Saturday is Terra Cognita day…
Platitudes, Bad Attitudes and Mother Issues
A while ago, Mike posted a letter from Pete Sokoloff imploring Santa Barbara and Ventura Scientologists to donate more toward their “ideal” org. Pete included the following quote:
“Anything for which the individual feels any misemotion—antagonism, anger, fear, grief, apathy—is something for which he has not accepted responsibility; and there is misemotion only when an individual refuses to accept responsibility in that sphere of action. He can control anything for which he has accepted the full responsibility. He is unable to control that for which he has not accepted responsibility.” L. Ron Hubbard, The Dianetic Auditor’s Bulletin, February 1952, CAUSE AND EFFECT.
Although he seems to include just enough kernels of truth to make me think the whole thing is true, this is another example of one of LRH’s completely unattainable platitudes. Maybe if I’d been Buddha or Gandhi in another lifetime I would have fully understood… But even then, he’s talking about more “control” than I’ve ever seen demonstrated.
Fire and Spit
Was the “misemotion” I felt for the people who lost their homes in the last wildfire due to refusing to “accept responsibility in that sphere of action”? Was I “unable to control” the fire and loss of homes because I hadn’t “accepted the full responsibility”? Was the little girl, who was abused by her uncle, grief-stricken because she hadn’t accepted responsibility? Because she’d refused to accept responsibility?
Scientologists salivate over this type of nonsense, believing they have the potential to reach such exalted states of existence. OT 7s probably think they’ll achieve this power on OT 8. OT8s, no doubt, think they’ll attain this ability on OT 9.
More Rhinestones
LRH’s Axioms of Scientology are littered with profundity.
Axiom 42: MEST (Matter, Energy, Space, Time) persists because it is a problem.
No. MEST is simply MEST. No more, no less.
My bike is MEST and it’s not a problem for me. I love riding my bike. I love my sharp kitchen knives. They’re MEST. Love the way they glide through tomatoes. Their keen edges are not a problem.
Then again, maybe MEST is a problem because I’ve refused to accept full responsibility for it.
LRH said the “public knows us by our MEST.” And since MEST is a problem, is he saying the public knows Scientology by their problems?
Axiom 32: Anything which is not directly observed tends to persist.
Since my whole world seems to be persisting, apparently I’m not directly observing any of it. If I really, really look at something, it will vanish? Or might vanish? Or has the potential to vanish. Or will it simply un-tend to persist?
You can play around with this one forever. I’ve heard people say LRH wasn’t talking about MEST, he was only referring to things in the theta universe, or facsimiles in the mind, or the emotional content of engrams. If this is so, he should have used a different vocabulary. He should have forgone the use of the word, “everything.” He should have spelled out exactly what he was talking about. Followed by a YouTube demonstration of MEST not persisting by direct observation.
Scientologists lap up this type of tripe, many believing they’ll attain some kind of lofty state in which they’ll actually be able to “as-is”—make disappear—anything—MEST, pictures in the mind, emotion, anything—by simply “observing” it.
By this logic, if they would simply directly observe their deserted orgs, the condition of emptiness would no longer persist.
Do, Re, Me, Fa…
LRH was no less obtuse in formulating his many “scales.” One of my favorites is The Valence Scale (from his book, Scientology 0-8, The Book of Basics):
I can control Mother
Hysterical effort to control Mother = psychosomatics
I can’t control Mother (takes no action at all)
(no comm with Mother)
Keeps others from handling Mother—“Don’t try to reason with Mother or you’ll get hurt!”
Protects Mother from everything
Tells people Mother is so good and aren’t we lucky to have her around
Deifies Mother
WTF! Sigmund would have had a field day with this one! Since he’s no longer around, though, can someone please explain this to me?
Last Words
For me, reading LRH’s overblown, unattainable proclamations were always a bit invalidating. Since I could never make complete sense out of these pearls of wisdom, I felt slightly stupid, as if I should have been able to understand what Ron was talking about. Since he was the smartest man on the planet, he would never have written anything not fully accessible to commoners, like me. If he wrote it, it must have made sense. It must have been right. But for some reason, my small brain just couldn’t grasp the profoundness of his insight.
Vast dictionaries-worth of misunderstood words accumulated over quadrillions of years will, no doubt, muddle a person’s mind.
Still not Declared,
Terra Cognita
TC, this was a great quote to pick for your weekly communique. I resonate with what many of the comments made. I, too, from the very beginning of my study of the Staff Statuses with star rate checkouts (and being a green $cilon with no study tech yet) made me think I just didn’t get it. Throughout my history, I thought something was wrong with me… maybe I had a major study bug. Yet, while possessing a high IQ, I had no problems studying and duplicating anything else I chose to study.
Thank goodness, I finally realized the gobbledygook was the problem and not me!
I had a couple of belly laughs reading this posting and some of the responses. Mainly because of how we human beings still contort ourselves into such agonizing positions, forever trying to find out the “right” way to be, have the “correct” view of the universe. I’ve come to see these efforts as the greatest tyranny ever imposed on anyone.
How about if we can just be who we are, feel what we feel and not have to explain it to anyone? Not have to show up in any particular way to ourselves or others – just show up the way we are in any given moment. It’s a radical thing to do. It may lose you friends and associates, but it will get you you.
Man-oh-man, this post has dredged up some (correct) emotions for me. I’m just going to reiterate this little gem here:
“He can control anything for which he has accepted the full responsibility. He is unable to control that for which he has not accepted responsibility.” Bullfukinshit!
LRH isn’t the only one spouting out this lie though. There are a ton of platitudes out there today about control. Think the right thoughts and exactly what you think appears. Umhum, and what about all those things that appear that you didn’t think of? Confirmation bias.
If you want to take that quote down to the most introverted level, self, yeah, maybe. If I don’t accept responsibility for the fact that I’m eating pizzas and nachos and a bucket of ice cream every couple of days, I’m definitely going to lose control of my weight, pants size and health. Any further than say, the tip of the nose, isn’t going to be controlled by taking responsibility for it. You can take responsibility all you want or possibly can to drive safely, maintain your vehicle, etc., but you won’t have an ounce of control over the guy who slams into you.
What gobbledygook!
Good article, Terra Cognita. Btw, I am sorry for having failed to acknowledge you a while ago about wanting (or rather agreeing) to get in touch with me. I was in the middle of a bunch of things and forgot to properly reply to you. My apologies. Yes, I’ll ask Mike for your email address, thank you.
The basic problem with LRH, IMHO, wasn’t his philosophical concepts as such, but his incredible tendency to make sweeping generalizations, and authoritarian-like assertions. Just too damn many , “The ‘ONLY’ reason for….”, or “Anything that so and so, is ‘ONLY’ caused by this and that, and blah, blah”.
He apparently wasn’t very fond of statements such as, “I believe that….”, or “In my experience, I’ve seen that….”. You know, the NORMAL statements that you hear from REAL researchers or philosophers, who ASSUME that their words are not to be taken as written-in-stone gospels, but ONLY as their opinions or hypothesis arrived at by empirical observations and/or actual research.
If instead of the sweeping statement he made in that beginning quote on “responsibility v/s ‘misemotion’ “, he would have said something like :
“Through my research I have been able to see a relationship between failing to assume responsibility for something in our lives, and the emotions of anger, blame, fear, sadness, etc, associated with it; and I have discovered that when we accept responsibility for the role that we played in our conflicts in life, those emotions tend to disappear and are replaced by a relaxed and decisive frame of mind which makes life easier and more happy” (or any similar statement),
It wouldn’t have sounded so full of contradictions. I believe that most of us would agree on the above as stated. Sadly enough, I believe that what LRH really wanted to say in that “responsibility v/s misemotion” quote, was what I just wrote above.
His basic flaws were : Too many generalizations, opinions stated as unquestionable “facts”, lazy research (studying a few cases or even just himself, and pretending this applied to EVERYBODY), and his biggest flaw, EXAGGERATION. A brilliant mind indeed, self-sabotaged by his own delusions of grandeur.
Hi Thetaclear. “The basic problem with LRH, IMHO, wasn’t his philosophical concepts as such, but his incredible tendency to make sweeping generalizations, and authoritarian-like assertions. Just too damn many , “The ‘ONLY’ reason for….”, or “Anything that so and so, is ‘ONLY’ caused by this and that, and blah, blah”.
Precisely!
And no need to apologize. We’re all busy. And I’m almost embarrassed to admit I’m just getting over a cold–obviously a carry-over from my days inside when such conditions meant PTSness, a connection to an SP, and overts and withholds hanging over my head.
They Psychiatrist Question of the Ages: WHY do YOU hate your moither????
Just my take. MIs-emotion would be the wrong emotion for the circumstance….. laughing about a terrible car crash would be the wrong emotion. Crying uncontrollably because a picture is crookedly hung. Just sayin’. Seems like to me anyway. The quote used by Pete implies that he thinks ALL emotion is mis-emotion. I’m certainly not caring about the santa B and Ventura not having their new digs, and I don’t think anyone else is either.
Here is my personal favorite, this definition of POWER:
“THE POWER (defined as light-year kilotons per microsecond) OF A THETAN IS MEASURED IN BY NOTHING ELSE THAN THE DISTANCE (defined as spherical spatial length) AROUND HIM IN HIS ENVIRONMENT THAT HE CAN CONTROL. That is the power of a thetan; the totality of it, believe it or not.”
This gibberish definition seems to be composed of words that sound “sciencey”. I think of a wide-eyed, breathless 9-year-old, arms stretched far, saying that sentence.
If you subtract all the lofty wordage, basically it’s saying, the more stuff you can do around you, the more powerful you are. Ok, duh. But light-year kilotons per microsecond??
That quote was from an HCOB, OT MAXIMS, where I first saw it. I recall it being one of the first things I’d read by LRH that I allowed myself to unequivocally disagree with, rather than think I had some kind of misunderstood word or false data, blah blah.
So thanks LRH, for providing me with that little break in the mental armor I’d created for myself on the subject of Scientology.
Oh yeah, John Doe – good one.
Yep!
“Light year kilotons per microsecond.” Hilarious, and indicative of the fact that he just made shit up on the fly from scraps of science he’d skimmed in the newspaper. It’s why those without a deep understanding of science think he was “brilliant.”
One wonders just where on the emotional tone scale Hubbard would have placed himself. He certainly ended in misery!
He was in hiding. Hiding is pretty low.
Jesus H. Xenu, every time I look at the profound words of L. Ron Hubbard, I feel the urge to shower. What absurd snake oil that piece of shit was selling to the slack jawed yokels.
Realizing, through reading the comments, that the KRC triangle is bullshit too. Another piece of “tech” debunked.
I was very good at manipulating how these generalities “could” work, but always had to twist what was actually written; explaining it away.
Great post, TC – and great comments.
Excellent post TC.
I am guilty of maybe subconsciously hanging on to too much Scientology false data because of emotional buy-in.
Posts like these and hopefully many more to follow, act as a sort of false data stripping helping people like me to reintegrate in the real world.
I wonder if “false data stripping” is scio-speak or has a King’s English translation in the real world. Obviously examining data to determine fact from false or accurate from inaccurate has value.
Many words and terms express concepts which is a shorthand for lengthy descriptions. I don’t recall how many words and terms are in the scn technical dictionary, maybe a thousand or more. Some scio-speak is descriptive or even fun like “a problems case” or “buttered all over the universe.”
False data stripping is 100% scio-speak. Though there’s nothing wrong with stripping away false data, there is something wrong with the way LRH applied this concept. If I recall, I wrote about this subject some months ago.
Thanks Terra – False data stripping wasn’t a scn concept I carried forward in my mind which needed unscrambling although there were certainly a few others! Maybe sometime Mike will add Terra Cognita to his categories list.
I only started reexamining my scn experience of almost 40 years ago after watching Going Clear. I found reading Mark Rathbun’s “Deconstructing Scientology” series of posts covered many of the technical aspects of scn and brought up several un-examined concepts I had carried forward. Your essays do likewise. Thanks for your good work.
Richard, thanks for the reminder. I followed his blog back then. Here’s an important post on the subject, in case anyone wants to read it:
https://markrathbun.blog/2013/12/20/deconstructing-scientology/
On Booktv which appears on C-Span I watched a neuroscientist discuss her book. She suggested that in the often hostile world of modern communication introducing children to various conceptual words would be beneficial. What came to mind for me was evaluation and invalidation which would be beneficial concepts for a young person to understand.
Richard, you may never see this. I agree somewhat, but I’ve found there are words that already existed that define these things. “Evaluation” is a sticky one for me. Although I understand the concept of LRH’s definition, it just doesn’t fit into everyday life using that particular word, IMO, of course. Understanding the concept of “evaluation” by LRH’s definition could be beneficial. I taught my girls that concept using the word “judge” – as in your friends may judge your actions or your thoughts or your decisions, but they’re not living your life or walking in your shoes, so they don’t fully understand, so take their judgment with a grain of salt. Stuff like that. The judgment, of course, comes after the evaluation (by LRH’s definition) but nobody on earth that’s not be in the slurch uses “evaluation” that way.
Hi T-Marie – I’m here – lol – a brief reply on a back topic.
I was thinking about kids in internet chat sessions. The concept of bullying has been getting discussion. A conceptual understanding of invalidation and, as you say, judging would help a kid being bullied to have some mental defense and understanding of what was going on. Also as you say, evaluation in the scn sense is telling a person what to think about his or her case in session which would be fuzzy in the internet example. Good for you on providing guidance for your girls!
Hi Richard. Glad you saw that. I agree, an understanding of invalidation is definitely valuable. 🙂
Ugh! I guess I’m not taking responsibility for that first quote pissing me off big time.
I like these quotes on responsibility from different viewpoints of many people:
https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/responsibility.html
that thing about “mother!” Somewhat attributable to the OT8 Wasband…except: NEVER defies: “mother!.”
I can’t recall Hubbard *ever* mentioning his mother. Or father. Did he “as is” them? As he did his second wife? 🙂
I believe that they are mentioned, or at least referred to, in his “Affirmations” document from the 1940s that’s available on the Internet. Something along the lines of “You don’t hate them, because they meant well,” not far from him telling himself that masturbation isn’t evil but can provide relief — I’m citing from dim memory.
And then all the harping, harping, harping in Dianetics about women trying to cause abortions and having big fights with their husbands, producing pre-natal engrams; and of course, LRH’s lifelong desire to be a successful USN officer like his dad (although Dad was I think more a payroll-and-accounting officer, not a ship’s officer), to the extent of creating his own half-ass navy in the 1960s and appointing himself as Commodore.
So I’ve often wished we knew more, much more, about WHAT THE HELL was going on in the Hubbard household a century ago? Clearly it began the process of LRH being all screwed up on the inside.
Terra, permit me please to present not so much really a devil’s advocate response to your essay, but another viewpoint. (though I will also add at the end my response to Pete Sokoloff’s bullshit intention in presenting the quote)
Simply put, I look at the presented LRH statements somewhat differently. To wit:
I do not look at the LRH ideas about responsibility in actual practice as either an absolute/extreme or as a black and white issue (you either take full responsibility or you take no responsibility), but as a “sliding scale” you might say, or a gradient or graduated scale.
That is to say, to use an LRH definition, when I elect myself MORE cause in any area, I do feel better about that area of life, less upset about it and more able to be effective in that area of life. That has been my experience in “trying out” this idea, putting it into practice (and it hasn’t been easy much of the time) since I got into Scientology in 1970.
If one assumes the absolute, that as a spiritual being, one helped create and thus agreed to the MEST universe, yes, from THAT point, I imagine one could be total cause over MEST. But as soon as one even agrees to operate in a body, one certainly CAANOT be full cause as every human body not only ages as a matter of course and at some point begins to deteriorate, but also needs to be fed, have sleep and “use the toilet.” I don’t care how much responsibility a person in a body takes, IN a body, one will not be full cause over that body. BUT any one of us can take MORE responsibility for our bodies and feel better about them and be more effective in their care.
Re: misemotion and responsibility. Again, a SLIDING SCALE. If you hear of an earthquake and thousands dying, and you feel tremendous sadness about this, you can possibly feel BETTER (not happy of course) if you decide you want to take responsibility and maybe contribute to helping the survivors of said earthquake. Just an example.
Re: MEST being a problem. Well, in Scientology theory (and this does indicate to me) the main reason a being decides to have a body and play the MEST game is to HAVE these problems and a game. No problems, no game, no interest, no potential fun. So MEST persists out of this desire to have some problems/games.
Anyway, just some thoughts. I could comment on everything you said, but this is already getting too long for one comment I think.
*NOW, re: the way Sokoloff is USING the quote. Of course, he is simply, as is the usual method, of pushing Scientologists’ guilt buttons, that if they do not continue to fork over their cash and sink more into debt to “help the fourth dynamic”, that they are not taking the responsibility for the planet they have committed themselves to do as Scientologist. Disgusting, insulting, and with the intention of putting people AT effect, the exact opposite of helping them to cause.
**Yeah, you know, I do in fact take a certain measure of responsibility for being a declared “SP.” Had I not been too open posting on Marty’s blog, I would have remained under the radar and presumably a hidden “in good standing” Scientologist. But alas, I do take responsibility for my actions of not remaining hidden enough.
So, if my son dies or Mother of Father dies. Or if a drunk driver almost kills me — it’s my responsibility and my fault because it happened? That’s absurd.
Uhm … no … did I say or intimate that?
Joe…
I’m sorry if I misread your post. I skimmed through it and it seemed you were insinuating that people who don’t take responsibility are at fault for all things that happen to them.
That’s a theory that’s utterly absurd to me. But if you weren’t saying that, I’m sorry. No hard feelings.
Joe: Your viewpoints are always welcome.
Thank you Terra.
Joe, I see you are taking the first step to coming out from under the mind control of Hubbard. You are having to TWIST what he wrote in order to make “sense” of it. Similar to another on this blog redefining the word “life” in Hubbard’s “cause over life” to mean ONLY BT’s. That is a first step. Congrats.
Wow. I wish I could understand why people believe this. There is no earthly or heavenly way any of this makes sense.
Exactly. People are obviously free to believe what they wish. But to think that bad or negative things happen because we don’t take “responsibility” for them, I n my book is simply asinine. Bad and awful things will always happen no matter what we do. That’s just reality.
Another mis-emotion is when you are smiling, or put on a happy, when you are anything but smiling or happy.
Like when there is some guy gone crazy (became a terrorist) and did what ever horrific act, and then the media go and interview his family, friends and neighbours and ask what kind of guy he was, and they say he was always such a nice guy, always happy, you would never think there was any problem, or something to that effect.
That is mis -emotion in the extreme.
But mis-emotion is very common. Actually most people put on a smiling face, every day, when actually they are angry, pissed off, sad, depressed, or guilty or what ever, …….anything but happy.
That is also called a valence, or social veneer.
Dio
There is no such thing as “mis-emotion;” just one of Hubbard’s bullshit terms. We feel what we feel; how we deal with it is another matter and totally up to us.
By way of addendum: I’m currently reading “The Enchiridion” of the stoic philosopher, Epictetus. A lot of small gems in this work, things to contemplate on a daily basis. The Stoics addressed these issues 2,000 years ago. It doesn’t appear Hubbard every studied them.
“Anything for which the individual feels any misemotion—antagonism, anger, fear, grief, apathy—is something for which he has not accepted responsibility; and there is misemotion only when an individual refuses to accept responsibility in that sphere of action. He can control anything for which he has accepted the full responsibility. He is unable to control that for which he has not accepted responsibility.” L. Ron Hubbard, The Dianetic Auditor’s Bulletin, February 1952, CAUSE AND EFFECT.
I read this twice. There is something I agree with him on. I agree that having an attitude of excellence and fearlessness is in fact a personality trait of the successful.
I think where Ron becomes deviant, below hate on the tone scale is sympathy, he seeks to punish out of people, weaknesses. Or perceived weaknesses.
Regimented thought and threats of mental and emotional punishment he used to try to make supermen.
The irony, or hypocricy is: Hubbard was an emotional crazy loon by other people’s personal accounts.
There Winskey and Theta Clear….. feel better lol! You guys rock.
Oh sorry, thanks Terra. I really enjoyed your essay.
Brian: I enjoyed your essay the other day, too. Alas, my responsibility level had fallen and I had a cold and thus didn’t respond.
One of the things that always bugged me about LRH was frequently having to look at his pronouncements from viewpoints other than those that were direct and simple in order to understand what he was trying to convey. These days, I’m not willing to go through the mental gymnastics to get what he was talking about.
I simply don’t believe that man “can control anything for which he has accepted the full responsibility.” I just see too much in the world that can’t be controlled no matter one’s level of responsibility. Some things, yes. But “anything?” I’m not buying it.
At any rate, now that I’m out, I don’t have to pretend to understand what he was saying. I don’t have to worry about MUs or floating needles at the Examiner.
Yes, I get what you mean. Hope you are well after your cold 🙂
“There Winskey and Theta Clear….. feel better lol! You guys rock.”
🙂
Terra, my brain is smaller than yours. I mean, I’m the guy who, during the 70s and 80s, thought Boogle Fever was a nose disease. Dense is as dense does…
OSD: I’m sorry, but I’ve scanned both our brains and mine weighs 2.3 ounces less than yours.
😀
in addition to your post…. My current reading material is soothing
Thomas Jefferson:
I am satisfied, and sufficiently occupied with the things which are, without tormenting or troubling myself about those which may indeed be, but of which I have no evidence.
……….
Secretfornow: Nice quote. My sentiments exactly.
Sure sounds like Jefferson knew his Epictetus! He was fluent in Latin, Greek and the classics so it’s very likely he did.
This is dangerous, rhetoric. That’s the only thing Scientology does. Buyer,beware.
Do Re Mi Fa Valence Scale: I not an ex, but that sounds to me like a two year old testing self autonomy and mommy’s boundaries and patience. That’s where the term The Terrible Twos comes from. It reeks of the suppressed and COVERT anger LRH had for women, specifically his mommy. It seems he never out-grew his Terrible Twos and his anger at mommy. He built a ‘religion’ to protect himself from his fear of women. And he covertly denigrates women by making it OK to use ’em and lose ’em. Hell, he does that with all scientologists, unless one is capable of buying salvation from that abuse. But when the money is gone, look out. Scientology is a despicable ‘religion’. Oops, I mean business. Oh make that ‘cult’. A despicable cult.
You nailed it, K Katzen; thank you. Hubbard treated all the women in his life abominably; all of them.
Great article TC –
Re Spit and Fire – your emotions regarding a devastating fire or an abused child would not technically be ‘mis-emotion’ because (I’m hoping!) Scn would consider those to be ‘appropriate to the situation’ as per their definition of ‘mis-emotion’ …
“mis-emotion: irrational or inappropriate emotion. It is a coined word taken from mis- (wrong) + emotion. To say that a person was mis-emotional would indicate that the person did not display the emotion called for by the actual circumstances of the situation. Being mis-emotional would be synonymous with being irrational. One can fairly judge the rationality of any individual by the correctness of the emotion he displays in a given set of circumstances. To be joyful and happy when circumstances call for joy and happiness would be rational. To display grief without sufficient present time cause would be irrational.” (ref Scn glossary)
But this made-up Scn word just leads to more control Who is anyone to judge another’s emotions or to decide what is ‘appropriate’? Pete Sokoloff and all the others conditioned to think this way like to throw these silly quotes around like a whip to bash people (‘the public’) into doing what they want them to – mainly to give them money.
FWIW! On staff, you were considered misemotional if you reacted in to anything with any emotion other than enthusiasm. No case on post was strictly enforced, meaning you could not show upset. The day my grandma died, I was severely reprimanded by my senior because I did not act properly enthusiastic that afternoon.
As a Sea Org member, even when not dealing with the public, there was never a time you could let down your guard and feel bad. The rule was was hide your real emotional state, pretend you’re happy always. If you weren’t pretending to be happy, you were basically considered misemotional.
Valerie: Ah, yes. No case on post! Except if you were an executive. Then you could scream and yell all you wanted.
Valerie & Terra Cognita – EXACTLY!
Pretend, Pretend, Pretend, unless, of course, you’re an executive, then you have permission to be a completely suppressive jerk.
White Light, what you wrote was supposed to be true, but look at the way it’s written. It’s written as though those emotions ARE misemotions and in my experience, any display of those emotions, for any reason, was treated as misemotions. Just saying.
Yes spot on! That’s what I was trying to say myself – thanks for clarifying 🙂
Garbalegook, wrapped in unknown nomenclature, surrounded by idiotic mumble gumble, barfed out by a narcassistic being pretending to be knowledgeable.
Terra,
Your words are always like a breath of fresh air in a stinky dungeon.
RE: def of mis-emotion:
Scn definitions of mis -emotion are wrong.
Mis-emotion means to put the wrong emotion on someone’s hardship or adversity.
Like laughing at someone when he breaks a leg or his house burns down, etc..
This is a social aberration. Lots of low theta, low toned people do this.
It is a form of insanity.
Dio
Correct Dio. Hubbard constantly expressed the “wrong” emotion towards others as he was insane.
Ah yes, mis-emotion. I went around and around with course sups, qual, and word clearers on this one. (I was a word clearer, and super literate) many times. I accepted that mis-emotion is any emotion inappropriate for the event or scene. Enthusaism at the twin towers bombing, for example, or grief at seeing sunrise.
To blanket any emotion from 2.0 (hostility) on down as misemotion is a generality and a lie. So, around and around I went with the pedantic twits. I FNed stating ‘I damn well know what misemotion means!” so they backed off.
Sigh
Yep Jim, you truly do know the fact on misemotion. Agree totally.
Jim: “Mis-emotion” and “misemotion” can be confusing. So why couldn’t LRH simply have said “inappropriate emotion?” Why did he have to make up a new word(s). In his above quote about responsibility, I thought he was talking about emotions below 2.0 and not “inappropriate emotions.” But that’s just me.
Around and around we go.
TC At least we can discuss words, their meanings, and nuances (gradients). We can strive to view from the other’s viewpoint, and even learn a bit. We have lots of freedom’s that active Scientologists do not.
Inside the bubble there was/is no latitude, longitude, or sanity-tude: WHAT DID RON SAY (WRITE). End of discussion, end of thinking.
Another clash I had word clearing in the course room was that I would go though all of the listed meanings of a word in my big dictionaries. I got told I was ‘slowing’ the students. ‘Just clear the relevant meaning in the dictionary— the one that Ron meant in the bulletin.’
“Vast dictionaries-worth of misunderstood words accumulated over quadrillions of years will, no doubt, muddle a person’s mind.”
Now, what language were those misunderstood words in? With trillions of years to play with, your thetan must have trillions of languages to sort out. That will be 5 million dollars to rid you of all these ‘misunderstoods’. But today only, you get a discount of 1 million, if you pay for the whole set by 2pm. Why yes, it is a Thursday.
Just more word salad to confuse the mark. Then swoop in and sell something to fix that ‘misunderstood’. Business is business, and $cientology is the business of confusion.
What in Xenu’s name is a “misemotion”? Certain emotions are ‘bad’? Certain emotions you’re not allowed to have? I suppose so, if you’re in a cult and the cult leader needs to keep you under his control.
So he creates this new word ‘misemotion’ to label and denigrate those emotions which might cause you to feel dissatisfied, fearful of what’s being loaded onto you, angry at what you see going on around you or grieving for what’s been lost due to the leader’s broken promises. Nowhere in the entire literature of psychology, psychotherapy or psychiatry does this silly word occur. An entirely made up piece of Hubbardian NewSpeak.
Scientologists! Embrace your ‘mis-emotions’. Like your doubts, they are valid and need to be listened to.
Yep.
“I can control Mother
Hysterical effort to control Mother = psychosomatics
I can’t control Mother (takes no action at all)
(no comm with Mother)
Keeps others from handling Mother—“Don’t try to reason with Mother or you’ll get hurt!”
Protects Mother from everything
Tells people Mother is so good and aren’t we lucky to have her around
Deifies Mother”
I could word clear all day and still not make sense of this.
Hi ya Terra!
Yep… you’ve sure got a propensity for opening cans of worms. But it is Scientology you’re talking about, so that result is as expected to occur as naturally as sunrise. I drank of that “wisdom” for decades… and while some of it (for me anyway) I found is an interesting way of viewing things, it cannot be stated in strongly enough emphasized words – Hubbard was the biggest hypocrite every to step onto a sea going vessel or don a uniform of any description! If the above Hubbard quote re Cause & Effect 1952 was true in any sense of the word truth he was the biggest & most misemotional son of a bitch that ever expected to be called sir. His treatment of his shipmates and the policy he devised for his followers reeks of despotic dominance as its goal, yet is camouflaged well within the supposed solutions for all of mankind’s problems. His own personal version and display of responsibility is disgusting and criminal, & by his own definitions no less!
Anyone, me included who ever took Scientology seriously took a long walk on a very short gangplank.
The one point Hubbard never had a suitable response or exchange for was the human condition itself, you know… things like love, loyalty, generosity and sense of purpose etc. They were all played upon and replaced with God like lies of doom and gloom if you don’t tow the line, Hubbard’s way. You either hand over your money or your life, or both. He turned out to be a highwayman and it flourished his organisation by using the mind as a weapon by actual practice! Miscavige just took it to new levels of arrogance and stupidity.
But overall, when the point arrived within organised Scientology that a person couldn’t come and go as they pleased or wasn’t permitted to speak their own mind without fear of punishment or retaliation, a demarcation line was drawn between sanity and insanity. Organised Scientology is insane and gets worse by the day!
Well done Terra, I hope you’ve come to terms with the self invalidation built into Scientology – it was designed to make you feel that way if you study it or apply it per the Church’s doctrines – it fills their coffers and mans their ranks.
I Yawnalot: Agree with all your points.
Lucky for me, my memory (and cynicism) was such that the self invalidation never lasted once I got off course for the day.
You are not alone in getting the invalidated feeling because you couldn’t readily understand. That’s one of the reliefs that occurs coming off the Scientology addiction. I think much of LRHs babble came from drug highs. The man desperately needed help with his mind and he knew it. To then foist his solution off on others for money is criminal. Thanks for your articles. I’m happy to see so many finally able to understand where LRH was coming from. He was certainly not ‘Man’s best friend’ as I’d thought for 40 years. Those years are starting to pay off in more wisdom then LRH ever had so I win after all. We are all fortunate to live in this interesting days of internet and drones. Some days I feel like those 40 years were just boot camp. Now I enjoy freedom because I know what its like to have it little by little taken away to the point I not only could not say what I wanted I even stopped my self from thinking certain ways – I controlled my own thoughts. Now I’m able to use that knowledge that it can be done to assist in other thoughts I chose to control. Big difference. Happy weekend all 🙂
$cn axiom numero uno (also known as the cult’s “prime directive”): “Your money is our money, so give it up…and NO nattering either!”
What? No Axiom 0?
Why does the story of the emperor’s new clothes always pop into my mind when I read this ridicuous tripe? MEST exists because it’s (‘they’re’ for the sake of good grammar) a problem; Really? The more I think about that sentence the stupider it sounds. Hey, I’m no physicist and an algebra drop-out, but, WTF? There’s nothing else BUT matter, energy space and time, so existence itself is a problem? Okay; life is hard sometimes, but matter, energy space and time are what we got. I get the sense that Hubbard and his devotees think of MEST as something negative – as opposed the spiritual entities (thetans?) which they presume themselves be. But a “spiritual entity” is still a form of energy is it not? As I said, I’m no Einstein; tell me if I’m missing something here.
Thoughtless me; I forgot to say ‘thank you’, Terra Incognita. I really appreciate your contributions here.
Bixntram: “The more I think about that sentence the stupider it sounds.” Yep. I’m with you. Mest is mest. It can be problematic at times. It can be a source of tremendous joy.
Thanks for this article. It’s pretty great.
I find it helpful to have these posts which directly quote Hubbard and illustrate the scope of the lies.
Probably one of the strongest things that kept me fully in through all the various difficulties one has as a staff member and a public as well, was my bedrock certainty that Hubbard knew what he was talking about, that he was 100 percent right always, and I just needed to study, apply, and keep trying until I was able to fully assimilate it as my own and thus gain further certainty and ability.
The loftiness of some of his writings simply inspired me to try harder, made me more in awe of his ability to precisely lay out such bedrock truths, blanket statements that could solve all the world’s problems.
I was thankful for these things, even if I fell short of the abilities described, even if I quailed at the scope of what I needed to accomplish – how far those bootstraps needed pulling up – I found security in such a profound understanding of existence.
………
Often it seemed that what he said didn’t really work, and where was the exact path to achieve this ability? I wasn’t seeing it around me in the OTs yet, nor had I found it for myself – but even that just served to make me realize how far I had to go, and how far he had traveled in his understanding and ability.
……..
Now I’m just gobsmacked by the idea that I worshiped a pasty faced, fat old balding foul toothed lying braggart, and gave him so much of my life.
It’s good to be free of that.
Thanks for your articles.
secretfornow: We must have twinned in the course room. I had much the same experience as you. It is good to be free.
Interesting to me…. that even a little innocuous reply such as yours … opens a minefield.
I was going to reply about twinning and drilling, and how if we had done so, you would have liked me as a coach. I did a good job and was always appreciated by both sups and students. In addition to other things, I am sup trained and loved suping, did a great job. Love helping folks really ‘get it’. I never backed down, was tough and exacting but with high granting of beingness – I had a great needle and so was great on meter drills, I got people through the dating drills, I FN like crazy, could coach so that they could get instant reads, and so on.
These are skills I worked to achieve and I was pleased to have them, they were part of who I was. These are things that I liked about myself.
So the first thing that comes to mind is all of that – these are good things to bond over.
Except that now all of that is an abomination and anathema to me. It was a waste of time, I brainwashed myself and helped to brainwash others. There is no pride, glory, satisfaction, strength, goodness or value in any of my actions.
This is what is true for me now. It was all a steaming pile of poo, and thus all of my accomplishments, “products”, fond memories, and glory days are poison.
You can’t pick and choose. You can’t say that you were just following orders. If you were a good SS guard, there’s no point in recalling fondly how skillfully you herded your charges to the gas chamber.
At this point, for me, those 40ish years are simply blacked out. Something to get over and atone for and someday forgive myself for. I don’t envision anything for a scrap book.
I’m holding onto the time before, and working to breathe and enjoy the present, and plan nice things for tomorrow.
………
Yep. We mighta drilled together. Didja get an instant read?
To hell with that! Let’s BBQ!
BBQ? Anytime!
How did I never see the Valence scale? Crap, I did read the basics. I read that book. I filled out the little busy-work proof that I read it. Clearly the cognitive dissonance was vibrating at such a high level that it vanished for me while I was reading it. Could this be Axiom 32 in action?
May I tell you that I had a physical reaction to your last words? Did you crawl into my mind while writing this muddled-mind-of-lrh-platitudinous article?
Back in the day of kool-aid drinking, I madly looked up words, demoed, and just valiantly tried to understand the axioms. Once in a while I’d have a “win” and understand something better. But if I’m honest it was never right on the money of what he was saying, because I didn’t get it. No how no way. And I felt less than.
Just now, I remembered that feeling. A belittled feeling that I hitched to myself. I did that to myself. I put this “knowledge” above me in value. If I didn’t get it, it was my fault. Wow, tearing up here sharing this. But I’m OK. I’m actually so relieved to remember that I decided that I was not enlightened enough to grasp it. It made me doggedly claw my way up the bridge while credit cards creaked, I feared for my marriage, and we both worked flat out to not fall flat on our faces so I could move up the bridge.
I didn’t ask myself at each level gained, “do I understand the axioms now? Maybe just a few of them? Are my thetan eyes opened up more? Do I see beyond sight?”
I do wish I had asked myself, because my pretender status only heightened as others soared while I plodded and “didn’t get it.”
For the record my valences are just fine…I love my mother and appreciate her and like her too.
If you ever run out of things to write about Terra, please pick a couple other Axioms, this was a rejuvenating read.
Clearly: Your marriage was one thing you never had to worry about.
Just want to say I’m very touched by your post, Cleary. That horror story you went through. Thank God, you’re free now. Thanks for sharing here.
Thanks Terra for illuminating this bullshit. A HUGE percentage of the crap L. Wrong wrote was of this type. The scam was to take NORMAL human behaviour and set it as aberrant where only scamology could “fix” you by participating in dehumanizing “auditing”. This was the majority of the trap. Since it was COMPLETE bullshit one would NEVER “get better” and thus the 2nd stage of the trap was sprung (people who don’t get “better” under auditing are labelled as MAJOR criminals. Thus you just push the cult member into the mud and they trudge along thinking everyone else is gaining super human abilities and spiritual gains and you are the lone, criminal exception.
Excellent article Terra. You hit the nail on the head with this statement, towards the end “Since I could never make complete sense out of these pearls of wisdom, I felt slightly stupid, as if I should have been able to understand what Ron was talking about.” That was my view when I tried to read LRH’s word salads.
The viewpoint of the sheep is that LRH is Source and basically a God in their minds. Everything he wrote was absolutely correct so if one didn’t understand it, it was the readers fault NOT that LRH was just blabbering away with vague sounding concepts, trying to appear as if he had some inside wisdom to life. If LRH had only written “Blah Blah Blah…” the sheep would read it and have VGI’s and a floating TA at the examiner.
You know TC, I think I’m in love….
Thump, thump beateth my heart.
At the end of the day, it’s all just another control mechanism. For example if Leah Remini (you go girl!) feels “misemotion” at the abuses of the COS it was because she had refused to accept responsibility. Sooooo what’s a girl to do but start a show where she can expose these abuses? According to LRH it’s the only way she can handle the ,misemotion”. Oops!
BTW misemotion is really a stupid word. In the bubble, the requirement is to feel nothing and pretend fake happiness at all times. Any feeling is classified as misemotion. In the real world, we are allowed the healthy option of feeling what we feel.
Yep Valerie. We had to be 4.0 or above at all times. Ha!!!!!!
4.0? What are you talking about, T? A good Scientologist has to be at 20.0, Action! (So they can make piles of money to spend on the Bridge.)
Oh gawd no, Terra Cognita. I was just waaaaaaaaay too low-toned for that! 😉
All good points Snake TG.
Terra,
Sea org talks at tone 40.
Dio
Great example of the consequences of Leah feeling “misemotion.” So true.