is a lunatic. I had to raise her sons myself. They are now all grown up adults having a good life. I did a good job with them.
But I do not have the heart to make her go through all that again. I just love her too much to do that to her. A love that has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the 2D , but it is more like a brother-sister thing , or a father-daughter thing. To mock up her face all overwhelmed by the court system just breaks my heart. I know that she honestly doesn’t realize the wrongness of her actions. She is NOT evil, and she is DEFINITIVELY not a bad mom. She is not. She just acts stupidly, that’s all. She just CAN’T admit to being wrong at almost ANYTHING. But I still love her VERY much , and would gladly give my life for hers w/out thinking it about it twice. I just doesn’t know how to stop loving the ones I love. When I love, I do it forever , and unconditionally so.
My only choice in the matter is to address this situation within myself. To run out ALL ARCXs , W/Hs, PTPs that I have ever caused BOTH of them , and to just to hope for the best. You know , sort of the “Suppressed Person RD” application of the tech based on this principle which is one of my PRINCIPAL stable data on life :
“A person carries within himself the enturbulative factors that make others to react towards him”.
So I am going to “Be Wrong” , and assume that I must have done something that I am not fully aware of right now , that PRECIPITATED the scene I found myself in in PT. And I will spent 50-100 hours of Solo-auditing handling my OWN case in relation to them, and will pray that this technical action will solve this situation for the sake and well being of ALL parties involved.
Now Marildi, THAT is to have the ability of being wrong. To love your fellow being enough that you rather be wrong than doing them in. So do the proper thing , and DO examine those posts of yours OBJECTIVELY, and see if there is something about yourself that you can learn and change. So many people CAN’T just be wrong about you. This has also happened to you at Rinder’s WITH Rinder himself. And Rinder (the individual) is the individual with more manners and protection for Human Rights (specially “Freedom of Speech) that I have ever known.
When one can’t admit to being wrong , your associates, your friends, your love ones , are the ones that frequently suffer the consequences w/out you even realizing about it. So do them a favor and just LOOK DON’T LISTEN.
That’s a poignant story Peter. I really understand and appreciate your determination to not sabotage your ex wife. That is a good hearted attitude. I trust that your daughter will appreciate you all the more as years roll by.
Chris : “That’s a poignant story Peter. I really understand and appreciate your determination to not sabotage your ex wife. That is a good hearted attitude. I trust that your daughter will appreciate you all the more as years roll by.”
Peter : Thanks Chris ; most kind. And yes , I hope that my daughter will realize about it soon enough so as to not waste all these past 9 years of hard work , and re-take where we left off w/out any interference this time. I am a natural fighter who never ever give up. Each time I fall , I get up stronger ; is in my nature. I see this as a test that I just need to pass as so many others that I have already passed in my life. Thanks for you warm words!
“Thanks for you warm words!”
You are welcome. Try to not think of it as a contest with something to win and something to lose. Just build good with good and love your daughter. Remember that no amount of explaining later will change what goes on in the past and no amount of maneuvering will change the genuineness of how your daughter remembers her rearing. Just help her and wait for her questions. Answer her with love and honesty and though there may be bumps, it will all turn out alright. Or not. You can only do what you can do, so do it with love. She will know and she will remember how it all went down. With your energy that you show in writing on this blog I get the sense that you can come on a little bit strong sometimes, me too. Don’t let your worries and anxieties about what may be happening while she is out of sight pollute your relationship with her. Be consistent (as you described yourself) and love. Again, she will always remember who tries to poison her mind against whom. You are spot on regarding not running down her mother. Keep going! I feel you. I went through a helluv an anxious time when divorcing my eldest daughter’s mother who was in the SO and dodging legal service. Like you, I stayed honest and worked my way through the ordeal and though we had a bumpy ride, we are closer than ever and she is going to be 35 this Spring. There is still whole lifetimes to be lived this life. Keep going!
Chris : “You are welcome. Try to not think of it as a contest with something to win and something to lose. Just build good with good and love your daughter.”
Peter : Yes, I fully agree on that ; thanks! , that’s great advice.
Chris : “Remember that no amount of explaining later will change what goes on in the past and no amount of maneuvering will change the genuineness of how your daughter remembers her rearing. Just help her and wait for her questions. ”
Peter : Yes, I understand what you mean ; thanks.
Chris : “Answer her with love and honesty and though there may be bumps, it will all turn out alright. Or not. You can only do what you can do, so do it with love.”
Peter : Yes, you are right about that. One can only do what is best for our kids , and do it with love, and just hope for the best.
Chris : “She will know and she will remember how it all went down. With your energy that you show in writing on this blog I get the sense that you can come on a little bit strong sometimes, me too. ”
Peter : Yeah, I tend to become a little controlling with some frequency. I’ve been (and am right now) working on that trait , and it is getting to be less.
Chris : “Don’t let your worries and anxieties about what may be happening while she is out of sight pollute your relationship with her. Be consistent (as you described yourself) and love”.
Peter : Yes, that’s good advice. I just feel sometimes that due to this situation with mom , that I might lose the best years of her life ; these years of so much change that I didn’t want to lose (pre-adolescence and adolescence) , where a kid need BOTH parents the most. Those periods where so many changes occurs that no parent want to miss , you know.
In the family I’ve always been the adviser , you know , the one that teach about forgiveness , compassion, honesty, integrity, love for your “enemies” , “mercifulness” . Mom is a good mom and a good women, but doesn’t possesses my KRC level and my spiritual awareness. At least not to the high degree that I possess it. So the tendency of my daughter towards dichotomies and towards the lower end of the “Scale of attitudes” , was frequently counter-acted by my constant presence in her life , 3-4 days a week, every week for the past 4-5 years. By the way , I am mostly doing some ITSA with myself here, you know, and that’s why the reply is long. But it is not necessarily intended for you to read and bored you to death with it. :-))) I just took advantage of your reply to do some ITSA , that’s all. It helps me release charge, and organize my thoughts. I hope Geir don’t mind.
Mom was a Scientologist (still is, sort of ; a liberal Indie , you know, and ALL BECAUSE OF ME as well, as I SAVED her from a SEVERELY overrun at the Executive C/Sed bullshit “Survival Rundown” ) , but she never trained beyond the SH and some basic metering at the unfinished M-1 co-audited course. I , in the other hand, have a very intensive and through training even if most of it have been self-taught , as who the fuck can be under the incompetent supervision of a Scientology Sup ? Most of them can’t differentiate A from B.
Even though that mom is an incredible smart individual , she was never was that much interested in learning anything beyond how to make more money ; she is a business woman per excellence , and a damn good one.
So the auditor-like and priest-like individual in the family had always been me , which was the perfect balance for my daughter. She always felt comfortable enough with confessing her W/Hs to me and not to mom , as she never had any consequences from doing so with me beyond a “Thank you , my princess , for being honest with Daddy” , and a big hug. And she always KNEW that I could always “read” her W/Hs as if I was reading her mind (which for all practical purposes, I always did). Mom doesn’t have my experience at recognizing symptoms of Missed W/Hs , and my daughter knows this, and cleverly use it to her advantage , by “blowing” herself from Daddy from time to time.
The above sometimes caused her to “blow” from her relationship with me as she knows that Daddy never miss one. It is not that I push her to tell me any W/H nor anything like that , as I am usually (though not always perfect) very careful with not restimulating her W/Hs (school stuff, boy stuff ; mostly silly and unimportant stuff). But she just REACT more in my presence than with mom , as she intuitively feel my ability to read people. But if she doesn’t react with all kind of symptoms, hostilities, etc, I never “push” her as such, but just let her be. And when I do “push” her , is mostly with VERY high ARC and making sure she understand that I am not going to either blame her, not punish her for anything she might say to me , nor even “lecture” her about it. Not even that. What she always get is a big smile , an ack , and a big hug.
Now, she is over there at the USA w/out having to have Dad all around to miss her W/Hs, because she has this tendency to W/H , you know , specially in relation to school stuff and beautiful boys. 🙂 This is silly of her as she knows that I am a VERY liberal father. She even has enough confidence and trust in me to tell me about all the boys she likes , and to even say in front of me things like, “Oh my God Daddy, did you see that boy ? , he is so hot”. And I go like, “Oh yes, honey he sure is handsome, look at those abdominals” , you know, something like that, and then we both laugh about it. I am a very liberal and modern father.
But she also knows that I have very specific rules (as EVERY responsible father does) that are not subject of being violated or changed neither by her nor by mom. But with mom , she can work less on her school stuff (mom is more “relaxed” on that, but misguidedly so ) , and her W/Hs s are not missed that much unless she is being abnormally hostile towards mom , when mom THEN ask the question. But she sometimes pretend an affinity she doesn’t feel at the moment , to avoid being found out by mom. With me, she was never able to pretend because 1) I always noticed it every time within 1-2 seconds, and 2) For some reason that I don’t yet understand, she could never pretend an ARC for me she didn’ feel. She either was in ARC or not , no pretending to amount to anything.
So my daughter found herself in this unique situation of being away from Dad, and into circumstances (due to mom’s lack of cooperation with me, and refusal to work as a team) where our comm lines are being either cut or obstructed , which she conveniently agree to , even if unwittingly so , as this control factor called “Dad” is against many things that she would like to do ; things that any responsible father would object to with a 12 years old girl.
Thus, she sort of tends to “Bank agree” with mom , and go mutually Out-Ruds with her regarding Dad. Do you see my dilemma , Chris ? And in spite that I have explained this mechanism to mom , time and time again in VERY high ARC letters using nothing but a “Good Roads , Good Weather” approach , she can’t never ever accept my arguments as valid enough, and can’t never admit that her actions of questioning my hat so much (even in front of my kid) , and bypassing me so much, is not only wrong , but VERY suppressive.
So , I basically got tired of this bullshit from BOTH of them, and wrote them separate letters informing them that I had to disconnect from this situation as it was affecting me too much already. I R-factored my daughter that all parents have rules to follow as part of being responsible parents, and that I had mine just as mom had hers , which I always respected and got her (my daughter) to respect as well, even when I disagreed with some of them. Told her that I didn’t expect any less courtesy from mom and her towards me , as she always followed mom’s rules and codes of conduct. Told her that I wasn’t any less important than mom , and that I didn’t expect this type of behavior from any of them towards me.
R-factored her that when she could realize my value as her father, and understand all I have actually been to her , and all efforts that I’ve made to be the best father that I could be for her ; and when she were ready to assume the hat of the daughter again, with all the duties that comes with it, that I will then relocate next to her, and we’ll retake the good and responsible father/daughter relationship that we had here in PR. But otherwise , I was done with it.
I told her and mom that I would always be here for BOTH of them should they need anything. That they just needed to pick up the phone and ask. But I also made it very clearly for them, that 1) I wasn’t moving now to the USA as originally planned, and 2) They would not be receiving any calls from me nor any type of follow up , but just a monthly deposit in mom’s bank account. Told them that my decision was firm and absolute , and basically put the ball in their court.
If I do otherwise, Chris, I would be R/Cing forever by being connected to terminals who have no respect whatsoever for the rights and privileges of others, and whose exchange factor (spiritual-moral) is just incredible out. If I do otherwise, I’ll not last even a year as the loss and enturbulation would be so much, that I know that this body won’t be able to take it. And they won’t have just an “Upset and partially disconnected dad” ; they’ll have a “Dead dad” , and a loss from which they would probably not ever recover. So I rather be an upset dad than a dead dad. You know what I mean ?
Chris : “Again, she will always remember who tries to poison her mind against whom.”
Peter : Not necessarily so if her ethics is out , which IS out, and severely so.
Chris : “You are spot on regarding not running down her mother. Keep going! I feel you.”
Peter : Thanks! , Chris. I am of the belief that the survival and well being of the mother of our kids has precedence over my OWN survival and well being. That’s the rule I live by. If mom is ok, then my daughter has more survival and happiness opportunities. So I must always work for the sanity and well being of mom as priority #1.
Chris : “I went through a helluvan anxious time when divorcing my eldest daughter’s mother who was in the SO and dodging legal service. Like you, I stayed honest and worked my way through the ordeal and though we had a bumpy ride, we are closer than ever and she is going to be 35 this Spring. There is still whole lifetimes to be lived this life. Keep going!”
Peter : Thanks, Chris ; most kind of you to say that. I am glad that it all turned all right for you and your daughter at the end. I know that you are not a theist , but if you don’t mind me saying it , God bless your daughter and your family.
I am a natural warrior who has fought many great battles with life , and always came winning at the end. I just hope that we don’t lose these beautiful years of the pre-adolescence and the adolescence where all those changes occur. I had promised myself that it would never happen. I had even decided to remain w/out any 2D (though I prefer the priest life anyway) so as to be able to fully enjoy those years with my daughter. So that she was always the focus of attention , you know.
But I am going to start a Solo-program to address any case in this area that might be enturbulating my flows, and to handle their universe at a distance by addressing my own O/Ws, ARCXs, and PTPs that I might have created for them in my past. I feel that this might help. I already did this once, and successfully so with my first wife (I’ve only had 2 women in my whole life). When we divorced she was INCREDIBLE hostile towards me. We couldn’t even have a one minute comm cycle w/out she exploding in anger. We had no kids together though I had helped her to raise two. But I have always been of the opinion that relationships should always end in good terms , and that people might not function well as couples , but can still remain good friends.
I knew that even though that she was being even suppressive to me , that I was partly responsible as my stupid unstability in my finances had heavily keyed-in her past marriage and restimulated her past PTS situations. She was also experiencing a heavy loss even when she had been the one who had decided to break off. I didn’t want it to end like that , but she just wouldn’t let me come near her enough to audit her or something. I remembered this LRH datum that I had read in the Freedom congress lectures about “The individual carries within himself the enturbulative factors that make others react towards him”. So I said to me, “That sounds sensible , what do I have to lose by ‘testing’ it ?”
I thus used the data from the State of Man congress , wrote EACH and every O/W that I had committed against her, flattening Responsibility on each overt to EP, you know, and just hoped for the best. I was about 1-2 months working at it , and then suddenly out of nowhere there was she reaching out to me. She confessed some of her own overts and W/Hs to me , I helped her out , bought for her 50 hours for pro Repair auditing , and we became great friends. I HAD changed her attitude from a distance by auditing my OWN case !!! That was just awesome that it could be done , you know.
So if I already did it one time , who is to tell me that I can’t do it again after 20 years of accumulated wisdom ? Miracles DO happen , you know ; they do happen if one have enough faith , and I am a man of a lot of faith.
I really appreciate that you took the time to write that reply to me , with great advises in it. That can only speak of a great character ; thanks!!!
Peter: “What I see is individuals who are in SHOCK at a the weird and incredible odd manifestation of never having admitted to being wrong in 5,000 posts !!!”
Individuals? You mean Geir and Peter and you? Most other posters, to their credit, have been quiet.
But you are right. If the cult leader makes a claim – no matter how outrageous – all cult members should accept that it is true and jump on the bandwagon.
Peter: “…undue influences that might drive your kid away from you due to 3P activities.”
That doesn’t apply here, though.
Peter: “So many people CAN’T just be wrong about you. This has also happened to you at Rinder’s WITH Rinder himself.”
You mean the times Mike has put a stop to an exchange because NEITHER side was admitting it was wrong and he said he was doing it because it wasn’t going anywhere? Those exchanges Including the exchanges I wasn’t even part of?
Peter : “Of course , if one can’t ever be wrong about anything, if one refuses to duplicate others , then one must become a victim , as the ONLY way to become the Cause Point in life is by accepting past authorship and participation in things = “Admitting to being wrong..'”
What we’ve got here is failure to communicate. Some people you just can’t reach. Wish you’d stop being so good to me, Captain.
Marildi : “What we’ve got here is failure to communicate. Some people you just can’t reach. Wish you’d stop being so good to me, Captain.”
Peter : Will do, Marildi ; will do.
Peter, I do realize that I’ve had my part in all this. But there was no way that I was being allowed to say so without it appearing to be someone else’s idea. It became a standoff for all concerned. I hope you can understand that.
I know Geir doesn’t want me here and I myself know I don’t belong. But I sincerely wish you and everybody the best. Catch you all later some time.
“I know Geir doesn’t want me here and I myself know I don’t belong. But I sincerely wish you and everybody the best. Catch you all later some time.”
That’s not true. We all want you here. You’re changing the issue.
Thanks, Chris, but I think that did become the issue. It finally came through loud and clear that Geir has been trying to drive me away by continuing to goad me. Let’s just give it a rest for now.
And thanks for your theta comm lately.
“And thanks for your theta comm lately.”
Thank you for yours! Right, give it a rest. Talk soon.
No, Marildi, that is not true you are dramatizing being a victim here.
The issue is simple and exactly like I have stated without any other underlying intention. I am in fact amazed that in face of the revelation that you have not been able to see anything wrong with your 5000 comments, that you wouldn’t take the opportunity to find a few points about yourself that you can improve.
But instead you pull the victim card, blame others and then sulk away. That is so wrong in itself – and therefore a great point to start improving. But that cannot happen if you insist on blaming others instead of finding in yourself the ability to admit you are wrong and then simply improve. It might feel scary like hell and and it might feel like you lose face and that your ego is hurt. But beyond all that there is real improvement to be had and progress to be made.
I would love to have you here, but not as a person entering into discussions without the ability to be effect, without any chance of admitting another is right when you started out with a different viewpoint.
I will add that this is precisely the issue I see with you and Vinaire – the inability to be an effect of another’s communication. You are both so eager to sell your own viewpoints, that you can hardly wait until it’s your turn to hurl that come-back at the other person. You seem to both have a big ego afraid of getting hurt or losing face – despite all talk of mindfullness or letting go and such.
Geir: “I would love to have you here, but not as a person entering into discussions without the ability to be effect, without any chance of admitting another is right when you started out with a different viewpoint.”
This is exactly where we started out days ago – you couldn’t convince me of your viewpoint about the guy who wrote you the “odd” email, so you started saying that I could never “admit another is right when you [meaning me] started out with a different viewpoint.” That’s when I said that you haven’t ever done that yourself, and you tried to prove you have by posting some links to comments of yours that proved no such thing – which you then admitted. In other words, you couldn’t prove that you yourself are not guilty of what you are accusing me of any more than I can.
But that didn’t stop you – you continued to repeat the same thing over and over until the only thing you’ve proved is that you are the one who is “without the ability to be effect.” And that you are the one who is dramatizing.
Geir: “I will add that this is precisely the issue I see with you and Vinaire…You seem to both have a big ego afraid of getting hurt or losing face – despite all talk of mindfullness or letting go and such.”
Wow, you couldn’t have described yourself more precisely.
Except that I actually right there and then admitted I was indeed wrong. Dead wrong.
But Marildi, you’re doing it again – deflecting your opportunity for improvement into something else.
I should have added that you soon changed the original accusation – that I have never “admitted another is right when you [I] started out with a different viewpoint” – to saying that I had never admitted being wrong about anything. And you kept repeating that over and over – and still are.
I pity your clients and kids if this is how you “help” them improve.
Shifting to attack mode on a very personal level instead of grabbing a chance for improvement. We should be giving Kataggek a medal soon.
Just provide links to you admitting to be wrong instead of countering with attacks like these.
“Shifting to attack mode on a very personal level”
As if you haven’t been doing that to me – ceaselessly? And what I wrote wasn’t even close to being as personal as you get.
I’m done with this.
I admit that my approach with you has been wrong. I haven’t met anyone except you and Vinaire that cannot admit to being wrong, and all the tools I have acquired in helping others improve relies on them being able to admit that there is room for improvement. I simply don’t know how to handle a person who so consistently insist on being right. And the reason I know my approach with you (and Vinaire) is wrong is simply because it doesn’t work. So, if you can help me find a better way to help you, please give me a hand.
Geir : “I admit that my approach with you has been wrong. I haven’t met anyone except you and Vinaire that cannot admit to being wrong, and all the tools I have acquired in helping others improve relies on them being able to admit that there is room fo r improvement. I simply don’t know how to handle a person who so consistently insist on being right. And the reason I know my approach with you (and Vinaire) is wrong is simply because it doesn’t work. So, if you can help me find a better way to help you, please give me a hand.”
Peter : I frequently find myself into that same dilemma , Geir ; not knowing how to get other to see and understand that he/she is wrong about something , after I have tried the “Good Roads , Good Weather” method , and the one about getting the individual to explain “how is he right about it” to ease off the compulsion to be right. Most of the time I succeed with my methods , as I am VERY good at it. But with certain individuals like my daughter’s mom and other people close to me , I just can’t.
I am dead serious ; this situation with people that doesn’t seem to never being able to admit to being wrong , is a VERY PTSing situation if one has emotional or work connections with such individuals. One just CAN’T escape R/Cing to it, even if one is a fucking 3 Ls completion. It is exhausting, and frequently involve many human rights abuses from the ones suffering from that malady. And that’s EXACTLY what pisses me off about it ; the human rights and civil right abuses. If these individuals could understand how can they potentially damage the dynamics of others, probably they would have a change of heart.
Being connected to someone like that (due to my daughter) has affected my life in unsuspected ways , even when I managed to have a very friendly relationship with the terminal , and to keep it that way for years!!!
The pain is so much , and the fear of what I might do to myself to end it , that I am SERIOUSLY considering committing myself to a mental type of hospital to have supervised care. It is that serious as I do not trust that (not today, at least, don’t know about tomorrow) my great abilities as as Solo-auditor-C/S are enough to help me to handle the loss. And all because someone decided that “He/she knew best” when in fact it is only their fixed ideas. This is so pointless indeed. This is not a god-damn game, or a contest to “be right”. Lives are at stake here, and the sanity level of individuals.
I really pity those poor souls ; I really do . They are potential criminals walking freely among us.
“So, if you can help me find a better way to help you, please give me a hand.”
Well, you could start by not making the kind of generalization you just did again – i.e. “I haven’t met anyone except you and Vinaire that cannot admit to being wrong.”
Seriously, Geir, that type of comment borders on being suppressive, whether that is the intention of the person making it or it’s just a knee-jerk reaction to push buttons because their own have been pushed, or anything else.
And it is simply not true that I have “never” admitted I was wrong. You fail to notice and/or acknowledge when I do – even in a comment above where I stated that I knew I “had my part in all this.” Just like you refuse to notice or acknowledge that my views about LRH and Scientology have evolved a good bit – simply because your opinion is that I should have evolved the same way you have.
On top of all that, when something is repeated over and over it tends to become “truth” and something “everybody knows.” This is actually a trick of propagandists, who know that if you tell a lie often enough, it is accepted and believed.
Regardless of anything, I very much admire you for saying what you did on your latest blog post. At this point I would say you need little if any help from me or anybody else. Kudos!
It is not a generalization that I have never met anybody else that cannot admit to BEING wrong (mark, not HAVING BEEN WRONG – you made that very distinction early on in our exchange regarding this – and no, generalizations like “I have my part in this” does not count – specifics are needed). I have not met others – only you two. Very specific. No generalization. You yourself admitted that you have never turned around and admitted to BEING wrong. You goaded me on the same. and I admitted right there and then that it was true and that I was wrong (in present time) about that. That prompted me to look at other areas I AM WRONG, hence my latest blog post.
Marildi, it was nice of you to point out my reluctance to admitting I was wrong. I take that eye opener and will use it to improve. Thanks.
Thank you too for pointing out my reluctance. I’ll be watching for it. 🙂
Would you like help in daring to admit you are wrong in any area?
Marildi : “Peter, I do realize that I’ve had my part in all this. But there was no way that I was being allowed to say so without it appearing to be someone else’s idea. It became a standoff for all concerned. I hope you can understand that.”
Peter : I DO understand you , my very dear lady ; I do. And I would have probably done it the same way. My post to you was sincerely meant to help you, but it didn’t require a reply back necessarily. It was some food for thought for you to sleep on , and use it as you saw fit ,on your private moments. I didn’t want to turn it into a public thing.
I can be an asshole many times , Marildi , but I ASSURE you that I am always sincere in my desire to help others, and that I never lie just to win an argument. I do not care about winning arguments ; I care about people ; I care about YOU as an individual. Do you really think that a man who take the position that I took regarding the situation with my ex-wife is not a sincere man with the best of the intentions towards those he love , and even towards those he doesn’t know that well ?
The Peter that my story describes is the REAL Peter. The one who sacrifices his happiness fot that of others. The one who doesn’t know about hate, vengeance, and petty human emotions even if some of my posts sometimes says the contrary. I am a sincere individual and an open book, Marildi.
I am only telling you this to show you that my advises were meant to help. I don’t have the necessary data to assert whether or not others here feel the same way I do about you , but as I had said before , I like you the way you are, and I can have you the way you are. But that doesn’t mean that I am blind to traits that I find destructive to others and even to yourself. It just means that my ARC to you is unconditional , just as it is for my ex-wife and my daughter, and my friends as well.
And please don’t feel the need to answer any of this. It is more than ok with me just an ack that you received the comm , as I DO understand your position 100% , my very dear lady.
Marildi : “I know Geir doesn’t want me here and I myself know I don’t belong. But I sincerely wish you and everybody the best. Catch you all later some time.”
Peter : I am not trying to make you wrong about that , but Geir doesn’t strike me as an individual who operates that way. I am a good judge of character even oven very long distances. He seems like a great individual that I can call a friend. It even seems to me that he is very fond of you. I know I AM and Calvin is. It feels like Chris is as well. And it seems to me that this blog is about VERY INTERESTING and smart people , and you are BOTH. For me blogs w/out Marildi are not blogs , as you bring balance to things, the other side of the coin. I’ve been able myself to see other angles of an argument because of your posts , which otherwise , I would not have seen them. It is not important whether I agreed or not to those other angles, but the important thing is that I perceived their existence. The result was more understanding for me about different viewpoints and why others had them. That is always VERY , VERY valuable.
I am REALLY sorry if I contributed to the feeling of not feeling wanted. I never meant for it to happen , really. I am PERFECTLY comfortable with your presence here and at any other blog. And if we frequently disagree on our views of Scn/LRH , even with heated emotions , that’s quite all right with me , and it has never been (nor will EVER be) personal with me. That’s why of my offer for you to know the real Peter in a more private way. It wasn’t meant to hit on you (I am a priest-like regarding the 2D) or anything , or to “corner” you , or do the “OSA thing” with you , or tell others who you really are. I just wanted you to know that I was a different breed of “critic” , and one that could perfectly co-exists with believers. That’s all.
So you take good care , and I expect to keep having the honor to debate and exchange comms with you. Ok beauty ?
Peter, I got all you said and very much appreciate the intention behind each part of it. As I said to you in one of our first exchanges here, Geir’s blog is unique – and you now add your own unique personality to this motley crew. 😉
Regarding what you said previously about the intention of a poster’s comment, I probably didn’t duplicate what you meant. Sorry about that. In the exchanges on this particular thread, I saw the truth of what I think you were saying, better than I had before. It applies not only to how we perceive the other person’s comments but should apply even more to how we word our own – including with regard to whether our well-meant remarks are actually condescending. That would be my main suggestion to you, with all due respect for many good things about you.
Incidentally, there was a Pro TRs sup at Flag by the name of Vittorio, who would always give his critiques by saying that the criticism was “a bit… (whatever).” As one of his students, I observed that this kept the critique or flunk from being a make-wrong and made it much easier to have. I’m sure you know what I mean.
Btw, I mentioned on my previous reply to you that I would not be posting as much for a while but that it had nothing to do with you personally, or anybody else. I am just going to be unusually busy for a while and won’t have too much extra time.
You take care too…my dear man. 🙂
There seem to be a slight admittance to being wrong right there, Marildi. Is that correct? If it is, then kudos to you, mylady!
And a curtsy to you, m’Lord. 🙂
So, was there an admittance to being wrong in there? Just need to know if I should move you out of the Vinaire/Marildi-bin.
Are you ever going to get off the “Admit you’re wrong!” approach? You already admitted that it doesn’t work.
Sorry, but I really have to go. Have a good day.
I was about to give you the benefit of the doubt and tons of kudos right there. But you simply couldn’t. Oh well. You have then solidly confirmed that you cannot, will not admit to being wrong. And that is no generality. That is you demonstrating the fact right here. Which means that you are in fact a person that has absolutely no intention of being effect of another’s communication. Which in turn means that having an exchange with you for the purpose of evolving new truths is futile. You just blew the little hope I had that you could bring value to exchanges beyond that of demonstrating that Scientology indoctrination creates Certainty in people and insistence on being right. Much like Hubard himself.
Going Plonk.
Don’t look now, Geir, but you have completely reverted. Take a deep breath.
– Marildi : “Peter, I got all you said and very much appreciate the intention behind each part o f it. As I said to you in one of our first exchanges here, Geir’s blog is unique – and you now add your own unique personality to this motley crew. 😉 ”
Peter : Thanks Marildi ; most kind of you.
Marildi : “Regarding what you said previously about the intention of a poster’s comment, I probably didn’t duplicate what you meant. Sorry about that.”
Peter : Thank you very much , and that’s quite all right.
Marildi : “In the exchanges on this particular thread, I saw the truth of what I think you were saying, better than I had before.”
Peter : Got it ; I am glad you did.
Marildi : “It applies not only to how we perceive the other person’s comments but should apply even more to how we word our own – including with regard to whether our well-meant remarks are actually condescending.”
Peter : Yeah , I fully agree with that.
Marildi : “That would be my main suggestion to you, with all due respect for many good things about you.”
Peter : Thanks! , point well taken and understood!
Marildi : “Incidentally, there was a Pro TRs sup at Flag by the name of Vittorio, who would always give his critiques by saying that the criticism was “a bit… (whatever).” As one of his students, I observed that this kept the critique or flunk from being a make-wrong and made it much easier to have. I’m sure you know what I mean.”
Peter : I sure do know what you mean , and I am guilty as charge. One thing is to have disagreements and even heated arguments about an specific point ; but another thing is to address (and attack) the person’s alleged personality traits as the main line of discussion. Even though there is nothing wrong in pointing out here and there to some poster some possible non-optimum conduct that he/she might be exhibiting ; it should always be done with finesse and good manners.
And yes , we cornered you ; at least I did. I saw you through my own case that I have with this subject of “Admitting to being wrong” due to reasons you’ll find in my story about my daughter , where such behavior from my daughter’s mother, is heavily affecting my mental , spiritual, and physical state in ways you can’t even imagine. And so I reacted with anger and frustration , and just jumped into the wagon. I should not have let my own case interfere with my judgment ; sorry about that.
Marildi : “Btw, I mentioned on my previous reply to you that I would not be posting as much for a while but that it had nothing to do with you personally, or anybody else. I am just going to be unusually busy for a while and won’t have too much extra time.”
Peter : Got it about that, thanks. But just in case that my presence here is affecting in any way your space and degree of comfort , I promise that I’ll be more careful in my future posts , and that I will inspect them carefully before posting them. I can’t promise not making any mistakes , though , as my social skills needs a lot of polishing as I had been away from interacting publicly with friends for so long. But perhaps you can help me to keep straight by not having any buttons or considerations to informing me when I am being an asshole , because I might miss it sometimes. I REALLY appreciate direct and blunt communications ; I can perfectly take them.
All I ask from you, is that unless some comments of mine strike you as obviously and 100% certain a personal attack from your perspective , to clarify first my originations before arriving at any conclusions. Deal ?
Marildi : “You take care too…my dear man. 🙂 ”
Peter : Jjjjj , thanks!!!
thetaclear: “But just in case that my presence here is affecting in any way your space and degree of comfort, I promise that I’ll be more careful in my future posts, and that I will inspect them carefully before posting them. I can’t promise not making any mistakes , though…”
Not to worry, Peter. I’m not the type to carry a grudge. And if I’m posting less than before, it has nothing whatsoever to do with you.
Thank you for your lovely promise. I promise the same. 🙂
Thanks too for the comments regarding heated discussions, cornering, etc. I really appreciate it!
Peter: “All I ask from you, is that unless some comments of mine strike you as obviously and 100% certain a personal attack from your perspective, to clarify first my originations before arriving at any conclusions. Deal?”
Deal. 😉
p.s. In the second paragraph, I meant to say Geir and Calvin and you.
“Having ‘bashed into’ numerous people in my dealings (including me ❤ Marildi), I wondered what the hell all the fuss was about?"
Calvin, if I misinterpreted what you meant by the above, I apologize.
In any case, I hope things are going better for you!
Take care, me ❤ . 😉
Geir, Having tried “absolute certainty” to the absolute limit, I will say from my own experience that I heartily agree with your statement on “bliss.” I also seem to have neither predilection nor addiction to bliss. I guess it’s just not my poison. This discussion reminds me to be thankful for that good fortune. I’m wondering if that lack in personality trait proofed me against the lemming characteristic and self-destruction of the true believing scientologist? Taken more broadly, I wonder if my natural personality proofed me against true beliefs altogether?
Every day is sunshine, and all the roads are Clear in Marildi’s space!
They used to be in mine as well. Until I almost went bankrupt from Scientology.
Alanzo
“They used to be in mine as well. Until I almost went bankrupt from Scientology.”
That’s natter!
Suddenly, with this comment, I realized the difference between a scientology critic and an independent scientologist. IT IS JUST A MATTER OF MATERIAL SOLVENCY AFTER THE COS EXPERIENCE !!!. ( persistent floating ta with vgi´s).
“IT IS JUST A MATTER OF MATERIAL SOLVENCY AFTER THE COS EXPERIENCE !!!. ( persistent floating ta with vgi´s).”
LOL! Good one Rafael SN!
I am still connected with a few still-in Churchies who are still high-toned (a rare thing) and refuse to disconnect from me because they know me personally and understand exactly what I have been doing as a critic of Scientology.
One of them sent me this quote a few weeks ago:
“Just because you’ve had a nightmare doesn’t mean you should stop dreaming.”
It’s one of the reasons to stay connected to Scientologists from your past. They remind you of who you used to be.
Always valuable.
Alanzo
Wow, Alanzo, I’m impressed with your recent comments. You aren’t looking at everything in a black and white way. You were even willing to say that the ethics conditions had merit even if they weren’t perfect.
Okay, just as you gave me the special Alanzo Award one time, I’m going to give you the Marildi Award to Special Critics. 😉
“Okay, just as you gave me the special Alanzo Award one time, I’m going to give you the Marildi Award to Special Critics. ;)”
Good call!
“It’s one of the reasons to stay connected to Scientologists from your past. They remind you of who you used to be.”
I seem to always remain cognizant of this. I seem always to remember my past opinions. It is entertaining and a source of wonder at myself. I can’t wait for some future time when I will wonder at my opinions of today!
?????????????????????????
That was in response to Rafael’s post.
” thetaclear commented on Scientology: The Borg of ideologies. in response to thetaclear: ?????????????????????????
That was in response to Rafael’s post.”
Think “irony,” it’s a form of humor!
Jjjjj
Got it!
“Jjjjj Got it!”
🙂
What? ….. Ok, I see….I ways a perfect Scientologist too once. I knew the answer to life, the universe and everything. My life was full of deep, beautiful meaning, devoted 24/7/365 to the greatest, purest purpose imaginable.
My universe was consistent and complete……or almost, till something cracked.
Now it is batshit crazy, KG’s style, and I’m loving it.
The difference? Now I create my life’s own batshit meaning, that’s all.
Yeah, I know what you mean. I went from a “Totally knowledgable Scientologist” with “unshakable certainty” about life , to a “where the fuck am I , who the fuck Am I ?” confused mental state. 🙂
“Now it is batshit crazy, KG’s style, and I’m loving it. The difference? Now I create my life’s own batshit meaning, that’s all.”
+1 brother
…or exactly what Chris said 😁😁😃
🙂
Ok
Chris just beat me to the answer while I was posting 😆
“Chris just beat me to the answer while I was posting 😆”
Great minds and all that . . . !
Chris: great minds and all that
Exactly!!!!! 😆😆😆
I think it is uber amazing. And it’s because you’ve been made totally certain about the correctness and immunized from accepting other ideas. Having KSW#1 and Tech Degrades as the 1st things you read and get star-rate checkouts on in every major course is no accident.
It’s one thing to leave the Co$ because of how fucked up it is. It’s another to crack the belief system you’ve been programmed into. It is actually implanting.
“It’s one thing to leave the Co$ because of how fucked up it is. It’s another to crack the belief system you’ve been programmed into.”
It has been taking me very many years and the process goes on. What I am pleased with is that my deprogramming has continued farther and deeper than I consider that Scientology had taken me. In other words, I am unravelling not only from Scientology but also from the predisposition to be snagged by ideologies like Scientology and cult-think in general, I hope.
Geir : “If it took THIS much to chan ge my viewpoint into what In ow consider to be the right viewpoint, then the mindfuck must have been amazing. And with this amazing hold it has on me, could it be possible th at it still holds me off from seeing more shit in Scientology? ”
“But I have never seen anyone wonder about that. Why not? Perhaps because the mindfuck is über-amazing?”
Well , I have! 🙂
You know what happen Geir ? What happen is that when you have a bunch of truths mixed with falsities , half-truths, and intentional lies ( 3 different aspects of the same thing) ; one then has the perfect trap. Those subjects that are composed of both truths and lies, are the most entraping ones. And the more higher truths they possess but mixed with little lies here and there, , the more they are liable to trap others , and insidiously so.
If you take all that LRH wrote including all his lectures about Scn and create a data base of all of it ; and if then you were to isolate just the falsities from it, you know, the things that are not factual or are twisted ; you would then find that they are not that many IF compared to the whole of the subject as a subject. I would say Scn is perhaps 70-80% truths, and 15-20% lies. And that’s EXACTLY why it is so damn difficult to deprogram others and ourselves from it , cause there is LOSS involved with it.
There is no way in hell that a subject who doesn’t have many truths can trap so many individuals for so long, and individuals with a great intellect and abilities. None of us would have fall for Islam, Christianity, Catholicism, or any other of those -isms. Most of us tested a lot of religions before Scn , but they didn’t feel real , you know , they didn’t feel intuitively right. But Scn IMMEDIATELY did !!! Isn’t that fascinating ? How does one explain that ? Many of us had excellent backgrounds at Science, logic and scientific methodology either formally or self-taught. In my case I was a 3rd year engineer student when I met Scn this lifetime ; and one who could even debate with PhDs. And there I was leaving my career (NASA was back then recruiting the best at my college ) to go “Save the planet”. And I immediately invalidated all my accumulated scientific knowledge (which was a lot) , and took LRH as my new “Authority” in science.
I lost all my great passion that I had always had for science and math, specially for research and inventing/patenting. ALL was gone, finished, and dismissed as “no longer needed” as LRH “had discovered” already All that was there to discover about psysical phenomena as well as mental phenomena. My life became w/out zest after a while, after the first 2-3 years on staff. There was nothing interesting for me to do but to help others. I was so scarce on games that a friend of mine and I used to discuss “what the hell are we going to do after we ‘Clear’ this planet ? , what then ? What else is there to do besides helping ?”. And we would philosophize about such matters for hours and hours till 2-3am sometimes to then go and begin our staff day next morning at 8:30am.
It wasn’t after 20 fucking years after !!! , that I began to re-take my interest for science again, but slowly so. 20 fucking years of my life TOTALLY wasted. Quite possible (at least per meter reads) under the yoke of LRH the past life-time as well , something not that far-fetched as I am only 47 , and “stole” this vessel at a young age (he left, all right, I di not forced him to). If what I suspect is true (which I DO NOT want it to be true) , I have more than enough reasons to be all BPCed with LRH as Marildi says I am , cause this possible involves losing my family at a young age. All I know that the e-meter reads and that I experience great grief , when I “look” at the area. Why ? I have no specific recalls, but only concepts and intuitions. So yes, Marildi, it is pesonal with me.
Scientology is but the best example of “when helps becomes betrayal”. It DOES contains many truths, it DOES help the individual , it IS more advance that most of Earth’s psychotherapies. But the lies that it also contain – even though that they are not that many as a percantage of the whole subject – are enough to destroy the whole of the subject, fuck up your mind, and trap you forever if you let it happen. Is is THAT insidiously destructive.
Definition of an Ex-Scientologist: A person who is no longer willing to defend the indefensible.
Alanzo
Listen man, I reserve my right to defend whatever fences I want to defend no matter how in de fence able you consider they may be. 😉 (freebeeing is a joker)
“Definition of an Ex-Scientologist: A person who is no longer willing to defend the indefensible.”
In Michael Shermer-speak, “The smarter a person is, . . . the better they are at defending their beliefs.” By his formula and your definition, all Scientologists are smarter than me.
Tony Ortega has a great post today. An analysis of Hubbard’s pulp writing written just after Dianetics was released. Pretty interesting: http://tonyortega.org/2016/02/16/science-fiction-smackdown-l-ron-hubbard-the-pith-helmet-wearing-pipsqueak-prometheus/
I have a question for Marildi.
I want to ask you HOW would you know that you are performing a cycle of action (in this version using the anatomy of control from “The Problems of Work)” as a rehabbed Operating Thetan compared to merely doing it out of habit as a low toned, re-stimulated person.
EXAMPLE:
You are standing outside Starbucks. You decide to do a cycle of action and enjoy a cup of the new tasty tea titled “Emperor’s Cloud and Mist Green” from Teavana.
You START and beginning walking into the Starbucks.
You CHANGE and order the drink. Drink the tea, and handle the waste by throwing it away. As you walk out the door…
You STOP the Emperor’s Cloud and Mist Green Tea experience.
Now.
What does being OT bring to making that better?
Or Version 2.
L. Ron Hubbard is at Starbucks reincarnated as a red-headed dashing young man.
Since he writes his own rules cuz he’s DA MAN, he lights a Kool outside and smokes and drinks his drink in spite of Starbucks smoking policy in Texas.
Yeah, LRH may not be perfect, but so what right?
I, a few feet away, completely oblivious of the sheer raging OT next to me, am also having a drink.
WHAT differentiates the improved quality of LRH’s coffee over mine and why would it be worth $ 350,000 to attain it?
KG, aside from your usual creative humor, I’m glad you are the one who asked me a question like that, because you may be the only one here who would understand and accept my answer. This is probably because you have not been a Scientologist and thus are free from as many preconceived ideas and “identities” as the rest of us.
I recently watched a video interview of Adyashanti, and at a certain point in the vid, he starts talking about identity. He says that on the first “arc” (meaning progression or line of development) of a spiritual journey, identity gets clarified and “emptied,” until it finally collapses. He is asked by the interviewer (at about 20:00 into the interview) what happens after one has achieved the boundlessness (i.e. no actual identity) that occurs on the first arc, and he explains it in terms of what it is experientially.
He says the first arc involves what a person is “free FROM” – which is free from identity. The second arc is what the person is “free TO” – i.e., am “I” as infinity free enough of identity to be able to come back into the world of time and space and experience “myself” while being eternal, boundless and infinite. In other words, is infinity able to experience itself as “this.”
All that made sense to me because I’ve been thinking for quite a while that life is a process! And I feel that I’ve been on the spiritual journey described by Adyashanti. Scientology gave me a good start on the first arc, so the value I see in it is that it has the potential to fairly quickly free a person well enough on the first arc that s/he can continue to “practice” it and start practicing/experiencing the second. Later in the vid he talks about honesty being basic to enlightenment (in my wording).
Btw, posting on blogs is actually practicing or expanding on both “arcs” – because there are so many demos of identity in action! Including my own, of course, and that too has been a source of increasing awareness. Note that I’m referring to not only the identities that have to do with Scientology but in general.
Watch at least 5 minutes or so of this vid, from about 20:00, which is the part I’ve described.
And what was the answer to Kata’s question?
Let’s make this a coffee party.
Marildi, LRH, and myself are at Starbucks near the Stock Yards in Fort Worth, TX.
A Texas longhorn that escaped from the Wild West Show is charging outside of Starbucks. Mas Oyama appears: a martial artist with perhaps the most conditioned hands in history is obviously back from the dead like LRH). And with his shuto technique he KNOCKS off the left horn from the bull. The bull longhorn, angry, charges again and Mas knocks off the OTHER horn with his shuto.
He then walks into Starbucks and orders a Pelegrino water in a glass bottle, sets it on the table and with is shuto knocks the top inch of the bottle off. He pours the water into a filter to remove shards of glass, and sits down to enjoy his bubbly water ignoring our dumbfounded faces.
LRH makes a note to write, “Karate Cowboy” as a new western novel, and to use the scene in the book.
In walks Simon Reinhard who, almost broke and needs quick cash, bets LRH he can memorize a randomized deck playing cards in 30 seconds or less and LRH takes the bet, and in 21.9 seconds Simon memorizes a randomized deck of playing cards that were shuffled by Hubbard, and repeats them back to LRH. LRH then promises to pay the double the debt tomorrow and asks if could Simon could loan him a 20. He’ll be here tomorrow, same time. Promise. Guaranteed. Ask Forrest Ackerman.
Now, each of us sit down to enjoy our drinks.
LRH is quietly talking to Body Thetans with his coffee and is thankful the FBI hasn’t figured out that reincarnation is real.
Mas Oyama is just present enjoying his green tea and sits powerful and serene.
Marildi is posting on Geir’s blog, recognizes my face from my avatar but keeps to herself. She’s private like that.
I’m memorizing chapter 42 out of “Thus Spake Zarathustra” and am using the Starbucks as a memory palace and my body is tired from my daily workout and from calling on clients.
Simon Reinhard is emptying the memory palace in his mind where he stored the PAO images of the cards he memorized. He is joyfully lost in his mindscape.
Marildi, you scratch a Texas Lotto ticket and you promise yourself to spend it all on your own personal development. You win $ 350,000!
You yelp with your good fortune and ALL of us show up to offer you our coaching services.
You get to spend $ 350,000 on any two of these people as a coach, and only ONE has something close to a Clear’s ability regarding memory.
But LRH tells you that he should get all of the money, and that you shouldn’t use anyone else here.
Who do you give your money to?
Me? I would go with this guy and Mas.
I think what you are saying in your post is “It’s now what you do but HOW you do it.” In short, a higher “beingness” is worth the journey.
Your enlightened coffee break beats my down tone coffee break as a way-cooler “beingness” based on self mastery.
And I agree. It’s now what we do but HOW.
“All dharmas lead to the same goal.” – The Lojong Proverbs
Using this as a “stable datum,” A WISE PERSON can use any dharma and become free. Yeah, they could even do it with the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster or become a fundamentalist of the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.”
It ain’t WHAT you do but HOW you do it if you really want the BEST coffee break in the world.
So, perhaps since all dharmas lead to the same goal, we may agree that there are many roads to the top of mount fuji.
Some paths are expensive and full of heartache. And the is a cost and heartache on any path me thinks.
Or MAYBE, with a paradoxical batshit free Will any “dharma” or “tech” doesn’t matter at all.
Maybe, Will USES whatever mythos it wants to evolve itself.
And IF SO …
No. Dharma. Matters.
And Scientology is a Dharma.
Then, Scientology doesn’t matter.
What matters, in this notion, is WILL, directing itself with what it wants to direct itself.
***
If No Dharma Matters, and any dharma can be used by a skilled will, then stumping for any religion is stupid, as every will will find its way if it chooses to.
Kat: “ ‘All dharmas lead to the same goal’…Using this as a ‘stable datum,’ A WISE PERSON can use any dharma and become free.”
That seems right. In fact, some people have suggested that not everyone was ready to gain from Scientology, while others were – and this is what determined the results each got.
Thanks for your duplication and the great ack. 🙂
I just remembered that I was going to reply to these coffee shop stories and say they are hilarious! Especially this one of you, me and LRH in a coffee shop. I had at least half a dozen good laughs when I read it. You have missed your calling! 😉
Loved the video too.
This is an excellent question KG. And well phrased.
“What matters, in this notion, is WILL, directing itself with what it wants to direct itself.”
Tautological Universe without end, Amen.
Yup. It’s REE-Lig-UNN all right.
From Scientology Technical Dictionary:
INDIVIDUAL: When we say the individual we are talking about something as precise as an apple. We are not talking about a collection of behavior patterns which we all learned about in the study of rats. We are talking about something that is finite. We are talking about somebody. The somethingness that you are and the capabilities you can be and this is what we are talking about. We are not talking about the color of your hair or the length of your feet. We are talking about you.
INDIVIDUATION: A separation from knowingness.
In Scientology, you are an individual with self-determinism, but to individuate is bad. It is assumed that the ideal knowingness in contained in the words of Hubbard that comprise the subject of Scientology. Per “KSW1” (Keeping Scientology Working series 1) one must not deviate from this knowingness.
.
From Star Trek:
“The Borg are a collection of species that have been turned into cybernetic organisms functioning as drones of the Collective, or the hive.” ~ Borg (Star Trek)
.
SCIENTOLOGY holds:
You are individuals. However, you are not allowed to individuate from the collective of the Church of Scientology. You are to be assimilated.
If you separate, you are an enemy of Scientology.
.
Pertinent summary – even basing it on Scn references. The practice we see with disconnection was not only what LRH also practiced in his personal life (the shunning of old friends), but he designed this Borg thinking into his philosophy. It is permeated by usthem.
Good cup of coffee? I think a lot of people here from Elizabeth, Marildi, Chris, Geir, Alanzo and I can all enjoy this cup of wonder.
***
ROSE TYLER: Really though Doctor, tell me, who are you?
THE DOCTOR: Ja know what we were sayin’ bout the earth revolving? It’s like when you’re a kid the first time they tell you the world’s turning and you just can’t believe it because everything looks like it’s standing still.
((BEAT))
I can feel it. The turn of the earth. The ground beneath our feet is spinning at a thousand miles and hour, and I can FEEL it. And the entire planet is hurtling around the sun at 67,000 miles an hour, and I can feel it. We are falling through space you and me clinging to the skin of this tiny little world.
And if we let go …
***
And if Einstein were there, he would imagine himself riding a light wave holding a mirror. . .
Marildi, I threw you an ARC bone when you didn’t answer my question above, but, you just ignored the hardball question about the “technical fact” question Geir mentions above regarding me and Alanzo.
Please, I’m asking nicely. And don’t write a book. Just give me an answer.
AND FOR REMINDER’S HERE IS MY NOT SO FAMOUS TRUE BELIEVER’S ALGORITHM:
***
MY TRUE BELIEVER’S ALGORITHM WHEN CONFRONTING A DANGEROUS QUESTION:
1. Change the subject, write a bunch and pretend you answered the question and IGNORE THE DANGEROUS QUESTION
2. If that doesn’t work, blame the fault on the questioner in a loving attitude and help him/her find the mistake they have made that doesn’t let them see “the truth” AND IGNORE THE DANGEROUS QUESTION.
3. If that doesn’t work, blame the questioner in a HARSH condescending attitude for moral or logical flaws and IGNORE THE DANGEROUS QUESTION.
4. If that doesn’t work, re-define the terms so that the question no longer has any bite (this is what you did above with the “not talk to critics tech”) AND USE THAT REFRAMING TO IGNORE THE DANGEROUS QUESTION.
5. If that doesn’t work, FACE THE DANGEROUS QUESTION but minimize it as unimportant in the big picture (EXAMPLE: “LRH wasn’t perfect but his tech is workable”).
6. If that doesn’t work, keep bouncing between these options and never acknowledge the question or its actual ramifications.
7. When the period is over, go warm up to a source that confirms the core beliefs and let the damage bar on your brain’s screen recharge, and then return to the conversation and START ALL OVER.
8. If EVER you have to face a dangerous question AND what it actually means regarding a sacred belief, always return to your “wins” about how it worked for you. Nobody can touch that.
Now, Marildi, you aren’t locked in the True Believer’s Algorithm. I’ve seen you disagree with Hubbard before.
But I am.
I often get locked in circles of my own batshit.
Laughter helps.
Fantastic points, Katageek!
Thanks, I forgot one. . .
9. Be unconscious that your belief stays the same and that you shift criteria based on what group or person is saying that either supports or detracts from the core belief. EXAMPLE: When talking with hard core believers, you believe some facts as literal, but when talking with critics or liberal believers ONE CHANGES BELIEFS TEMPORARILY TO PROTECT THE CORE BELIEFS AND NOT REMEMBER THAT YOU FLIP-FLOPPED.
I saw this on a preacher once with evolution. From the pulpit, he was all “Darwin is a lie” but when talking to Scientists he made huge concessions to keep his God as creator. Then, he went right back to the flock and preached Darwin as a lie.
He wasn’t lying to himself, his cognitive dissonance loops just kept him in the dark of his variable criteria.
My “batshit free will” aint science. It’s batshit. Science is science. Batshit is batshit.
“He wasn’t lying to himself, his cognitive dissonance loops just kept him in the dark of his variable criteria.”
A friend of mine, a brilliant engineer, is yet a true believer in the Blood of Christ. Reciting something to me that his preacher had told him that the chance of evolution was like covering (your state) Texas in softballs, 3 ft (1 m) deep and then picking one, I got a pencil and calculator and showed him that wasn’t a big number and he just shrugged it off and went to church.
Yup.
One of the apologists that did a book on Noah’s ark basically ADMITS evolution and natural selection happens. Since it is impossible for every animal on earth to fit in the ark, he conveniently allows for variations of species. So, two bears were responsible for all the various species of bears today.
Now THAT means in a world less than five thousand years old (supposedly) that all the bears differentiated and STOPPED?
A year ago, I happened to just run into a professional apologist in Mansfield Texas.
He jumped right into the algorithm and refused to deal with my question:
“If the Bible is perfect, why don’t the ten commandments, the only thing God wrote himself, match?”
Yup. He dodged that quick. AND HE STARTED THE DISCUSSION!
It wasn’t my fault! Honest!
“It wasn’t my fault! Honest!”
I dunno about that!
KG: “Marildi, I threw you an ARC bone when you didn’t answer my question above, but, you just ignored the hardball question about the ‘technical fact’ question Geir mentions above regarding me and Alanzo.”
Do you mean this question:
“I want to ask you HOW would you know that you are performing a cycle of action (in this version using the anatomy of control from “The Problems of Work)” as a rehabbed Operating Thetan compared to merely doing it out of habit as a low toned, re-stimulated person.”
I thought I was indirectly answering that question with the description of enlightenment that Adyashanti gave on the video, which I implied was also a description of full OT. I basically said that LRH never got us there, but that he had taken us through part of the journey.
To rephrase my answer to your question, a full OT would be what Adyashanti described as a fully enlightened person – someone who could go back into life with the awareness that he IS existence, All of it, and with boundless love for All.
More specifically, I think LRH expressed this in terms of the dynamics – the idea of BEing each of them until one would eventually BE the eighth dynamic – i.e. the “Allness of All.” And to answer your question a little more directly regarding a cycle of action – per LRH, an OT would be a guy who could and would fix the kids’ choo-choo train. That is, he would be able to complete a cycle of action, even the commonplace ones, and do so with full awareness and no attention on the past, as in restim.
Also, I assume you’ve seen by now that I did answer Geir’s question about the ‘technical fact.”
Thanks sweetie! That clears it up!
XO
Since the Borg is the working metaphor here. These are two Scenes from STTNG demonstrationing as to why the metaphor fits …
Captain Jean Luke Picard is playing Alanzo.
And Hugh makes his decision.
This was played out as Hugh deciding to return to the crash site against his personal choice but in favor of his analysis that it would be better and safer for his new friends if he returned. The Borg are amateurs at conditioning. A Scientologist would have returned to the crash site because there simply wasn’t a personal choice not to. This is why the true believers stay at Int. My ex-wife is a trustee there. She is trusted with a van to drive off base alone to make daily purchases and return. She returns because she is not in doubt about staying. Such is her bliss of faith. Such is the conditioning of her compulsive other-determinism masquerading as self-determination.
Marildi,
You realize you aren’t perfect. So …
List three times you were wrong!
KG: “List three times you were wrong!”
In just the recent comments, I’ve indicated I was wrong – unless you want to be sort of rote about it and demand I use the exact words “I am/was wrong.”
To be specific, I apologized to Calvin. I told Peter that I had misinterpreted something he said. And I also told Peter that I myself had “a part in all this” – meaning I was at fault too in the commotion between me and Geir.
I didn’t think it was necessary to use the exact words “I am/was wrong,” but it seems to be important to you and Geir, so I’ll say it. “I was wrong.”
Thanks Marildi!
But these are relational questions not belief questions.
Where have you been wrong about what you believe on Scientology?
Me?
I once briefly thought that the earth was 5,000 years old after listening to a preacher.
I once believed that the ONLY way to get to a happy eternity was to trust Jesus Christ and his Zombie resurrection POWER!
I once believed that memory palaces were how the Greeks memorized lectures, but I found out, very publicly in an embarrassing way, that there were STENOGRAPHERS then who could write down literally what was said. So, my historical position on memory palaces and their worth was wrong in that conversation and I looked like a baboon.
And I promptly admitted I was wrong.
Where are three places Hubbard is wrong in the Basics IMHO?
My three:
1. The ONLY REASON you give up a subject is a misunderstood.”
2. The tone scale does NOT always go from one tone to another.”
3. We aren’t fallen Gods, we are ascending batshit.
What are three places where you think Hubbard failed? He claims his system isn’t “perfect” so … where ARE THOSE imperfections?
KG, let me point out first that when Hubbard said the system was “workable” he was referring to the tech of auditing and training (as per KSW1), so I assume your question was with regard to the tech.
My own take is that the most basic “imperfections” were in training. To be specific, I worked for a number of years in the area of training and I observed that many (not all) Supervisors were lacking in having a conceptual understanding of study tech – even though study tech itself is quite workable when applied with understanding. The rote or robotic application of it, however, gives students losses – and that contributed to the overall failure of the system.
In a similar way, the tech of training auditors specifically is another area that lacks in 100% workability. To begin with, not enough Scientologists were trained as auditors, just a small percentage in spite of the fact that Hubbard said training gave 50% of the potential gains of Scientology (along with 50% from auditing). Per my observation, pcs who weren’t also auditor trained and experienced in applying the tech often ended up with a very limited understanding of Scientology basics.
That particular lack then lead to additional factors in the failure of the overall system, since many Scientologists were therefore misapplying the tech – and also became vulnerable to cult think.
There you go – my take, based on my own observations
Thank you Marildi. Very good read. I enjoyed it.
Nah, nix number three.
3. Scientology didn’t discover bio-ethics as claimed in FOT.
KG: “But these are relational questions not belief questions. Where have you been wrong about what you believe on Scientology?”
Oh – Geir never put it that way. He meant wrong about anything.
But that’s an interesting question. I’ll think about it and answer tomorrow because I’m getting ready for a birthday get-together today – and I’m already behind schedule! 🙂
Sounds great.
Marildi. “What are three places where you think Hubbard failed? He claims his system isn’t “perfect” so … where ARE THOSE imperfections?”
What exactly was your part in it?
“KG: List three times you were wrong!”
I have to confess that I was wrong today. While figuring a problem, I made a miscalculation. Re-checking my work it turned out that I really hadn’t. I was also wrong in this way twice before.
Ha ha ha!!! I’m also wrong that way a plenty ! And sometimes I’m not even aware of it until it’s too late….But let’s not lose hope: I have also moments of inspiration and get to be right about being wrong too!!
I meant I get to be right about being wrong ALSO.
Should’nt have usted the word too.
(The finest philospical details tend to get lost in the language)
Brother, being wrong about making mistakes is a terrible affliction! I feel your pain!
So wrong … it’s RIGHT!
I’m striving to be a better quality of wrong!
“Wrong” is a lot like the koan mu and actually an interpretation of its meaning. Some buddhist teachers (Robert Pirsig in “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance” think it is like this:
STUDENT: “Does a dog have a buddha nature?”
TEACHER: “Wrong.”
STUDENT: “Does a dog NOT have a buddha nature?”
TEACHER: “Wrong.”
You’re so fucking right!
It takes an artist to be right by being wrong, that is what I’m striving for.
“So wrong … it’s RIGHT!”
Like the curved universe, if you look out in one direction far enough, you’ll eventually see the back of your own head!
Philosophy will evolve into art if it ever flourishes.
Same goes for science and even religion.
I think you are right about that, Rafael.
This blog is the evidence
This blog is the evidence
Sorry double click mistake
Well, that is an interesting notion Rafael and it seems Geir agrees.
The Three Lenses Humans Typically Use (Per “The Structure of Religious Experience”)
Scientific: (Viewing through the Scientific Method)
Religious: (Viewing through a dogma or belief system)
Artistic: (Viewing through a creative lens.)
***
Religion cannot fully embrace Science and be true to itself, but it can be artistic.
Science cannot fully embrace religion and be true to itself, but it can be artistic.
Art can embrace Science and Religion and be true to itself.
***
Art Wins.
This blog is awesome and the community is cool.
This blog is awesome and it’s community is cool!
Not an “oops.” Said it twice cuz I wanted to!
Zen Pencils illustrates the Genius of Neil Gaiman and it fits this diversion from the topic. But I guess it isn’t a diversion. Art is about as “anti-borg” as you can get.
http://zenpencils.com/comic/50-neil-gaiman-make-good-art/
OMG, Kat – I had just read your post about the Buddha consciousness of a dog as a depiction of “wrong” and was about to post a reply to it. I was going to tell you that you should put it into cartoon form as that would increase both the humor and truth in it – and the art. Then it occurred to me that you should do that with all or at least many of your posts. But before I had a chance to post my reply, I saw the comment above with the link of someone doing that very thing. This is what they call synchronicity – a good sign for you!
Seriously, cartoons of your posts would make a wonderful collection that you could put into book form and publish on amazon.com (for free, in case you didn’t know that). Maybe some of them could even be put on t-shirts – such as the one about the Buddha dog and sell them to the Buddhist community. Or on pillows, or cups or whatever.
You could become rich and famous! 🙂
Thank you for the idea Marildi!
Sure! And don’t forget that I am a copy editor. 😀
Btw, I haven’t forgotten you other comments to me. I’m just super busy and have a limited amount of time for posting these days. I’ll get back to you, though.
I just learned that! I didn’t know. I need a copy editor actually …
“Art Wins.”
Like it.
Evidence for Art DRIVING Science. . .
Art wins!!!!!!!😃
“Same goes for science and even religion.”
I think that’s already true brother. The “Newton vs Leibniz” controversy over who invented calculus seems to on the one hand credit Newton as the inventor, yet teaches Leibniz’s version as it is more elegant (artful) and easy to understand.
Yes indeed brother😃
“You are an imperfect being, created by an imperfect being.” “We only wish to raise quality of life for all species.” “You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.”
For discussion, we should consider the elegant solution which is The Borg.
As a species, in the large picture, does The Borg qualify as an artform of Nature? As an artform of science-fiction? Or is art such a human abstraction that it cannot or should not be applied to Nature?
Good question.
“Or is art such a human abstraction that it cannot or should not be applied to Nature?”
My ego doesn’t fucking like that Chris. I have a bias to believe that the soul exists so it’s time to start the True Believers Algorithm as my cognitive dissonance is raging.
… ((CLEARS THROAT)) …
Chris, you POOR THING. How did you come to ask such silly questions? How can I help you see where you are wrong to even ask such a question? We all know here that the soul is eternal and c0-creates the universe with a multitude of souls. It’s a certainty. Now, how can I help you get on the right road again?
Now FORGET the question or we’ll go to the part where I attack your character, reasoning ability and ethics and go all “tough love” on you AND STILL IGNORE THE QUESTION.
Hehe, well, for those who admire Nature, The Borg are certainly an elegant solution. Scientology is not an elegant solution but rather an impotent fantasy role playing game.
As an ideology, scientology doesn’t really pack a punch. Islam, now THAT’S a Borg of ideologies. Scientology doesn’t really amount to a pimple on Islam’s ass, let alone The Borg.
It worked! I got you to change the topic so I can avoid the awkward question!
Every time! 🙂