This Facebook post highlights something important about Scientology. The incomprehensible code language that scientologists speak.
To a non-cult member I am sure this is virtual gibberish: 2D, postulates, flows, beingness and the whole idea of a “liability formula” and repair of past ethics are just meaningless terms and concepts.
This does two things — it reinforces the “us against them” construct that is a foundation of all cults, keeping the members in the mind prison because the outside world (wogs) don’t understand them.
And…
It allows them to define things in their own way.
And this posting illustrates perhaps the most insidious part of this. Scientologists categorize all unethical sexual behavior as “out-2D” (2D means 2nd Dynamic which is defined in scientology as the urge towards survival through sex and families). If someone is a rapist they are “aberrated on the 2D” as a more correct and precise “technical term”. The accusations of rape made against Danny Masterson were dismissed as “he needs to raise his confront on the 2D” and he needs “his aberrations handled.” Normal, “wog” terminology is rarely, if ever, used. Children raised in scientology don’t even understand the term “rape” and “pedophilia”. It is a way of covering up crimes by redefining them in scientology terms — and of course, scientology has the only solution to “handle the problem.”
This is a characteristic of all cults — but I do believe L. Ron Hubbard perfected the art. He talked a lot about “definitions” and spoke of the work of Alfred Korzybski and his theories about general semantics and the relationship between reality and language.
Of this there can be no argument — scientology has a highly refined and extensive nomenclature that is extremely difficult for outsiders to grasp and it sets scientologists apart from the non-scientologists more than any other characteristic they have in common. Even today, I still struggle not to think and use scientology terms. It is so ingrained it is perhaps the hardest thing to shake. Sometimes I am still unsure if a term is “scientologese” or regular english — and even if it is regular english, whether it has a differently shaded meaning in scientology (like “natter”)…
It’s a fascinating subject, and people much smarter than I have written extensively about it. This Facebook post “triggered” me to comment about it.
Mike,
Has it ever occurred to you the parallels between the true workings of Scientology, especially post LRH, and another dystopian novel, The Lord of the Flies by William Golding?
Regards as always,
Yes, I have recommended Lord of the Flies previously on this blog. It was one of the books I read when I left the Sea Org. The mindset of the characters in that book describes the denizens of The Hole to a “T”…
jWell…(deep breath),
I have to tell you; I read this and agree with everything this woman has communicated about what a viable man-woman relationship needs to be and what each partner has to do in order to create a viable man-woman partnership (aka in Scientology a “2D”)
But I was in and I know the cult lingo and I understand what she said and happen to agree with what she said.
OK, now that I’ve admitted THAT, with regard to CONTENT, I can tell you that all the points that Mike made about CONTEXT, in other words, not WHAT was communicated, but HOW, are points with which I agree also.
Cult language is wildly frustrating and annoying when you don’t understand it. It drove me wild for YEARS. Coming to understand it IS very nearly learning another language.
If someone would translate what this Clam has written into plain English I would bet money that most people would read her meanings and say, “Oh, yeah. That makes sense.”
As it stands, reading what is gibberish to them is just going to piss just about everyone off except for a tiny group of Still ins or Exes who will either agree or disagree with it.
I don’t think we should go too crazy about words though. Every profession has its lingo – medicine, law, real estate, etc. Every religion has its lingo too, though nowhere near the extent that Scientology has its own lingo! It really is another language and after you learn it, like Mike says, you start THINKING in it, and its a hard habit to break.
Interesting feedback on Danny Masterson as far as the COS lingo goes:
“he needs to raise his confront on the 2D” and he needs “his aberrations handled.” …
A rather large kitchen knife might handle his “aberrations”
I find it mind blowing that Harvey W. is in court for some of the same type crimes Danny Masterson committed yet…….Danny still hasn’t faced the music…
Ballet Lady I agree with you, “I find it mind blowing that Harvey W. is in court for some of the same type crimes Danny Masterson committed yet…….Danny still hasn’t faced the music…” Ditto for Bill Cosby. He used the rape drug to knock them out and then raped them. That’s what Danny did too. So why isn’t Danny even charged with any of it? DA Lacey is why. She is despicable and should be voted out of office.
Again, about that “success”™: I’ve had 2marriages. The first was only a couple of years after leaving Flog and was while I was too wrapped up in the ‘truths’ of the cult. It was an unmitigated catastrophe, a true ‘learning experience’. The second one was more based in reality and has been heaven for 28 years.
Re-reading that “success story”®, I believe the best advice I could give to her is to RUN! That relationship’s not going to last.She and he have to work it out together. I once had one of those one-sided relationships. As we went to couple’s counselling to try to get it back on the rails, the therapist, a woman, eventually kept asking me what *I* wanted, as me trying to figure out what the so-called wife wanted was never going to work, as she wasn’t aware enough to know what she was feeling; all figure-figure and calculating.
Jere,
What you’re saying, i.e., that “she and he have to work it out together” IS what she’s saying.
Just saying 🙂
Aqua, I didn’t read it as he and she working together, but I heard her focussing on her having to create HIS 2D as well as hers, her making *everything* “go right” from her position. The impossibility of that is something I understand from my 1st “marriage” where I had to guess at what she needed/wanted as she couldn’t/wouldn’t talk to me about such things; ‘Twas frustrating, of course, and ultimately deadly for the relationship —such as it was. As I was still a good scientologist at that time, I took responsibility for it ALL; I just couldn’t DO it all; it’s impossible. AS IF I could guess, with little or no data, what she needed/wanted from me. It was all so similar to scientology. For all their lip service to communication, scientologists really suck at actually talking things out, communicating their current feelings rather than the proper thoughts about what they should be or might be feeling. Instead. they’re like two Aspergers sufferers talking past each other, neither actually saying anything the other can relate to.
Part of my error that first time around in marriage was accepting that level of uncommunicativeness common to scientologists. scns can’t talk about ‘their case’. It’s verboten; That bleeds into never speaking of their*feelings*; only talking about their thoughts, like good little robots. There are times when it’s GOOD to say “I don’t feel quite right” about some subject and be able to talk it out with your partner; That’s something scientology’s “No Case outside of a formal session” proscription rules out. Thus, two spouses really are hamstrung from working things out together. Each has to do it separately. In that situation, my advice is still: RUN! Find someone who you really can talk with about the important things, as well as the trivial things which can blow up into *IMPORTANT* things. It’s much more satisfying in the end – – or in the middle,or beginning.
jere,
Understood on everything!
Omg, how the hell can one “be” one’s loved one or anybody else if there’s no communication, if that person can’t/won’t communicate?
For whatever reason!
No communication is the worst.
A nightmare.
You’re well out that relationship if I may opine 🙂
Sounds like you have a happy marriage now.
And may I also say, jere, that you come across as very caring.
Your spouse is a lucky lady 🙂
I’m sure you’ll say that you’re very lucky too 🙂
Hi Mike,
LRH researched the mind and spirit and needed words to define things he found. Just as any researcher before him did.
You say:
“ Even today, I still struggle not to think and use scientology terms. It is so ingrained it is perhaps the hardest thing to shake.”
The problem in my humble opinion is not that you have learned a lot of “gibberish” that set you apart from the world (as it happens to medical doctors, or psychologists, if they think in concepts that are alien to their fellow-men). How this sets them apart is of course very well described in LRH’s brilliant theory of ARC and Reality being nothing but agreement.
Could it be that the problem lies in the fact that you not only learned the terms, you also observed the things they described and might still be observing them? (Example: the theory of ARC in action!) Hard to get rid of, once understood!
You also mention pedophilia, this very fashionable term that has good people hate anyone who had sex with someone underaged. Many even happily agree with locking them up and throwing away the key. All because of a term that describes something that cultures without that word would handle and have handled very differently.
Marcel Wenger
Independent Scientologist
Marcel, I have been out of Scientology for around 7 years. I was in for decades. I have spent a great deal of time locating Hubbard’s control mechanisms inserted within his “tech”. Don’t fool yourself, it permeates everything including his definitions of affinity, reality and communication. And I did not throw the baby out with the bathwater. I took the truth Hubbard plagiarized from earlier philosophers and wise persons and threw out his purposely inserted lies. I do not deny benefit I got from being in the cult.
My question is, at what cost?
Marcel wrote: “LRH researched the mind and spirit…”
When the first statement of an opinion is based in fiction, it tends to negate the validity of anything flowing from it.
I wrote five hundred words beyond those two lines, but words of an unbeliever can make no difference to a true believer, so I deleted them. True believers can use their super powers to make the words magically re-appear, but really, just reading a couple of popular books or blogs would better debunk the scam perpetrated by Hubbard.
For the record, the definition of pedophilia is NOT just “anyone having sex with someone underage”. It is defined as an adult, or older adolescent, who has sexual urges or engages in sexual acts with pre-pubescent CHILDREN.
There’s a world of difference between a 19-year-old guy having consensual sex with his 17-year-old girlfriend. I don’t think most people would agree that anyone should “lock him up and throw away the key”. But depending upon the age of consent per state (in the US), it may or may not be illegal. And if it is illegal, it’s not defined as pedophilia, but falls under the statutory rape/sexual assault/corruption of a minor law.
As far as actual pedophilia is concerned, you seem to be trying to defend the indefensible. The “term” is not the problem; the horrific act of an adult going after a young child is the problem. I don’t care what you call it — it’s still despicable, horribly abusive and illegal. And it’s why we have laws in place — to protect children from sick deviants who seek to abuse them sexually.
I certainly wouldn’t want to live in a culture where true pedophiles aren’t punished harshly. Do you have young kids? If not, come talk to me when you do and some monster rapes one of them. Then we can discuss whether or not it’s “fashionable” for a parent to want to literally kill the disgusting pig who forever scarred their innocent child.
Oops… EDIT to my above comment…
First sentence of second paragraph should have read: “There’s a world of difference between pedophilia and a 19-year old guy……”
I miss the edit feature.
“ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
It strikes me as the way down the rabbit whole to an entire alternative worldview or mindset. More than just in-group jargon, reality itself is being re-defined, such as with the magical thinking behind “postulates,” that they somehow create reality itself and have power over matter.
Grotesque!
Hubbard’s mindfuckery with language is his masterpiece.
Bloody hell, what a load of incomprehensible gibberish.
This is basically a made up language, designed to prove how superior the cult is to the rest of the world.
Excellent topic, and a big part of understanding cults.
Language is a super-important part of creating a cult. Through language you can both alienate a group from the rest of society as well as assure its conformity to groupspeak and groupthought. Just ask Orwell…
An additional element is control over the group’s ethics. You redefine it for them. By doing so, you assume a godlike role in their lives and get them to do what you want and how you want it done according to your priorities.
You assume control over their sexuality, relationships, family and children. You regulate the latter’s education, ethics and priorities. You enforce insularity of the group’s families against the rest of the world.
You control their finances. They become either too destitute to desert you or at least, they will operate by the sunk cost fallacy. I.e. they will feel unable to leave as they have already made so many sacrifices to stay in. They will be unable to face the idea that this was all for naught.
Once you own their bodies, their minds, their circle of family and friends as well as their values you pit them in an us-vs-them mentality and assure them that grave consequences will befall them if they stray from the right path. As an extra bonus you indoctrinate them that they are the only possible saviors of the world around them. You set up an enemy figure, even if it is as ludicrous as “the psychs.”
Hubbard was an intellectual and spiritual lightweight. Despite the universal, and even otherwordly inspired expertise he claimed at, well, EVERYTHING it is easy to deconstruct his big sounding claims, his intellectual thievery from the most lightweight of sources as well as his relentless self-mythologizing–at least with the benefit of hindsight and the much greater volume of information available a few decades after the fact. He emerges as a vulgar blowhard and garden-variety con man.
However, one thing he was brilliant at: Building this insidious cult organization and enforcing total conformity to this prison of belief while giving his minions the idea that they were really not sheep but empowered individuals/big beings and that “belief” was not even part of the whole deal. However, the elements he used to enslave his followers are pretty much run-of-the mill “Cult 101” and can be found equally present in other oppressive organizations.
Todd, excellent points.
The only thing I’d add is the “misunderstood words” thing. “Use my dictionary and then convince yourself that I’m on to something.”
And then when it’s still a jumble of blather, people give in and join still hoping there’s something to it. (And once you sign up that’s when all the things you mention really kick in.)
Spot on.
“…we have a responsibility to BE the BEINGNESS of the other person’s 2D, also. And to defend that 2D and that beingness.”
Yikes. That type of in-group lingo is a big part of the process of creating a bubble around members that isolates them from the rest of the world. Other people hear that kind of language and react with understandable confusion and dubiousness, and for true believers, that only reinforces the idea that they have some kind of special knowledge that outsiders lack. And once you have been fully programmed, you find it difficult to communicate with anyone who hasn’t been programmed the same way, so you find it easier to just interact with others in your group. It works like a charm.
Also, it’s funny to me as someone who was never in scientology, to realize that I understood this whole post just fine. LOL I suppose if you are going to understand what you are witnessing in terms of the abusive practices and toxic policies and their effect on scientologists, you kind of have to be able to translate stuff like this.
Well put Chocolate. This kind of language does isolate one from one’s fellow man. I should know, having endured more years in the cult that I’d care to admit.
Good observations Chocolate, but as someone who USED to be in the bubble and who understands the words, it’s STILL incomprehensible gobbly-gook that doesn’t persuade me that she learned anything. It sounds like a bunch of phrases she was told that she strung together rather haphazardly.
All she’s saying is that the woman has to “be” the man insofar as looking from his viewpoints and acting accordingly and the man has to “be” the woman as regards looking from her viewpoints, and acting accordingly.
If they’re going to a restaurant and he’s in the mood to “be” her, he’ll pick a place he knows she would like or at least one that she won’t hate. He looks from her viewpoint and acts accordingly.
When she’s getting ready to go out with him, she knows he’s always on time and tardiness is one of his “things” and so she’s ready on time. She looks from HIS viewpoint and acts accordingly.
What’s the big deal? Meaning, apart from the lingo, apart from HOW it is communicated.
Each of them “being” each other could translate very simply into them treating one another with consideration, thoughtfulness and respect!
But I agree that the language can drive you wild.
If the language fails to describe Reality then the language fails.
This poor woman may have looked at another man wrong (hetero-normative assumption, of course, as Scientology is homophobic) or had an affair. You wouldn’t know from her writing. It may well have been a minor occurrence.
I’m betting she had an affair with a married man, and they blamed her for it, making her responsible for the guy’s “2D.” It’s disgusting.
I wasn’t indoctrinated into Scientology lingo and frankly find the speak nonsensical when I find examples of Scientologists going on in that way to each other. But I was steeped enough in New Age lingo at an early enough age that I’ve incorporated some of that and have to work to dismantle it sometimes. For example, “havingness” is a stupid word, but I found it hard to translate when leaving behind that New Age crap. It assumes the prosperity gospel / New Age Calvinism as a given. It assumes responsibility of the recipient, whether they’re being raped (“pulling it in”) or “manifesting” a million dollars by ripping off the needy through a Medicaid scam. It’s got the lie baked in. So I had to deliberately ask people to translate the word for me if they used it. Eventually I lost those friends, who still believe that they deserve everything they have and that victims of abuse created that for themselves.
But occasionally I find something useful. Like Scientology’s “out-exchange.” I don’t think it’s useful in one sense, because it’s so completely mercantile, with no value on meaning or love or any other social value. But in the sense of there being an imbalance in exchange in a relationship, it’s kind of a useful concept. One could say that finance capital is out-exchange with workers, for example. Miscavige is certainly out-exchange with Sea Org workers.
It might have been a minor occurrence, or none at all —thought control would have her believing a minor daydream, not acted on in the least, being as bad as actions in the real world.
This posting also has a certain “flavor” which is common to many many scientologists.
It’s letting themselves off the hook for doing something not cool. It often comes in the form of a statement such as,
“I had this HUGE cognition!!”
“I can finally make case-gain in this area!”
Any kind of a statement like this.
The intent is to show that “tech is going in” so nothing more to see here, folks.
And also to inoculate oneself from criticism or challenge from others because everyone knows you’re not supposed to invalidate peoples’ WINS!
Brilliant post, John Doe! So true!
I had to sign a Liability Formula at Flag who did the overt of having a lap dance. For his amends, he bought his wife two intensives of Flag auditing.
I went home and told my husband to go get a lap dance because I need some auditing!
Cindy: Did the hubby have enough time or MONEY to get that lap dance, being at flag and all?
I also think the extreme labyrinth of words, terms and complicated organizational construct makes it very difficult for lawyers, police, government officials, etc to deal with Scientology and its crimes. I was thinking about that yesterday when I was reading on Tony Ortega’s site how the French police were stonewalled when they were trying to contact witnesses in the suicide of a young Scientologist. In order to be effective in dealing with Scientology, they would need the help of a high level, experienced (ex) Scientologist. They would also need to understand that all “Scientologists” are not the same. There is a public Scientologist, a Mission staff member, a Class V staff member, a Sea Org staff member and then extreme differences in the training and experience of Sea Org members themselves. There are many veteran Sea Org members that have VERY little understanding about Scientology and its inner workings. Its kind of what the government had to do with the mafia except Scientology is much, much, much more difficult to understand and pull apart.
Even when I was involved in this it drove me nuts when people referred to their girlfriend, boyfriend, etc as their 2D. It just sounded so cold and clinical. Now that I’m out I see that it was intentionally designed that way.
The really insidious part is when $cientology redefines words most “WOGS” understand to mean something completely different, like ‘ethics’. “The most ethical people on the planet.”, means something completely different to a $cientologist than it does to the average person. So the average person takes it at face value, without understanding ethical to the $cientologist means doing whatever is best for $cientology, and screw the rest of the world.
Pick: After all these years, I find “most ethical beings on the planet” to be code-speak for “most obedient” to their ‘betters’ in scientology. “going to Ethics” simply means volunteering to be punished for some infraction, often unintentionally.
The doubt formula is a fabulous exercise in tribalism. Despite claiming there are no absolutes, Hub’s “scriptures” are full of them. The complexities of life are reduced to heuristic thought stoppers. Everything is either black or white; there are never any shades of grey, no appreciation for nuance.
The gobbledygook aside, this individual believes that only two opinions/options are available to her. This is the limited freedom she has, as a scientologist, to “think for herself.” Within the binary world of scientology there is only certainty (strength) or doubt (weakness). It’s better to be extreme than to be moderate. it’s better to be wrong than to question.
I read this post a few times, trying to put myself back into that mindset. So as a translation for those of you who don’t speak scientology:
Hi, I am in trouble again. This time it has to do with my boyfriend (or husband). I made the mistake of thinking for myself instead of allowing my partner to take control. I now realize that I am in a group of people who don’t allow that and aNd am too scared to leave. I have chosen to stay in the group that has total control over me. Please don’t sec check me again.
I REALLY GOT THAT! I mean like the flow of bullshit just overwhelmed the not-is-ness of it all. So I will postulate that the ARC/KRC will help me keep my TRs in so that the confront level of everyone I communicate with will rise to my superior level. If I keep the intention of my survival on a high enough level then peace will break out, crime stats will drop, hangnails will heal and everyone will see that rainbows and kittens are the reality. I can only thank LRH for his superior handling of all his personal relationships as a roll model for DM who has such great relationships with all his family, friends & admirers. Of course I must also humbly thank the great ones in all things… because we know that without their guidance & leadership the world would fall apart and life would not be worth living. Oh yes oh great saviors of the universe… The opinions expressed here have nothing to do with reality.
I am OT 7 and did an Admin Scale on my 2D and have been keeping stats on my comm lines with terminals that could align. It has really keyed me out to do this because I have narrowed it down to two terminals. I am getting auditing on this tomorrow and have asked for an assessment to be done on them and then quad ruds and overts to make sure that I am totally clean and that I’m not making a choice based on some whole track recall (since I have no Reactive Mind). If I don’t read and FN on the two terminals then I guess I will just have a 2D with myself until I go OT 8 and 9.
I mean OT 9 and 10.
I’m already OT 8; I must have not-ised that time on the Freewinds.
Lol You nailed it Mary
Of course you did. It wasn’t real😂🤣😂
“I’m already OT 8; I must have not-ised that time on the Freewinds.”
Or the ‘engram’ of that time caused you to suppress the memory. AND, being an 8, you definitely, positively, absolutely won’t be affected by mesothelioma from all the blue asbestos you inhaled at the time.
Good one, Mary Kahn!
Laugh Out Loud, Mary K!
But what’s super important here is the steamrolling into a person’s skull several valuable control points:
Scamatology is THE greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics. PERIOD. No need to think about that. After time and time again of reading this, having it used on you in auditing. Anything that even has a slight tinge of criticism is pounced on.
Your own overts, and others overts are spotted by ANY CRITICISM whatsoever of the choich, or anything flubtard.
If you or someone that you know are not moving on the bridge at all times, there is something wrong with you that needs fixing.
Flubtard knows everything, and everything that he says is true and correct.
Like old flubtard knew anything good about how to treat women!!! HA HAHAHHAHAHHA!!
If Hubbard knew how to deal with women he wouldn’t have been divorced.
IF Tubby knew how to deal with women, he probably wouldn’t have had to get married
—thrice.
Mike, it’s probably due to an out-ethics sit on your third dynamic, or an unflat engram chain causing an ARC break of long duration, not to mention an out-list and possibly even out-Int. Didn’t mean to evaluate, as it violates the Auditor’s Code. In any event, a little RPEC would probably bring back the good indicators. Perhaps write it up to RTC or CSW your local Org for a C/S 53 to find your item.
LOL! And to think that I understood all of that!
VWD!
😂
Me too
Of course it’s all Dev’t. 😁😜
🙂
That facebook tome is incomprehensible. no actual meaning, just a circular argument that goes no where. MC Esher did that with his drawings, Clams do it with words.
A tale saturated with sound and fury, signifying nothing. That describes the $cieno debating tech all too well.