It’s SaTerraDay — yay!
Two Main Types of Ex-Scientologists
There are two main types of ex-Scientologists:
Type 1: Those that still believe in the tech.
Type 2: Those that don’t.
Not Written in Stone
Are these generalities? Yes. Are there gradient variations and differences within each group? Absolutely. Do people waffle? All the time.
If labeling people was good enough for L. Ron Hubbard, please allow me to indulge in a bit of pigeonholing, myself. LRH preached that his theories were one hundred percent correct and workable all the time. I fully admit that my words are biased opinions. Which is okay. I don’t charge money or have any plans to create a religion.
Transformation
Most Type 2s start out as Type 1s, still believing in LRH’s tech and policy. Once Ethics gives Type 1s the boot, they begin educating themselves. They begin to surf the Internet and visit blogs; they read books by disgruntled ex’s; they watch television and YouTube videos. They talk to other ex-Scientologists who’ve experienced similar conditions. This transformation takes anywhere from weeks to years. For some, this process started before they actually left.
Some Type 1s never stop believing.
Ron and Davy
Type 1s feel betrayed by current church leader, David Miscavige. Type 2s feel betrayed by LRH. Type 1s believe LRH was a genius. Both Types agree DM is an abomination.
Type 1s dream that some sort of reformation takes place within Scientology once DM is gone. Type 2s hope for the church’s imminent collapse.
KSW
Type 1s believe in Keeping Scientology Working and that LRH and all his theories are infallible. They believe that any failure or disappointment with Scientology processing (auditing) is due to a misapplication of the tech—which in turn is the result of misunderstood words and undisclosed crimes.
Type 2s believe LRH was seriously disturbed and that much of his tech and policy, if not flawed, is unworkable. They point to Scientology’s dwindling enrollment as evidence.
Type 1s believe the e-meter reads on mental mass—that somehow, it’s able to measure spiritual activity. They are convinced that thinking of an incident around the same time their auditor calls, “that,” is proof the e-meter “reads” on mental mass and is a viable therapeutic tool. Type 2s aren’t so sure.
Science
Type 1s don’t require scientific methods to substantiate the efficacy, value, or helpfulness of the tech. Type 2s do, no longer believing everything they read.
Namaste
Type 1s still think psychiatry, the AMA, and yoga are “other practices” and should be avoided. Type 2s embrace other forms of therapy—mainstream or not.
Type 1s are not open to new practices. Type 2s are.
Clear #983
Type 1s are afraid of disavowing the tech and being wrong. Admitting the tech is imperfect, challenges the legitimacy of their wins and gains. It means they “false attested” to achieving states of spirituality they hadn’t really attained. They wasted years and thousands of dollars chasing a lie. Admitting to one’s mistakes is hard and can be felt as an assault on one’s very beingness.
Type 2s acknowledge they were duped.
Conversation
Discussing Scientology with a Type 1 can be frustrating, if not an exercise in futility. Most Type 1s are card-carrying believers in Keeping Scientology Working and therefore, everything the founder wrote is, if not perfect, is at least workable. To think otherwise is sacrilege. They cling to these ideas of a perfect technology by resorting to name calling, “joking and degrading,” and tossing logic out the window. (I try to limit myself in this regard.)
Type 2s feel liberated debating the merits of Scientology tech and policy.
Type 1s have to be right. Type 2s, not as much.
Last Words
Type 1s and Type 2s are a real phenomenon. Or…Type 1s and Type 2s are constructs of an over-imaginative mind.
Still not Declared,
Terra Cognita
FoolProof;
I imagine you on Saturday mornings pleasuring yourself with a copy of Terra’s latest! Damn he sure gets you hard……..every time!
My last comment on this thread as Fool Proof trashed me when I only asked he identified his true name as he works for Gavino and OSA (hi Gavino). I make a comment maybe 3-4 times a year on this website. I found the topic interesting and no I am not hiring PI’s to investigate him. Have a nice day.
I notice from a scan of the commenters on this interesting thread that most are using fake names especially Fool Proof. I stopped using fake names 7 years ago on these type of websites. If you are still using a fake name you are either type 1 or type 1 and a half.
Why especially me? No, I think most on here also using nom de plumes are Type 2s.
I don’t.
I have nothing to hide.
Tell Dave I said Hi !
Oh haha chortle chortle. This has been said so many times on here when people can’t wrap their wits around the information I have already given and resort to this sort of silliness. And I bet you’ve got lots to hide.
Your last sentence is the sort of thing that leaves people with a bad taste in their mouth about scientologits.
Amazing arrogance and condescension.
I find it amazing that a comments section that is full of insults, name-calling, nasty remarks and untruths about Scientologists, whether in the Church or not doesn’t draw the same level of approbation that you level at me for rather a minor remark compared to what is written on here.
I don’t think Scientologists are really going to worry about what commenters here write about them and their religion. That ship has long since sailed.
Why single you out?
Random luck I guess.
Your comments fascinate me and I want you to keep commenting. Scientologists don’t read this blog. People “under the radar” do, a lot of them, and I think your attitude and approach is very enlightening and probably helps some see where their heads have been at and hopefully, with some distance, see that this is neither pleasant nor healthy.
You make the point that just leaving the organization is not enough. You’ve got to change your mindset. And that is a valuable lesson to learn. It’s why I try to highlight some of the things you say.
You are a great example for all to see.
I really DO appreciate you taking the time to comment as I think it’s valuable.
Well ok. Say your name.
“your name”. Actually I am Mreppen. Do you really think I am going to give my real name to someone like you who would then embark on some sort of weird private investigation gig in order to somehow try and do me in?
Oh my. That is perhaps the weirdest comment you have ever posted.
You have a very inflated idea of your importance to anyone. Very.
Well, why else would he ask then?
You are incorrigible and proud of it.
Oh my, FoolProof. If you only knew how much the pot is calling the kettle black…or maybe you do.
It’s the oldest trick in the book to accuse someone of doing to you what you’re doing to them. In this case, what Scientology and David Miscavige are doing to most people who are out (who are loudly out) is exactly what you say you suspect Terra Cognita of intending toward you.
So, you’re either OSA, doing the Saul Alinski “Rules for Radicals” maneuver, or a still-in who has no clue about what David Miscavige is doing to Mike, Leah, Karen de la Carriere and other high profile people who are out – even his own dad, Ron Miscavige. Search for David “let him die” Miscavige to get an eyeful of what “COB” is doing.
I’m glad you’re here talking too. It shows some courage to come here and interact with “SPs”. I hope you’re also, in the back of your mind, looking for what is true. You’ll find it here if you follow up what people say with an open ear and mind.
Here’s a good one for ya. Miscavige has been altering Ron’s exact words on the PDCs – specifically PDC 20. Look at the changes here in the video below. You can do the test yourself. Find some old cassette copies of that PDC lecture and then listen on the new, CD copy too. But here it is on a video that can start you on your way down the rabbit hole.
And, by the way, I’m out but under the radar big time. You wouldn’t know it if we were standing next to each other at an event…if I went to events anymore.
There’s a reason we’re out. If you can confront the evil, you might be able to get free and be a genuine real version of you again. Won’t that be nice?
Watch this about passages taken out of the PDCs – Black Dianetics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jG9X0gEedDs
Interview with Ron Miscavige – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esjykphNZI4
This is true. You can’t correct it from the inside anymore because all reports go only to Miscavige. None of Ron’s Watchdog committees or any other positions are there to cross check any bad stuff going on. That’s why I left. It can’t be corrected from the inside, as it is now. C’mon out. We are pretty good people.
Not declared either.
indie8million
I have been “out” since the 1980s and I see you are still not really out as such so as for the pot calling the kettle black maybe you would like to eat your own words. I confronted the evil decades ago but it seems you can’t still fully do so. As to the alterations of the PDC I think he has done much more than just that so don’t come on here making daft assumptions and aspersions. I am not defending the current Church but the original technology which anyone having read my posts eventually puts 2 and 2 together. So go back to school and do basic arithmetic again. Or read the Data Series at least when you dare to go in the Org. Or Method 9 my previous comments.
Oh, well, what must you have said to lead me to believe you were still in? Daft, is it?
Pardon me if I haven’t seen or noticed your name before. If you’re famous, and have made it clear that you’ve been out for a long time, I haven’t seen your post and I’ve been checking in here for at least 5 years. I intimately know people who left in 82 so have been aware of the crap going on for a long time too. I just stayed in, hoping I could change it from the inside out. Impossible today.
Myself, I was going to say to Terra that I agree with her that there are shades of gray to what she posted. I’m out but I do believe that people have genuinely gotten benefit from how Ron put together the tech and, though the person creates his/her own gains, the questions and process have prompted them to ask those questions and have those gains. That’s why I don’t talk smack about the actual tech because people have benefited from it. I refuse to throw the baby out with the bath water but I’m not “obsessed” with it either. It has been helpful. Ron did get worse as time went on and I think he did lose his mind, eventually. However, that doesn’t mean that he didn’t intend to help people in the beginning.
My pot calling the kettle black comment was about accusing someone who’s out that they were going to come find you and invest money in investigating you. One, it’s Miscavige who does that and two, most people who are out can’t afford to do that and I don’t believe they would even care about it if they could.
You’d probably have more reason to worry about OSA seeing it.
Anyway, we’re all on the same page here. No need to reduce our power by arguing amongst ourselves. The bottom line is that, in its current incarnation, the church is toxic. Whatever we can do to make people aware of that so that they aren’t negatively affected by it is my reason for communicating.
All the best to you, FoolProof.
indie8million
And all the best as well to you Indie.
I was about to comment that “only two types” was far too rigid…then I spotted Alex’s comment. There are at least 3 and possibly more.
One of the things which occurred to me early on was that no other person was “responsible” for my cognitions or my general awareness. Not the auditor, the C/S, the DofP…no, not even Hubbard. Since I was the one who had done the digging, the gold I found belonged exclusively to me. Oh, I said the expected things and gave the expected thank yous, yet I was simply giving them what they wanted while living with my own reality on the “source” of my gains.
My thought on the emeter was simply that it “twigged” on thoughts which needed further examination. Being able to narrow down those thoughts in our ever thinking minds turned out to be extremely valuable and I moved through my grades rapidly and with very useful (to me) results. Probably the biggest new awareness was during Gr 5, Power Processing, the second portion called 5A. Totally altered my life in that deep quiet way one sometimes stumbles into. That particular awareness has been part of my operating awareness ever since…and that was back around 1969.
Being older when I got in, with university long behind me, and a deep love of reading a wide variety of subjects, I spotted more than a few of Hubbard’s “fibs” and simply took what worked for me.
Like Alex, helping others was – and still is – a major goal. By the very early 80s, it had become clear to me that the scn organization was not going to be of any further use to me, though I could continue to make use of what I’d learned and adapted. As it happened, my life mate whom I’d already met at Flag, left about the same time I did and we remained in close contact for many years. If she were the only “win” I’d ever gotten from scn, the whole time would have been worth it.
Foolproof, OSA trolls are Type 1. It is probably split pretty even.
Wynski, I am surprised at you, no actually I am not. Maybe you didn’t read the whole article but Terra is calling Type 1s those that have left the Church and disavow Miscavige etc. if you read further down. I doubt OSA trolls will be in this group eh?
Reppen, I use a nom de plume MOSTLY because in my real life it could hurt FAR more than it could help to be associated with scamology. I also have a general rule to NOT put any PI online where not needed
Weird conclusion to draw from that data point.
For once I agree with Wynski!
Exactly why I use a fake name too.
🙂
Me three, Aquamarine! I just want to be able to do what I can to help people get out (which includes educating them on logic/illogic in general so that they can start to see the illogic around them). Plus, around my new friends, I don’t even speak of it at all.
ETerra, there is a “Type 3”. The one who is no longer Type 1 or Type 2. The one who joined for no other reason than to help. The one who DID help a lot of individuals and their families simply by teaching them the Communication Course back in the late 60s-early 70s. The one who was never public, always SO, by personal choice,since 1971, who never sought to be an all powerful being, never paid a penny for training and auditing until hit by the dreaded “Freeloader debt” after 10 years of full time 24/7 service.
I dont know who you are or why you think you are such an expert but I can tell you need to learn much more about the human character, about human nature, about human motivations and responses to life situations
.
And yes, I consider myself a Type 3, someone who is no longer a scientologist but values the lessons learned over my past 77 years of life. Please don’t delude yourself thinking you know much because eventually you will realise, like me, that we know f…all. All with due respect to what you do know. Alex
Thanks Alex, spot on!
I’m a Type 3 then, Alex, by your definition. LOL.. and the Church would probably agree to that.. lol. Joined to help, went right onto org staff and then to the Apollo in Portugal. 10 years of 150% dedication and belief, with the certainty I was helping. I had some gains, met many wonderful people who I call friends to this day, including you.. and I have my own reasons for not using my real name. None of which have anything to do with still believing in the tech or the Church or Ron or any of it.
Howdy,
Recently I bought a shredder. Not just any shredder. The shredder that has CD shredding capabilities. Craigslist helped me find a deal and now I’m in business.
You know those CD pages meant for binders? Yea they are like flimsy pages and can store 4 CDs on one side, 4 more on the other. Well imagine a deep file cabinet (27inches) filled from front to back, page after page of lectures. (The marketing fluff, aerodynamic binders went to the landfill first thing.)
Oh, yea I bought every CD package (congresses, ACC’s, basics, and “essentials”). Disssssssssssssss!!!!!! And I don’t mean that I’m dissing, I mean that LRH likes to diss. Ok, mind you that I’ve only really begun my CD listening journey, starting with the “essentials” I’m looking forward to gaining insight, debating BS, and hopefully finding some highly useful tech in the process of decluttering my life.
It looks to me like LRH was trying to figure Everything out. Honestly, I don’t think some of these lectures were really meant to be distributed like this. In his lectures I get that he had lots of stories, opinions, and lots of junk to vent -sometimes all across the map.
I’ve come to appreciate this blog and thought I’d mention so. Yes, at first it can be uncomfortable, like pulling up a sewage lid, but not anymore. Feelings- they’ve been hurt, but after a while it all runs out. Heart shattered to fragments – it heals.
I like to think that if there were some very sane advice, given on the via of complete sentences, methods to follow that would allow me to help myself or my friend- I’d be all over it (and certainly was while in the church).
Trust : it is what it is. Can try to fake it, or pretend it’s absolute in a given direction (for example your type 1, type2 essay), but it really is only what it actually is.
“Both Types agree DM is an abomination.”
Oh Dave, in case you have forgotten, WHERE’S SHELLEY?
Niccolo Machiavelli’s ideas were often brutal and to our modern mind, barbaric. They included such ideas as the killing of all the families of person’s opponents. He is rightly vilified, and yet still some 500 plus years after his death, his works are published and read by millions of people. They read his works because they contain some insights into his subject; politics.
L Ron Hubbard and his Church of Scientology appear just below International Terrorists on lists of what people hate the most today. As someone who got out of the church in the 80’s after 20 years of giving and receiving auditing, I can understand that. There’s so much in the current church and in the body of work by L Ron Hubbard on Scientology that should be labeled wrong and evil. But I’m willing to place a bet with anyone who’s prepared to honor the bet in 500 years’ time, that L Ron Hubbard’s work will still be published and read because they contain some insights into his subject; how to address and help the human psyche.
I’ve noticed the current trend in apologism (or nostalgia) which makes the now-inevitable concessions that Hubbard’s life, personality, behavior and methods were abominable, and the organization he created a totalitarian nightmare – and yet holds out the idea that there is some essence of his “work” which has value that will be recognized in the future.
When I was introduced to Dianetics and Scientology, I’d had a reasonable education including philosophy and some introduction to applied psychology, had tinkered with things like self-hypnosis, and was familiar with metaphysics and the occult (and, specifically, Crowley). I thought it was fairly obvious what Hubbard was up to, and while he (and his early collaborators) cleverly packaged a lot of old ideas and techniques into compact accessible form in the lower-level courses, there was nothing particularly new or interesting except the ways in which he used sales and persuasion to build a following and an organization.
Later, I did some cross-disciplinary graduate-level studies that included a bit of higher-level philosophy and religious studies, so I’m fairly familiar with what interests scholars. Philosophers and theologians will have no interest in Hubbard; there are already more people in those fields who were once popular and even prominent and in some ways influential, who wrote large bodies of work – usually, relatively more rigorous and coherent than Hubbards’ – that are now long-forgotten, than you can imagine.
I think that in the future, Hubbard may be of very minor interest to specialists in new religions movements for his role in defunct 20th century cults, and more for the organizational history of the quintessential high control group that he created than for any actual ideas, theories or philosophies. Any of his supposed “work” regarding the mind, which was shoddy and unscientific to begin with, has already been made outdated by advances in specialized psychological fields using modern methods and technology such as MRI and fMRI that can actually “see,” to some useful extent, what the brain is doing.
Even Hubbard’s supposed past life recall method in auditing, was known before him and has seen been conclusively proven to actually just produce what is now known as false memory syndrome, a quirk of the function of the mind in which under suggestible conditions, the imagination (similar to dreams) generates real-seeming but fabricated recollections. If there is any sort of spiritual nature or reincarnation (and if some tiny portion of past life recall was genuine and not illusory), it’s most certainly quite different from what Hubbard thought or taught.
I’ve found that “conclusively proven” often has its own “sell by” date, some time in the future. Science is rarely “fixed” and what was conclusive yesterday is no longer so tomorrow. And, when it comes to the brain and human mind, one which seems to have no location, science is still in the kindergarten stages.
We’re now well into quantum physics and mechanics and it’s totally mind boggling what has been shown to be “true”. “One thing can be in two places at the same time.”
We’ve only just begun.
Peter, that’s another interesting bit of apologism or wishful thinking that I notice is in vogue in certain circles: Science isn’t settled…quantum physics, dontcha know?
Discoveries in quantum physics are not going to make Hubbard’s claims about Piltdown Man, the water solubility of radiation, or the cancer-preventative properties of cigarette smoking, turn out to be true. His more esoteric claims aren’t any better based, and don’t stand much more chance of being saved from the dustbin of history.
Hubbard wasn’t talking about quantum physics, anyway – even though, if he were on the leading edge of thought of the time, much less had the recall he claimed of advanced civilizations, he should have been. At the point that Fritjof Capra came out with The Tao of Physics, Hubbard’s “work” was mostly obsessed with his supposed body thetans, and he was gearing up to write Battlefield Earth.
That reminds me of another reason why there is unlikely to ever be any serious future interest, particularly not academic, in Hubbard’s production: it is unscientific, lacks intellectual rigor, and is unorganized and self-contradictory. Anyone who had any serious thoughts about looking at it in the future would start out by reading Dianetics, ask where the referenced research and case studies were to back it up – and on finding that they never existed, would write Hubbard off as a charlatan and a fraud and move on. Even if they had some minor interest, Hubbard’s failure to cite his sources and collaborators, the unnecessarily large amount that he wrote and spoke, and his failure to acknowledge where he revises or abandons earlier ideas (much less the inherent contradictions), would make it too hard to try to get anything out of.
I think the future might hold interesting discoveries, such as as of collective or species memory that accounts for the navigation habits of butterflies, and some rare types of past-life-like recollections that are authentic – and it will owe nothing to Hubbard.
Peter, which of Hubtard’s ideas do you think will be “rescued” by quantum physics? I’ve never read anything he wrote that overlaps that area of science.
You’re on swsprime. It may be read a bit but only the way people read about Rev Jones today.
dumb and dumber.
Regarding “Clear #983” – After any number of hours of introspection someone might resolve some issues and gain some new awareness or outlook, not necessarily some universal “state of spirituality”. I’m pretty sure my clear number was in the 8,000s. If it was a really cool number like 8000, 8008, 8080 or 8888 I’d surely remember it but they probably reserved those numbers for the big shots. I wonder who got 666.
“I fully admit that my words are biased opinions. Which is okay. I don’t charge money or have any plans to create a religion.”
This made me smile 🙂
Hahahaha! Poor old Terra! He‘s like a cat on a hot tin roof now with his articles, carefully choosing his words and couching his theories in generalized but nevertheless negatively sounding constructs (I will explain further down – they are quite clever – granted) in an effort to reduce any comeback or retort from me, or hopefully from others who have some courage to say what they think instead of swimming with the herd of wildebeest trying to cross the Zambezi comments river with Wynski the crocodile lurking to snap you up. I see Yossi is already being labelled as “OSA”, a la anyone who disagrees with the herd mentality, and all he said was that the article is boring.
Or Terra is sitting there perhaps in the hope that his negatively leaning words dressed up as “fair comment” will not be challenged and all can nod their heads sagely again and congratulate him on another load of pointless old nonsense. One wonders has he been sitting at home waiting with baited breath for what “Foolproof” is going to reply, as probably has Mike (due to the overtime), and also the usual gang of vitriolic, vituperative and vicious victims, fingers poised above keyboards, ready to unleash more vituperation. And I think these last ones (the crocodiles) can perhaps be labelled as “Type 3s” or more officially known as “Type IIIs”, as of course such is very appropriate and the joke has been mentioned already below, although one mention was innocently inadvertent and others not. Scientologist and even ex-Scientologists will get the joke here of course. So there is another “type” here and we can now label them, as Terra has done. Type III is of course “perfect”! (So it seems now that the horrible sin of labelling that Scientology does, is now acceptable? But Terra covers himself on that one by admitting it, of course – so well, we can brush that one off then. What is good for the gander and all that eh? Or – the good old one of “the overt doth speak loudest in accusation” – couldn’t resist it! Scientology can be chastised for doing it but when we do it, oh that’s alright then!)
Actually of course there is at least a smattering of truth in his otherwise pointless words. He is more or less correct in that there are indeed 2 main types of ex-Scientologist, although “ex-Scientologist” is actually a misnomer as many of whom he calls “ex-Scientologists” consider themselves still to be Scientologists, although the official Church counts only members in good standing now, I believe. I think it is even defined so in one of the Church dictionaries these days and one has to be a paid-up member and all that. (The membership and donations fees are extortionate – I will concede, but as usual, such extortionate extremes are not LRH Policy.) But regardless of all that, apart from having a surreptitious go at me and the many (still) like me, what is the point of the article? Well, let’s look at the way some of the paragraphs are sneakily presented:
Firstly the cleverly phrased: “…debating the merits of Scientology tech and policy”. Apart from the occasional genuine admission from some commenters that they got something from Scientology, and the begrudging ones of “yes, I made some case gain but I couldn’t disclose my penchant for…” or “I was regged until 3AM for my IAS Patron Status” types, hardly anyone commenting on here wants a “debate” about whether or not case gain was made. The very simple reason for this is you either made case gain or didn’t. Those that made case gain have no beef about anything (case-wise) and those that didn’t of course want to try and convince those that did, that they didn’t really and it is all imagination, and that they should “suffer” like them, and seemingly then Terra.
Secondly the adroitly phrased: “Type 1s have to be right.” This of course is very surreptitiously saying that of course “we all know” these Type 1s aren’t really right and are thus having to assert their rightness. Does Terra think that people won’t notice how the statement was weighted? Or is he assuming that the level of discernment here is poor? (See – I have done the same now except on the opposite tack, by forming my words so that people who agree with Terra’s supposition come across as having low discernment capability – not that I would want to be so surreptitious as Terra of course – haha!)
Thirdly the statement: “Discussing Scientology with a Type 1 can be frustrating, if not an exercise in futility.” Well, yes, that would be true if one actually discussed Scientology, but then as I have discovered here time and time again, what people think is “Scientology” is somewhat far removed from the subject! When we perceive nonsenses such as “Hubbard was Lucifer” and Terra only takes up certain meter reads, and Brian has his own version of OTIII that he ran for 3 weeks on his back porch without a meter, we might all spontaneously combust with laughter after reading the bogus and malicious “OT8” “HCOB”!
As for this: “Type 1s believe the e-meter reads on mental mass—that somehow, it’s able to measure spiritual activity. They are convinced that thinking of an incident around the same time their auditor calls, ‘that’, is proof the e-meter ‘reads’ on mental mass and is a viable therapeutic tool. Type 2s aren’t so sure.” Well, that would be true if they didn’t have you as an auditor then Terra eh? What with your personally selected reads and all that eh? By the way, did you ever find the word or words on the meter course that you went by?
Now we have this: “They cling to these ideas of a perfect technology by resorting to name calling, ‘joking and degrading’, and tossing logic out the window. (I try to limit myself in this regard.)” Well, for the sake of your PCs Terra, I hope your piece of “logic” about only taking up the meter reads that you thought were worthwhile came after you “limited yourself in this regard”. And as “everybody knows”, the real humdingers of joking and degrading are stated here, time and time again. Or is “Hubtard”, “El Con” and “Tubby” etc. not so? (And they are relatively mild!)
And now: “Type 1s are afraid of disavowing the tech and being wrong. Admitting the tech is imperfect, challenges the legitimacy of their wins and gains. It means they ‘false attested’ to achieving states of spirituality they hadn’t really attained.” As I vaguely recall Terra however did admit to doing precisely that, did you not Terra? Certainly your meter course eh? But I don’t recall falsely attesting to anything in my long history in Scientology. And again, the supposition is that the “tech” is imperfect, which, as we have seen from Terra’s many admissions of misunderstanding, is no real wonder then, is it? I mean if, as we have seen from the many examples posted here, an HCOB says “do XYZ” but on mis-interpreting it you do “WTF” – one can only “LOL”. True, there have been problems with people attesting to states that they had not achieved again due to misinterpretations of the technology but a Type 1 would simply correct the problem. A Type 2 in this case would write a story about it saying how bad it all was! But we find from many examples here that as regards the “tech”, they haven’t got a clue what it really is.
And now we move on to: “Type 2s embrace other forms of therapy—mainstream or not.” Oh! Really? Which “therapies” are being “embraced” then? I recall only a few people on here who have “moved on” to another therapy/religion after Scientology, and that is Brian with his Buddhism and from what I recall he is squirreling that as well! Other than that I don’t recall anyone saying this. I stand to be corrected of course and no doubt will be but even so the numbers are not going to be that high I believe. Unless you are all queuing up for a good dose of ECT or Prozac? And “other forms of therapy” – like what? Happy “embracing”!
And of course his opening remarks about generalities “lays the groundwork” (for the less discerning) for the fact that the rest of the article is indeed all generality and he hopes to convince the reader that he is not going to be doing that of course in the rest of the article, whereupon, from my points as above, he then proceeds to do so.
The “scientific method” (of testing I assume) being espoused by Terra and supposedly demanded by Type IIs, is and was quite simply answered by my rather long screed on Terra’s previous article, which then Mike decided to portray in another light in another story later.
And last but not least, “Type 1s and Type 2s are constructs of an over-imaginative mind.” Now is this Terra’s “over-imaginative mind”, or is he admitting that his theory is nonsense? No, to be fair I think that the existence of such people is more or less a fact, as his first sentence in that paragraph states, but the reasons and waffle Terra states above about them and how Type 1s supposedly think and act, is indeed like that rather big spiral diagram of a misunderstood word in HCOB ”CONFUSED IDEAS”. I am sure you will remember it!
Perhaps someone can enlighten me here on the journalistic or writing term for embedding a (not-so) subtle counter or negative message in one’s text and pretending that one is well, sort of, unbiased. For that is exactly what Terra has done in his article.
Happy to see you still plying your trade Foolproof. Your perspective is always interesting and sometimes enlightening.
Just a couple of comments:
“…many of whom he calls “ex-Scientologists” consider themselves still to be Scientologists, although the official Church counts only members in good standing now, I believe. I think it is even defined so in one of the Church dictionaries these days and one has to be a paid-up member and all that.”
Are you serious? You actually believe the “official Church” has millions of “members in good standing”? It is fascinating that you sow your comments with such blatant scientology propaganda? Why? You didn’t even need to make this argument, it had no relevance to anything else you are saying, but you felt he urge to cast the “official church” as being the truthful source of information it most definitely is NOT.
“Perhaps someone can enlighten me here on the journalistic or writing term for embedding a (not-so) subtle counter or negative message in one’s text and pretending that one is well, sort of, unbiased. For that is exactly what Terra has done in his article.”
Well, whether there is a name for this or not — but stand in front of a mirror for a minute and perhaps it will come to you.
Hmmm, where did I say that the Church has millions of members? They may or may not have, neither you nor I really know that. They probably don’t as you imply but where did I say that? You are catching the Wynski disease known as “Dub-In-Itis” by too much association!
On a different but related subject, strangely enough though I am always a bit puzzled when I see such and such an Org has 150 staff members or similar, which is, if true, quite something, and belies the poo- pooing of increased numbers on here. Of course how they count them (including FSMs? or bussing them in) is a factor but nevertheless I find it strange and a slightly contrary “fact” to the generally accepted belief (here) that the numbers are dwindling. But I am not beating any drum for this.
I have heard that when you stand in front of a mirror there is nothing to be seen!
Obviously you didnt say the millions, that is the “official church” that says that and you are the one promoting how they are such honest injuns reporting their numbers.
As for your subsequent paragraph — more propaganda. There is ONE org with 150 staff. Tampa. I have explained why. You conflate that into the generality “such and such org has 150 staff”.
One thing I will say, you are quite accomplished at your art.
I am not even being “artful” here – you ascribe more to me than I am! Where is my “promotion” of their numbers in the text: “…although the official Church counts only members in good standing now, I believe. I think it is even defined so in one of the Church dictionaries these days and one has to be a paid-up member and all that.” I don’t see any “numbers” or actually any implication of what you are saying in that text
No I have seen over time on here, other Orgs with (more than) I would have thought in terms of staff. But Mike, you know, it was more a question than me asserting something. I don’t really care either way. And I even stated I don’t know if it is true and it may well not be and they have padded the numbers somehow (FSMs and bus-ins). Artful? Not at all. You give me too much credence.
You are too modest.
I think it is artful to proclaim “the official church counts only members in good standing now” and then protest that “I never said there were millions.”
If the official church, as you say, only counts members in good standing, and they claim to have 10 million members, to then say “but I never said they had ten million members” is astonishingly disingenuous.So, do you agree that they DONT have 10 million members or do you disavow your statement that they “only count members in good standing”? Or do you actually assert there are 10 million members in good standing? It is one of those 3 answers. You are ducking and weaving again — maybe it’s because you are one of those “admin types” that Hubbard warned us all about.
Mike, really, I didn’t mean what you are implying, really! You read too much into my, what I thought were innocuous statements that were not beating a drum for anything. Yes the Church have probably got far less members than they what they state. I don’t know. I didn’t actually know they claim to have 10 million members. Alright now? Jeez!
Fool, are you the same person that runs that ILoveMyOriginalMartyBlog ?
Your posts here and the post on that blog have a similar low level of logic & sanity.
Not KNOWING from just walking into an org (today vs. 20 years ago) that the number of people is falling off of a cliff shows a complete lack of sanity.
Never heard of the blog.
Foolproof, suggestion, word clear, and demo
” succinct “.
Chris, suggestion: learn to read.
Your rebuttal doesn’t make sense.
Good try though.
What word did you misunderstand?
FP, you’re not Type 1 or Type 2; you’re in a class all your own!
If response length is a good objective measure of “bite,” then TC is your own personal nightmare pit bull, with his teeth sunk deep and a death grip on your back side!
Without him (and those like him here), what would you be? You’d be left to present an affirmative defense of Elron’s mega-mindfuckery, without all the butt hurt whinging.
If you can defend $cn practices on both logical and objectively verifiable grounds, then why not just do so instead of chumping for what you believe to be TC’s taunts that single you out for grief? If $cn worked and your TR 0 bull-baited was in, then you wouldn’t be wasting time on time-wasting SPs like TC, would you? You’d be busy extolling the miraculous wonders of $cn’s sure cure for whatever spiritually ails you. You’d be citing chapter and verse of all the empirical research that’s found $cn processing to be 100% effective.
More specifically here: Why not just give all that mess a miss and provide us with the scientific proof that memory recall is NOT just a biological function that is solely enabled by living brains, but instead can exist in some non-physical form and be transmitted across life times?
Or, just cut to the chase here and provide us with just one single solitary Oh Tea who can objectively demonstrate the thetarific super-human power of going exterior with full perception and exert causal powers over some part of the MEST universe from that supposedly independently operative state of disembodied existence?
The fact that the Mighty Thetan himself wasn’t even cause over his own MEST body’s condition and died as a crazy old demented coot with butt load of Vistaril on board to calm his deepening madness strongly suggests that $cn’s promised Eternity and total spiritual free dumb is never ever going to be achieved by anyone, don’t you think?
You wish to argue for the efficacy of $cn, but you do so solely from a solipsistic position that completely ignores, both the vast objective evidence that mind (and therefore, memory recall, attention, emotion, etc.) is dependent on brain, and the fact that no one who’s attested to Clear or Oh Tea levels can objectively demonstrate any of the promised powers and abilities that every one of them should be capable of…if $cn worked.
Quit your carping and pony up with the proof, Foolproof!
Haha – you have just proved the opposite of your theory. It is you and others like you that trail your slime of bitterness here.
Yes, I can just see it now, Scientology is going to take special care to prove to the brain of Harping-On that Scientology works. Give your brain a rest!
With no “proof” offered by you or your kind, and seemingly no awareness on your part that the extraordinary claims of $cn require extraordinary evidence, we’re just going to have to call you “Fool” for short from here on out.
Call me what you like, but those past life memories that you are in terror of will always be there, won’t they?
No, they won’t, because they’re not real memories of actual experiences; they’re false memories which have been implanted in your mind and allowed to flourish and propagate there, based on an obviously incorrect assertion about how memory works.
If trans-life time memory was indeed possible, and every one of us had experienced untold numbers of previous existences, then it stands to logical reason that we would by this very late date be in possession of a huge amount of objectively verified evidence to support that hypothesis.
But we have exactly none instead. Even the most purportedly advanced $cilon, who’s supposedly cured his/her “whole track amnesia” for good can’t provide a single solitary bit of proof that their “memory” is indeed veridical…not you, not Elron, not anyone!
The fact that this extraordinary cult claim not only lacks the extraordinary evidence that it requires, but that it’s completely without any shred of empirical evidence to support it, should tell you all you need to know about $cn’s ultra-whacked space opera cosmology.
If it doesn’t, then you’re not living in the real world which is, of course, your perfect right. Just don’t try to sell that pseudo-science crap to kids or I’ll have you up on mind rape charges…just like those that Elron should have been jailed on long ago!
Harpoona, that is the one thing scamologists fumble on. They claim to have the tech to save people for eternity YET, doing the ONE action that would cause the most people to obtain this precious tech they refuse to do.
Any sane person knows why that is. Only the insane argue against doing it.
Catch-22?
Foolproof: Please give it UP! You’re not funny, are only barely comprehensible; very nearly earned a TLDR rating.
If I cared about such things, I’d flag you as a possible OSA drone and possibly take some action about you(?what? I don’t know), but it’s not worth the effort. Might better flag you as comic relief, what a still-in is doing instead of thinking.
Don’t worry, I have had just about enough now and will let Terra and the brain boys crack on with their spontaneous combustions and whatever else they want to crack on with, you included. As for “take some action”, are you threatening me? If so someone might take action on you for doing so.
“The “scientific method” (of testing I assume) being espoused by Terra and supposedly demanded by Type IIs, is and was quite simply answered by my rather long screed on Terra’s previous article”
No, it was really “answered” in the way you imply, but trying to reason with or educate a true believer such as yourself is like trying to counter a creationist or flat-earther, so I don’t think anyone bothered.
However, as an example, I can take on one point you brought up, of whether this any therapy that’s been scientifically shown to have results, and it’s not just been well-studied, but for just one type of therapy, CBT, there have been meta-analyses of the many studies verifying the actual results and effectiveness specific applications of it, such that there’s now been a meta-analysis of the meta-studies of how it performs in various settings – including honest, scientific acknowledgement of the things it does well including supplanting psychopharmacology (no, “psychs” aren’t just looking for any way they can to drug people), and some ares in which other modalities do better, including interventions from exercise to mindfulness meditation. I’m going to take some time to excerpt this, so that anyone can see for themselves a bit of how real science is done in the field of the human mind:
The Efficacy of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: A Review of Meta-analyses
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3584580/
“Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) refers to a popular therapeutic approach that has been applied to a variety of problems. The goal of this review was to provide a comprehensive survey of meta-analyses examining the efficacy of CBT. We identified 269 meta-analytic studies [each of which reviewed from dozens to hundreds of individual studies] and reviewed of those a representative sample of 106 meta-analyses examining CBT….
To obtain the articles for this review, we searched PubMed, PsychInfo, and Cochrane library databases using the following key words: meta-analysis AND cognitive behav*, meta-analysis AND cognitive therapy, quantitative review AND cognitive behav*, quantitative review AND cognitive therapy. This initial search yielded 1,163 hits, of which 355 were duplicates and had to be excluded. The remaining 808 non-duplicate articles were further examined to determine if they met specific inclusionary criteria for the purposes of this review. All included studies had to be quantitative reviews (i.e., meta-analyses) of CBT….
RESULTS
Addiction and Substance Use Disorder
There was evidence for the efficacy of CBT for cannabis dependence, with evidence for higher efficacy of multi-session CBT versus single session or other briefer interventions, and a lower drop out rate compared to control conditions (Dutra et al., 2008). However, the effect size of CBT was small as compared to other psychosocial interventions (e.g. contingency management, relapse prevention, and motivational approaches) for substance dependence, and agonist treatments showed a greater effect size than CBT in certain drug dependencies, such as opioid and alcohol dependence (Powers, Vedel, & Emmelkamp, 2008)….
Schizophrenia and Other Psychotic Disorders
Meta-analyses examining the efficacy of psychological treatments for schizophrenia revealed a beneficial effect of CBT on positive symptoms (i.e., delusions and/or hallucinations) of schizophrenia (e.g., Gould et al., 2001; Rector & Beck, 2001). There was also evidence (e.g., Zimmerman et al., 2005) that CBT is a particularly promising adjunct to pharmacotherapy for schizophrenia patients who suffer from an acute episode of psychosis rather than a more chronic condition.
Depression and Dysthymia
CBT for depression was more effective than control conditions such as waiting list or no treatment, with a medium effect size (van Straten, Geraedts, Verdonck-de Leeuw, Andersson, & Cuijpers, 2010; Beltman, Oude Voshaar, & Speckens, 2010). However, studies that compared CBT to other active treatments, such as psychodynamic treatment, problem-solving therapy, and interpersonal psychotherapy, found mixed results….
Bipolar Disorder
Meta-analyses examining the efficacy of CBT for bipolar disorder revealed small to medium overall effect sizes of CBT at post-treatment, with effects typically diminishing slightly at follow-up. These findings emerged from examinations of both manic and depressive symptoms associated with bipolar disorder (e.g., Gregory, 2010a, 2010b). There is little evidence that CBT as a stand-alone treatment (rather than as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy) is effective for the treatment of bipolar disorder….
Anxiety Disorders
In general, CBT is a reliable first-line approach for treatment of this class of disorders (Hofmann & Smits, 2008), with support for significant positive effects of CBT on secondary symptoms such as sleep dysfunction and anxiety sensitivity (Ghahramanlou, 2003)….
Somatoform Disorders
Within the somatoform disorders category of DSM-IV, meta-analyses primarily examined the efficacy of psychological interventions for hypochondriasis and body dysmorphic disorder. One meta-analysis found a large mean effect size for CBT, which outperformed other psychological treatments (i.e., psychoeducation, explanatory therapy, cognitive therapy, exposure and response prevention, and behavioral stress management), with effect sizes in the large range, as well as pharmacotherapy treatments (paroxetine, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, and nefazodone), which also evidenced large effect sizes (Taylor, Asmundson, & Coons, 2005)….
Eating Disorders
For bulimia nervosa, meta-analyses compared the efficacy of CBT to control treatments and found effect sizes in the medium range (Thompson-Brenner, 2002). However, the effect of behavior therapy was greater than that of CBT, with the average effect size for behavior therapy in the large range (Thompson-Brenner, 2003)….
Insomnia
CBT for insomnia (CBT-I) has long been shown to be more efficacious than control treatments. A recent meta-analysis examined its efficacy on both subjective and objective sleep parameters in comparison to a control group for individuals with primary insomnia (Okajima, Komada, & Inoue, 2011). Effect sizes for the efficacy of CBT-I versus control at the end of treatment on subjective sleep measures, which included sleep onset latency, total sleep time, wake after sleep onset, total wake time, time in bed, early morning awakening, and sleep efficiency, ranged from minimal (total sleep time) to large (early morning awakening) (Okajima et al., 2011)….
Personality Disorders
There was one meta-analysis that examined the relative efficacy of CBT versus psychodynamic therapy for the treatment of personality disorders (Leichsenring & Leibing, 2003). The findings indicated a larger overall effect size for psychodynamic therapy compared to CBT. This was consistent with observer-rated measures, which showed a similar pattern of effect sizes: stronger for psychodynamic therapy than for CBT (although this effect size was also large). Self-report measures, however, indicated larger effect sizes for CBT than for psychodynamic therapy….
Anger and Aggression
Two meta-analytic reviews focused on anger control problems and aggression (Del Vecchio & O’Leary, 2004; Saini, 2009). The findings from these meta-analyses suggested that CBT is moderately effective at reducing anger problems. Findings from these reviews also suggested that CBT may be most effective for patients with issues regarding anger expression….
Criminal Behaviors
Four separate meta-analytic studies supported the efficacy of CBT for criminal offenders (Illescas, Sanchez-Meca, & Genovés, 2001; Lösel & Schmucker, 2005; Pearson, Lipton, Cleland, & Yee, 2002; Wilson, Bouffard, Mackenzie, 2005). Out of several theoretical orientations and types of psychological interventions for criminal activity, behavior therapy and CBT appeared to be the superior interventions in reducing recidivism rates, both with medium mean effect sizes (Illescas, Sanchez-Meca, & Genovés, 2001)….
General Stress
Four meta-analyses examined occupational stress and the majority of their results were quite similar: CBT interventions were more effective in comparison to other intervention types such as organization focused therapies, especially when CBT focused on psycho-social outcomes in employees (Kim, 2007; Richardson & Rothstein, 2008; van der Klink, Blonk, Schene, & van Dijk, 2001)….
Distress Due to General Medical Conditions
Limited well-controlled studies existed in the study of non-ulcer dyspepsia, multiple sclerosis, physical disability following traumatic injury, non-epileptic seizures, post-concussion syndrome, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, Type II diabetes, and burning mouth syndrome (e.g. Soo et al., 2004; Thomas, Thomas, Hillier, Galvin, & Baker, 2006; Baker, Brooks, Goodfellow, Bodde, & Aldenkamp, 2007; Ismail, Winkley, & Rabe-Hesketh, 2004). However, cancer was studied more rigorously and with more robust methodological attention, indicating small to medium effect sizes of individual CBT as compared to patient education only in gynecological and head/neck cancers (Zimmerman & Heinrichs, 2006; Luckett, Britton, Clover, & Rankin, 2011), on secondary outcomes such as quality of life, psychological distress (i.e., depression and anxiety), and pain. Further, CBT was shown to be equally effective as exercise interventions in treating cancer-related fatigue (Kangas, Bovbjerg, & Montgomery, 2008).
Chronic Pain and Fatigue
Meta-analyses examining the efficacy of psychosocial treatments for chronic pain have investigated chronic low back pain, fibromyalgia, rheumatoid arthritis, chronic fatigue syndrome, chronic musculoskeletal pain, and non-specific chest pain. These reviews have examined the effect of a range on treatments on chronic pain, including relaxation techniques, mindfulness-based techniques, acceptance-based techniques, biofeedback, psycho-education, and behavioral and cognitive-behavioral treatments. Results of these meta-analyses revealed varying effect sizes for these treatments depending on the type of chronic pain targeted; however, CBT treatments for chronic pain were consistently in the small to medium effect size range.
Pregnancy Complications and Female Hormonal Conditions
One meta-analysis found CBT to be more effective in comparison to control conditions for perinatal depression (Sockol, Epperson, & Barber, 2011), and another meta-analysis found beneficial effects of CBT for postnatal depression, but these results need to be interpreted with caution because it is difficult to causally link depression with pregnancy and hormonal changes in these studies (Dennis, & Hodnett, 2007)….
Yes, very good. All that effort involved and yet most on here know (but might not admit) that flying someone’s rudiments in 10 minutes does more for someone’s mental health than all of the above you list.
WOW FP you are in full form today. First I have to say that I do enjoy your backlash on Saturday’s. I have decided that this is what you look forward to all week long. This is the place where you can lash out. I’m wondering now if during the week you have to “act” all level headed and “OT” for those that surround you. And here you can be your angry pissed off self.
Yes, there is some truth in what you say Ms. P. I am thinking of packing it all in though. It is probably wasting eveyone’s time here, and as you say, I’ve got to strut around being OT more rather than sitting at a keyboard. Interesting though that you see my tone level of comments as angry. I suppose “challenging” might be interpreted as antagonistic but there is always a certain amount of tongue-in-cheek to my comments as well. But being a Clear means I can use all emotions and of course act appropriately – anger and antagonism included, to situations where such are the correct response.
As for me “lashing out” – the whole content of this web site is “lashing out”. Or hadn’t you noticed?
Ms. P —
That’s what I see, too. FP is constantly saying that Terra and other posters wait with baited breath to read his posts. LOL…as if. His ego could fill a stadium. It’s so embarrassing.
Like you said, it seems to me that he can hardly wait for Saturdays to come around so he can go off on endless rants
Baited breath? Constantly eh? The first time and only time I have stated such is in this link. How “embarrassing” for you eh? Or is it that you feel compelled to reply negatively to any comment I make and now invent things? Pretty usual about me and my comments. And of course actually I have replied to about 5 or 6 or Terra’s “stories” in among the what, 20-25 he may have posted. The ones I didn’t bother replying to were less drivel than the ones I did. Yes, your haste to press fingers to keyboard is very embarrassing. But don’t let me stop your hyperbole – it’s obviously thereapeutic.
FP —
Actually, you said pretty much the same kind of thing directly to Terra a few or more Saturdays back, which is why I mentioned it. Look at your previous Sat comments — you’ll find it.
If I were quoting you directly, I would have used quotes. But I have no desire to sift through your old posts.
I distinctly remember the comment because it was embarrassing, frankly, that you would think anyone is waiting around for you to show up.
Like Mike said, you have a very inflated self-importance.
I’m not embarrassed at all. Why would I be? I’m not the one who says crazy shit.
hardly anyone commenting on here wants a “debate” about whether or not case gain was made.
I wanted a debate with you but you disappeared. We were discussing the significance of the placebo effect with regards to talk therapy. I cited studies I thought would be of interest to you and to the debate. You claimed the results of auditing were “empirical” but when asked to provide evidence you vanished.
The “scientific method” (of testing I assume) being espoused by Terra and supposedly demanded by Type IIs, is and was quite simply answered by my rather long screed on Terra’s previous article,
You dismissed the notion that auditing could be tested as well as the efficacy of any alternative. This suggests a very poor understanding of the scientific method as well as a fixed idea about therapeutic values. I explained to you how psychological therapies such as CBT, DBT, etc., are measured, the basics of a clinical trial, and how auditing could be tested in a similar fashion. Once again…tumbleweed…
So I see no evidence from your commentary that you are interested in any reasoned debate. You seem uninterested in building ARC and understanding why some people here hold the opinions they do. When some have tried to engage, you disappear. Your comments are typically caustic and hostile and do not bespeak an enlightened state worthy of pursuit. In conclusion, you demonstrate none of the wisdom you claim scientology provides. You seem to be shitting all over the Code of a Scientologist and some pretty basic scientology teaching including, but not limited to, ARC, The Tone Scale, What is Greatness, HCOB People’s Questions, HCO PL Manners, HCO PL Open Letter to All Clears, heck, even HCO PL How to handle Black PR…!
It’s bizarre to see you argue the effectiveness of a therapy when you are neither able or willing to demonstrate it.
Why is scientology so pressed to kick people out? Wouldn’t scientology be more motivated to draw people in?
The whole thing, today, feels like it has been tended to better than a batch of neglected tomatoes. Where are you, LRH?! Please come back and continue my auditing!!
In examining the comments here posted on Mike Rinder blog, it appears both types show up, and some in between.
Who will win the argument or discussion?
Look up the word argument and/or discussion, simple highlight and click.
Myself, I once thought I could go clear and then OT. where’s the beef, is what I eventually questioned, no beef, just bun is what I found out.
I’d wish DM would show up and answer and prove things, post here, after all he should be Grade 0 comp, or willing to talk to anybody about anything.
What say you David, DM?
IMO, li’l Davey Boy didn’t honestly attest to anything, in or out of Scientology. I first met him as an OEC vol 2 intern. AS Flag’s CF officer, I had a few interns come through, and had, of necessity, one vital question of them before they touched “my” files, the answer to which they would have seen in the preceding few days: “What’s the primary purpose of CF?” I didn’t expect (or want ) word-for-word recitation of what was in ALL CAPS in the PL, but had it pasted up on the wall by my desk just in case of uncertainty. every intern BUT Davey got pretty close; He hemmed and hawed, missed the most important element, then glibly argued when I pointed out the PL and asked him what it meant. Oh gosh, he was so smoothly glib! Almost had me believing his balderdash.
Comparing notes with my co-workers afterwards, I concluded he was at best an indifferent student, if not the type of guy who knows ALL about a subject before he cracks open a reference.
More recently, I read that he clocked his co-auditor at St Hill. From other reports and my observations, I can easily believe the reports which earn him the nickname of “Slappy” and conclude that he didn’t honestly complete Grade 0, or TRs.
And recent news descriptions of his being asthmatic show the lie of the myth he spreads that Scientology auditing CURED his asthma.
Gib, El Con couldn’t even do what you are asking of DM. Violent criminals rarely can..
I am type 2 and I am very glad that you are not going to start a religion.
PPS. There are always workable truths in every major religion/cult/whatever
Otherwise they wouldn’t have grown the way they have. That’s the fun part … sifting through the crap to find those viable seeds.
Imo anyways
Yeah it was a gas, alright, but that gas has passed! I certainly still use the parts that work for me, though.
There are workable truths in cartoons, funnies, fables and fairytales. Religion is not the sole purveyor of workable truths IMHO.
The Ponies are livid.
I am a fan of the old feminine wisdom tales ala Clarissa Pinkola Estes myself.
I have a Q.
“The Tech” – is this the universal principles of being that can be found at the heart of most religions and recovery groups (whether actually applied to one’s life is a different post)
Or
Is it something else?
PS. The e meter would have me anxiety ridden. Ah yes – the prophets of discernment come in many guises.
I always regarded Hubbard’s policies as suggestions. He never convinced me that Scientology worked. I only saw it as a tool which I could use to get some spiritual progress. I left Scientology in 1989 and never gave it a second thought until Rathbun started his blog in 2008. The auditing in the beginning from 1972-1980 was helpful. After 1980 it was too complex and expensive. OT VIII was a total scam.
My devolution from Scientology took almost thirty years and went in two stages:
1. For the first twenty five years, I thought there was some inherent value in Scientology as a workable technology but I did not participate in any activities. I was 100% out.
2. After studying the occult, and Hubbard’s connections to it, I concluded that Hubbard was a misguided man with strong opinions based on myths. He had excessive belief in his own mind and its mental constructs with no real originality. He merely copied Blavatsky and Theosophy but changed it to his own belief system with no real basis in fact. He experimented on people and was very clever in writing scripts which could be used with an e-meter. In the end, he produced nothing of value for me. His only value was in organizing Scientology into a subject which could be used as a tool for a short time while the mind found its own solution.
so true George, even Ron said one has to run scientology out
Yep, it’s bullshit. I’d wish it take shorter, but free discussion has shortened it for any individual willing to look and compare of results to be supposedly had.
I agree with your point 2 entirely. However, one has to be actually LOOKING for one’s own solution. In my area there are some well-off and highly intelligent OTs who did the Bridge up to OT8, and spent many years on OT7. When GAT came out they duly did OT 7 & 8 all over again, once more for quite a few years. They then woke up and formed their own Indie group and embarked upon Cap’n Bill’s version – and as far as I know are still on it. How many years can one audit this shit? I was on OT7 two years, bored out of my mind at the lack of wins and pure mechanics of the auditing (believing I was auditing other entities, not myself). Clearly, one can get trapped into this is one applies KSW which actively stops one from looking for one’s own solution.
Lol @Dr Mac “… How many years can you audit this shit?
And there are those all in for OT, no matter what form yet (you can’t really know a level until you get there right? Or let’s presume), and no matter how many lifetimes it takes.
The real documented and sworn atrocities, whatever your beliefs, began early with his authoritarian militaristic level of governing a business while running and/or hiding from local, state and federal governments, authorities, hiding assets, discovering past lives while leveling criminal punishments disguised as ethics and justice, comm Ev offense if your in box is stacked! Then separation, torture and allowing human rights abuses on his own top people. Sound familiar?
That was LRH, not Miscavige, all the while developing or imagining the OT Levels, again your preference,- until he couldn’t and basically dropped out and tuned or turned into something, well, in the end, even more strange.
Well, Computer Guy above described Type III – which is definitely my category. Even now though, 13 years since I escaped, it’s hard to wash the stench of having been ‘in’ for 20 years.
I truly hope the whole operation gets seized by the IRS and that Miscavige rots in prison. Most of the time now I can ‘not think about it’ anymore – EXCEPT – when I grudgingly find myself using some tool I learned in SCN because it either automatic because of all my training, or some thing that still works better for me than whatever else I’ve come up with since. I really hate those moments because it’s like “Hotel California” where “you can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave.”
I feel like I’ll never truly escape or be free of the social stigma of having been so badly duped into the cult, no matter what else I do. Soon, I’ll be moving back to my old home town, where I will have to explain to all the people who knew me 30 years ago, BEFORE I got suckered into it, what happened and why I abandoned them for a stupid, evil cult.
“I feel like I’ll never truly escape or be free of the social stigma of having been so badly duped into the cult, no matter what else I do. ”
The therapy that worked for me started with realizing that Hubbard was simply a minor product of his time period. He was born in 1911; I was born in 1946, He had a head start and was brought up with an occult background. I was a Catholic slated to be a Priest. It was merely a process of adjustment to free myself from him. This is not an excuse. I had to stand on his head.
“Father George” – Wow! I’m Reverend Richard and still have my Scientology “Minister Certificate” to prove it.
I’m way more recent than 05, ..but boy do I understand what you mean…..
Hotel California is an apt reference for me too. There is so very much that is ingrained and trained in. I had almost 40 years in.
I don’t know if I’ll end up with a final opinion of my rearview mirror, a nice neat package of explanation and emotion that I can just leave to the side and make my way forward….
I’m still peeling and dealing… but … so far the simplest for me is to just embrace having been naïve and tricked. “apparently I’m capable of being stupid for decades” But being still mind trapped ingrained makes for some tough spates of pretty bad feelings.
…
I found Aaron Smith Levin vids to be helpful, particularly the interviews between him and Mike – there is a light airy acceptance and insouciance that I found to be helpful. I was a bit in awe of it… and it’s something that I maybe look to try to adopt later on when things are less raw.
(and I pray for the day I can stop being UTR, that’ll help)
Your friends and family will never really GET what drew you, what it was like, how it’s been. I figure we should just take the comfort and happiness they have to offer. Enjoy the today with them.
Alright, good analysis Mike. I will give that to you, but what does Scientology think about those who no longer want to go on course or go into session? Its out there on the internet in the Scientology orientation video.
Let’s see, what does it imply? Doesn’t it say if you walk out that door, you could jump off a bridge or blow your brains out? Those are strong words, very cultish. This is official church of scientology material. Crazy, I thought so too. For a multi billion dollar organization to suggest those who don’t go on course should die violently is some mafia type material, not something I would find in a community oriented religious group.
Type 2s don’t sound so bad when put into the context of that video, KSW, and fair game. Now, a serious overhaul of Scientology materials to modern day standards, ousting of current executives, and a amnesty of all former members could stop the dwindling spiral towards the infestimal and insignificant. Type 1s might hope for it, but I don’t see a 21st century Reformation (‘KSW repair action’) happening. Yet revolutions aren’t part of doctrine, so the best Type 1s have is the hope of a return to MEST of the master, but that’s just hope.
TYPE 4 : Marty Rathbun
Dave F.
Type Asshole who betrayed and took the money: Marty Rathbun
🙂
I am a type one.
I know that I am.
I cannot answer the questions why LRH had been this or that and if and but and soandso.
I cannot handle every problem.
But I have the power to decide if I want to solve a problem or not.
And I do not want to solve the problem Scientology. Too many conflicting data.
Too many lies. Too many different interests.
That is an OT ability to be able to have a problem and not solving it.
“That is an OT ability to be able to have a problem and not solving it.”
No Schorsch, that is the normal human condition. LOL!
Sorry, but many of my friends are not in either category. It’s just not true that there are just two types. Life isn’t like that. People aren’t like that. I know Freezowners who don’t care if their PCs are on psychiatric medication or are taking it themselves. I know some who refer to Hub as an asshole. People do not fit neatly into two little boxes. Nobody at my house does, either, that’s for sure.
Claire, you hit the nail on the head. My thoughts exactly. Yes Terra, you made sweeping generalizations based on what? Maybe it would have been better to outline your pathway out and how you went from being a Type 1 to a Type 2. You can speak for yourself but not for everyone as there are more than only two categories. What about the people who think Ron was not perfect, was an asshole in some cases, but that some, not all, of his tech works, and they admit they had wins from some of the tech? And to say the Type 2’s don’t have to be right? Ha! There are a few posters, not mentioning names, but they fight so hard to denigrate and grind into dust anything LRH and anything tech related and make any commenter who shares a win with the tech a target of a free for all, tearing them limb from limb. The word Service Facsimile comes to mind when I think of these people. They simply can’t grant beingness to anyone who has had any win whatsoever in Scn. So if you want to talk about having to be right, that is where many of the 2s reside–making themselves right and others wrong.
I think that since both groups would like to see the existing church in its existing incarnation brought down, then let’s concentrate on this. Then after it is down, those who want to reform Scn and start anew can do so. Those who don’t want to do that can also have their way. It’s called live and let live. And just because I sometimes “sling the lingo” doesn’t mean I embrace all things LRH or all parts of the tech. It doesn’t mean I wouldn’t refer someone to a psych if they needed it. And yes, I DO practice yoga and it has nothing to do with whether you are a 1 or a 2 at all. I just didn’t like you pigeon-holing me in your article.
No need to feel pigeon holed.
You can decide to ignore this construct altogether. It’s just one persons opinion. Nobody is asking you to give money or anything.
Very true Mike that no one is asking me to give money or anything. And I don’t feel pigeon holed because I didn’t accept that label on myself. I think the author of today’s post wrongly attempted to pigeon hole people into only two categories. And as I pointed out, and as many others of your posters also pointed out, people are much more complex than that.
Are these generalities? Yes. Are there gradient variations and differences within each group? Absolutely. Do people waffle? All the time….
There’s probably the Type 3’s , that actually go AFTER CoS and try to expose them for the horror they are…..then someone said the Type 4 .Marty..I guess he went after them then did a complete flip????? Anyway, Terra Cotta…. said they were generalities….don’t know what everyone’s getting in a huff for. Jimminie Crickets!
Lynda – I agree. I’m not taking the “construct” literally. It’s a conversation opener allowing people to express their feelings about their scn experience which is a good thing. Lighten up.
This topic opens the possibility for many threads which could go on for a while which usually doesn’t happen on a daily blog. Maybe Mike will someday decide to take Sunday off and let Terra’s topics ride for an extra day.
My first attempt at blogging was on Marty’s blog three years ago. I continued making about 15 or 20 comments without anyone else posting anything. I didn’t realize he’d posted a new topic and everyone else had moved on! I had the topic to myself, kind of like a diary – lol
ctempster, what really happens is that people are NOT torn apart who said they have some wins. (people have wins all the time from many things in life)
The reality is that people who come here saying the tech works are asked to SHOW the objective results that El Con said a person would get for DOING scamology.
Since no one CAN as it doesn’t werk, they tend to get upset and feel attacked. And then write posts like you just did.
Wynski, You attempt to tell me what I was feeling and thinking and that thus “…And then write posts like you just did.” You didn’t hit the mark on knowing what I think or feel. I didn’t “feel attacked” as you wrote. And here is something to think about. Why do you and a few, not all, think that people who have a win at Scn or at anything for that matter, have to PROVE or SHOW objective results. If a person goes to a church and sings a hymn and then feels better, how can they show objective results? It is all subjective. My point was and still is, that people should allow people to voice wins on anything which may or may not include Scn, and not have to prove or show some kind of objective proof to their win. If it is faith, then so be it. Faith is a belief that can’t be quantified. We as good listeners and hopefully friends on this site (we are, after all, united in our quest to take down the C of $), we should just be able to have someone originating a win. And we should just be able to grant beingness to that. If you think it is a crock of bull personally, that’s fine. But don’t attack them if you think it’s bull. Just read it and nod wisely because you know the real score, and move on. That’s my message.
You didn’t understand a word I wrote. Typical of those still in thrall of the unworkable “tek”.
You have to have the last word and make it a make-wrong at that, Wynski. Whatever.
Cindy, why don’t you just address the substance of the post rather than blather about something unrelated?
Thank you Terra Cognita, You Always have interesting posts & what you write really contributes to the entire collection of Scientology Stories and Heartaches. I understand the two types of ex Scientologists you mention. As for me I think I am a type X meaning status Invisable for I feel that if a type1 wants to still believe in tech and Ron, they will. The huge difference for me was, a) the auditing for the most part I received did not inspire confidence in that EMeter or most who were operating it. And this was apparent from the start & b) when I was steered into the Guardians World of Lunacy, I could no longer pretend that Policy and my Sea Org pledge for one billion years would save me. I learned it all came down to power and control. If I did all I was asked to do even it it was totally out Ethics I was Upstat. If I pointed out situations that I felt were out Ethics whoops thrown right to the howling spy wolves. I quickly realized the only things that mattered were absolute adherence to Ron/ miscavige and even better if while in the Sea Org I kept donating money for services that all other Day & Fdn members wanted me to loan them, then all was well. So today I call it as I see it and what I see with Scientology is very lonely very expensive very hurtful very full of outright lies & very destructive to bodies,minds & spirits. It is not a religion, it is a nightmare gone very very wrong. ??
Ann, you’ve just to stop holding back about how you really feel! LOL
I know! Big Smile. A fire has been lit in my heart & I am letting it flame & spark far into the Night the cult has drawn around itself! I do love to laugh & have learned how powerful all you amazing posters are. Thank you from my ? Peter.
TC, great topic.
The most workable position is the #2 who does not throw out the baby with the bath water.
1. Knows Hubbard plagerized some very valid applied techniques and practices.
2. Knows Hubbard built in lies to his “tech” to control members of his group. Has identified the lies and control mechanism.
3. Compares some of the usable techniques and rules of Scn with proven techniques that can be used with good results.
4. Knows the organization is robotic to Hubbards and Miscaviges dogma and stays clear of it.
5. Has moved on and stops regretting that they hooked up with a psychopathic criminal.
6. Supports exposing the cult so that more people don’t get trapped in it.
7. Is living life to the fullest using whatever works for him or her.
That’s my position and it’s working out well for me. I went through the steps. First believing in Hubbard and not the current organization. The more I learned the more I realized what a fraud Hubbard was. And that lead to seeing how he built the tech to create Sciebots and Seaborgs.
BKmole,
I am similar to you.
I was only in the cos for a few days, before I was declared. That was 21 yrs ago.
I learned about book 1 from a TV commercial and read a good part of it before I got in and realized that there was good stuff in it.
Went to the cos got a demo and had a good release or key out, did a couple of intro courses, and very long story short, quickly realized that the place was coo coo, and let them know that, and was soon declared.
Serendipituously, (the Hebrew’s call it divine providence) a few months later, while on a business trip, someone briefly told me about the story of scn and the big exodus and the resulting fz, connected with it, and then bit by bit, got all the books and read them, and so did scn by the seat of my pants, including getting a lot of fz auditing and learning how to audit and it was the best thing I ever did.
I sorted out all the good data from all the false and limiting data.
It saved my life many times.
There is a right way and wrong way to do pretty much everything.
Dio
The “misunderstood word” theory or idea or whatever it is seems to be one of the more difficult concepts for me to understand. From my experience, I just don’t see a logical cause and effect to the level I see it portrayed in scientology. For example, there was a loss of a valued person within a company. The loss was caused by a number of crazy factors and managerial neglect. After the loss of the valued person, the official cause was listed as “a misunderstood word.” I thought wow, these people are crazier than I thought. It was unimaginable. Absolutely zero problems were fixed. The whole situation was dismissed as nothing more than a misunderstood word.
I would think once you question what is really going on in this crazy religion. All the money spending, the electronics, the disconnecting from friends and family. If you had any sense left you would be out of there in a hot second and never look back. If any one got in my face or followed me around I would question it even more.
I can not wrap my head around what is so appealing to this craziness. Looking in from the outside it is such madness at every level
What’s missing your reality here, Donna, is that many of us got in decades ago. A tremendous amount of information that you can now access, simply was not available back in the our day. As well, the organization was different, too. Many for those eras will tell you we had one hell of a lot of fun. In the NY org, we coined the phrase, “If it isn’t fun, it isn’t Scientology”… and we meant it. Lots of folks working together, high stats generally, rarely any sea org to deal with and people getting better, by their own standards. The crap really began in the 70s and things became far less “fun”.
Good point, Peter. I also remember the days when “Scientology was fun.”
What I think that a lot of outsiders – and maybe even ex-members – don’t really get, is that especially back then, when there was a lot more freedom at the missions and local orgs in particular, people were more able to make what they wanted of their experience, and importantly, out of their intentions to better themselves and to help others. I’m not sure the results would have been particularly different, if a group of like-minded people had gotten together in some other organizational form, but with the same intents and purposes.
What’s happened now, is that the CofS has exerted such control, that there’s little freedom left for people to make their experience with Scientology what they want, and to meaningfully relate to others.
Hope this hasn’t double posted – My original post suddenly disappeared!!
Looking back on my $camology “experience” I can honestly say that I was never a scion!!! Is this another type of ex?
Let me explain:
I had NEVER heard of Dianetics or $camology until one day I received an OCA tucked into a free newspaper pushed through my letterbox…….. (Where was the internet when you needed it…..?).
I filled in the OCA and sent it back to the mission, but didn’t include my phone number thinking the personality results would be posted to me……..
Little did I know that this mission was on speed dial to directory enquires and got my phone number. A div 6 reg called me and persuaded me to come in for the results, despite my protests that it was an 80 mile return trip……. Anyway, I drove down to the mission………..
The div 6 reg gave me the results from the OCA which (as usual), came back with characteristics which didn’t seem to apply to me. Then I did a “communication” course which I felt was next to useless. At this point I just wanted to get out of the mission where I did the course and go home. I didn’t even have any thoughts of asking for money back. I simply put it down to experience……..
The mission I attended, unknown to me at the time, was one of the biggest money makers in the world at the time. This included a lot of the smaller “orgs”. Needless to say this mission employed an excellent div 4 registrar.(By $cino standards anyway…….).
So, the night I completed the useless course I got called into the registrars office at about 10.00 pm. She WOULD NOT let me leave until I had signed up for a Life Repair!! Before I had properly started that I was regged for the Purif, and a load of other stuff, the following week…….!! Little did I know that I was now the mission’s cash cow as I was fairly affluent back then.
It turned out that the mission was committing financial crimes which, quite frankly if the police had ever heard about, would have resulted in the place being shut down and the “execs” jailed. That’s another story……….
Personally I got VERY little “gains” from $camology. The thing keeping me there was the ever increasing amounts of money that I was pressurised to pass over, (didn’t want it to be spent in vain), and the constant “love bombing” from the execs, plus the “you’ll get great gains from the next level” persuasion……..
Looking back on it I can see SOME gains to be had for SOME people doing SOME of the lower div 6 courses. Although they’re probably not worth it at the prices that are probably charged now………….
The rest of it, in my opinion, was a crock of shit! The validity of the emeter, the grades, the state of “clear”, the training side of the “bridge”, Hubbard’s false stories in booklet form, the events which used to tell us which wonderful things had been achieved (but I never saw any real life results). Attacks on psychiatry (never did agree with that, but couldn’t mention it).
And don’t get me going on the “OT” levels! The mission was run by “OT’s”. Frankly the way they used to go about it was pure business suicide. Never saw a more deluded bunch of retards in my life! (And that’s probably an insult to retards…..).
Amazingly enough I’m not actually anti $camology. I’m anti the abuses that’s for sure. But then I’m anti ANY abuses of ANY group. If people say “No, I’m not going bankrupt, selling my house, cashing in my pensions, remortgaging my home, getting loans out etc…. etc……”, then it means just that.
And as for the cult’s evil disconnection policy….. Words fail me……….
But…… If people are happy paying in god knows how much for a complete bucket of shit then it’s fine by me. As long as they are FULLY AWARE of what they’re getting.
As far as I’m concerned people can have a belief in communicating with little green men dressed up as the 7 dwarfs, all wearing pink hats. And pay £1,000 a day for the privilege If it floats their boat then that’s fine by me…………
Soooooo, to cut a long story short I may be a Type 2, and definitely not a Type 1. However, I prefer to be a Type 3 – “Never believed in the shit to start with……….”
Take care all.
Perhaps I was a little hasty in saying I was Type 3 judging by the number of comments where Type 3 is mentioned!!
I’m Type X – None of the above!
Exbrit … I don’t get it … You felt the comm course was useless and got nothing out of Scientology, but kept giving money for more services … Why?
Hi Joe,
It was because of the undue influence exerted by those in the mission, and other areas of $camology.
It happens to many people in this cult. Don’t forget it is essentially a SCAM. People get persuaded to listen rather than look…………….
Joe, an completely unbelievable question. Show me ONE person who got the stated abilities from all the Grades they purchased. You CANNOT. As they don’t exist. YET, you and they kept paying for the next Grade up and through clear.
List ALL the abilities that EL COn listed for clears that you got when you went “clear” (and demonstrate them) or explain why YOU kept paying for a lie.
Bournemouth?
You guessed! Were you there too?
Yeah, late 90s/early 00s…on and off. Steph Groeger tried to reg the crap out of me every time I set foot in there but I was a tough nut to crack back then (sadly I got worn down elsewhere, years later). Nice peeps for the most part. I did hear whispers of dodgy finances but, much like everything else remotely unpleasant, dismissed them as lies/entheta, etc. Glad you’re here (and out!)
???
mwesten.
I think we have a lot in common. Would like to email you. Can you please ask Mike to give you my email addy?
I can’t post my email address on a public board!
Hope you receive this.
Take care.
This was extremely boring, like always, but this time thanks for keeping it short.
Yossi—
Extremely boring? Then why did you read it? If all of Terra’s posts are boring to you, then why bother reading them at all? Or are you calling these posts boring because you’re a diehard Hubbard fan?
KIC, I suspect you just offered a little snack to an OSA troll 🙂
Lol…yep, you’re probably right.
Too complicated for you to read,Yossi? Do you need the Dr.Seus version of it? Instead of Thing 1 and Thing 2 ,we have Type 1 and Type 2. Ex-Scientologists who ran out and just blew. Type 1 still believes Hubbard and believes Davy is not it,Type 2 thinks all of it is all full of ……….
You said : Type 1s and Type 2s are constructs of an over-imaginative mind
Yes, true, the reality is much more complex, and this is a beautifull example of tabloïd-like caricature. Not helping truth
In 2009 (!) I tried a similar thing. I ended up with 6 groups.
https://whyweprotest.net/threads/accounts-count-over-on-exscn.44344/#post-930184
YMMV
Group G : Marty Rathbun
🙂 again, Dave F.
What the Savage Miscavage fails to consider is when $cientologists are mistreated it starts to send them down that inquisitive online path, find some real truths about this nasty cult they’ve been flirting with, acquire better objectivity and facilitating becoming non-$cientologists.
Mistreatment is it’s own reward so things like disconnection, Ethics, RPF and the usual Pod People inhumane Scientology way only hurry along the fall out and rejection by previous believers. Essentially being calculating a-holes will only get you empty orgs, LRH policy or not. Poor treatment of humans is never workable and eventually a price will be paid by those higher ups with little vision or humanity.
The price is being paid right now all over the world.
The dedication of people who want to stop Scientology criminality is approaching 1967 Sea Org levels.
Examples Mike,Tony,John Q and many others.
In 1967 the SO people were smart and the World was dumb.
Now the world is smart and the SO members are dumb.
In this life of mental soup, I guess my take on Scientology has sort of blended into everything else I’ve gotten myself messed up with. But there is a definite “cycle of action” (ohhhh… I hate using that term but it gets the point across) that Scio to ex – Scios go through when the truth begins to expose itself. Where and how far you go with the truth of Scientology is an interesting topic with all sorts of personal views & results. There’s no real guidelines, except honesty and the understanding that the organisation of the Cof$ is criminal and is one enormously BIG SCAM. But for scams to be effective there is generally a certain amount of truth, desires or concentrated attention/interest involved.
Over the last couple of years, especially with the help of this site, its references etc & even Marty’s to a degree before he fell off the sanity perch helped me delaminate the subject of Scientology. Hubbard had despicable character traits/flaws as a human being and sure liked to pick a fight with anyone who didn’t agree with him. His policies are evidence of a huge chip on his shoulder. I been particularly bemused and then amused by Hubbard’s use of the emeter reads on himself to guide him to his tek. If those that believe in the standard of Scientology effectiveness, I think they also must consider the fact it was Hubbard’s case that guided him to his conclusions about life. Those rascally little entities sure must know a thing or two hey? Just had a thought – think I’ll see if I still have my meter in the back of the shed somewhere, charge it up and work out the winning lotto numbers… well?? That’s not as silly as it sounds… is it? Hubbard made a squillion dollars with it!
Interesting take Terra and tku. I especially liked the way you introduced this topic. You tip toed through that minefield with ease.
Then there would be the Type 3, which is a combination of Type 1 and Type 2: they think that some of what LRH developed is valid, whether he plagiarized it or not, but mostly, the Type 3 doesn’t have the time or energy not the inclination to try to fully tease apart the subject to catagorize what is workable for them and what isn’t.
They just don’t care about it any more. There is a whole world of other practices to explore!
I know this may sound crazy, but hey, we are talking about Type 3 here. ?
Wouldn’t that then be type 1.5?
Type 1.1 would have to be exes who seem to regard Hubbard and the tech positively, but are staring to become covertly hostile to them….
Well done as usual, Terra. Following up on your article, here’s my own elaboration: There are three types of never-ins:
1. Those who know how thoroughly evil scientology is and want nothing to do with it except to put an end to it (this would be most of the those who frequent this blog).
2. Those who kinda know what scientology is on a superficial level and think Tom Cruise is a
little wacked, but that’s Hollywood for ya.
3. Those who don’t read much, or don’t have English as a first language, or are beset with anxiety over personal or career problems, maybe not a lot of friends, and are therefore vulnerable to scion’s snake oil.
Did I miss anything?
Well, there are those like me, who understand a lot about Scientology because we got entangled in The Forum (previously est). Werner Erhard ripped off A LOT of LRH’s ideas and practices – I experienced some of the initial up and subsequent downsides described by those who were on staff or SO. I suppose this makes me T4?
Briget62 – I think you might qualify as a full fledged “Ex-Cultist”. Congratulations!
Below is from memory and my take on things so don’t quote me – lol
About a year after I blew scn I decided to give EST, Erhard Seminar Training a try. It was “Large Group Training” over a weekend. I think the main thing Erhard took from scn was the “service facsimile” a gobbledegook scn term which never made sense to me but the actual scn auditing question as I recall was “What do you use to make yourself right and others wrong?” The idea in EST was to bust you off your “story”, what do you use or say to yourself to be right and justify your failures or something like that. I suppose it was transformational for some people but I didn’t put much into it and didn’t get much out of it.
As an aside about a year ago someone posted a link to a magazine article about Erhard and he was still active. He’s received some acknowledgement in academic circles and his “Leadership” courses are in use at some well known universities. He got a bad rap in the press but the most damning accusations against him were later recanted. As I recall he won a hefty settlement in a slander lawsuit.
P.S. The spell checker used to work here but now it doesn’t. I don’t know if it’s part of the blog or my computer.
Waking up this morning I may have clarified my thoughts about service facsimile. That happens a lot with me, thoughts organizing and clarifying overnight.
A facsimile by dictionary definition is an exact copy or reproduction. So maybe Elron was talking about “a picture” I have of myself which I use (services me) repetitively.
Type 1 is STILL a scientologist.
EX-scientologists by definition figured out that it is bullshit,
I think you meant to say Ex-Church of scientology members. Otherwise, it is an illogical statement.
I don’t believe one way or another. Testing shows scamology doesn’t werk.
It works on tomatoes doesn’t it?
Please don’t get Wynski started on that or we’ll never hear the end of it.
My bad, you’re right.
Solanum lycopersicum novis
Thanks a lot, Wynski. Now I have to google this, and God help you if this is fake Latin 🙂
OK, ok, its real Latin, a tomato. But “novis”? A NEW tomato…like, a J & D as re LRH creating Tomato Novis, that weeps? …I THINK I get it. But if not, you’ll have to enlighten me, Smarty 🙂
Aqua, it’s the like what Hubtard did when he created “Homo Novis”. For simplicity I just tacked it to the end of the tomato name, Latin. A better tomato because of scamology.
https://im-01.gifer.com/7LtZ.gif
As I suspected; “Tomato Bovis , LOL, good one, Wynski, you sicko 🙂
Whoa “Novis”…typing in the dark here…don’t ask why…
Good point.
I believe that the main point is that both types are n o longer beholden to the Bureaucracy that calls itself “The Church of Scientology”. There are subtle other divisions: 1. those who believe it is a church. 2. Those who don’t. Personally, It was first presented as a science, but the scientific method made no appearance; must have one of them “other practices” things, thus to be avoided at all costs. Most recently, I’ve come to accept the religious aspects of Tubby’s insistance that he was God, thus infallable; and he ONLY writer in the world, AFAIK, who has no need to review or edit his work. Certainly, he didn’t allow that his view might change over time. For a hidebound engineer like me to accept Scientology, I had to be convinced to accept his work in an unreasoning, religious belief-system way, believing beyond belief that it would all make sense at the end of the road; that’s a sign of a religious system that brooks no questioning of its basic premises nor the deity of “source”. Trouble was, when the end of the road came, that system fell like a house of cards in an earthquake. (sorry for the mixed and over-stretched metaphores.) (could I be infected with “sherman-speak?)
I agree that type 1s are still Scientologists; For a short time, they banded together as “Independants”. Some even registered the first reformed church of SCN, or some such. As we’re seeing, Type 1s give it up pretty quickly and figure out there’s not enogh money in it, certainly not enough to make a career of, since the only customers are those who have been chewed up and spat out by the RCS, which is a revenue stream that’s rapidly drying up; particularly as the RCS usually has already stolen all their money so they’re not going to be able to pay for much. An indie can’t survive long in the biz if the money ain’t there.
So there’s another type III: those who would be type I, but are no longer independantly wealthy and don’t have a “sugar daddy” or equivalent.
Keep those Under The Radar types in the mix too. Who knows how many stay in to keep in touch with family or friends and those who businesses have a lot of Clam employees or customers. Those SINOs {$cientologists in name only} may be very numerous.
Is there any way to estimate their number? I can only think that there is no way of counting the UTRs. No one in corporate $cientology will ever let out real numbers.
Zeemoo:
I believe the number of UTRs pretty much equals the number of “active” scientologists, as everyone skips events when they can, even (particularly!) staff members. From the reports I’ve read of recent Exes, there just aren’t many diehards “in” anymore. The dwarfenführer and TC might be the main examples, and they’re in it for what they get out of it: slaves and other perks no one else can get. Seems even the Captain of Fleecewinds doesn’t get many of the perks she should expect, but has to travel extensively to flog for paying customers in addition to running a cruise ship, managing all the unqualified crewmates forced to be there, some wanting to escape, already near-mutinous.
“Those SINOs (Scientologists in name only) may be very numerous..”
I would like very much to believe this, and it does make sense that numbers of them are out there, not nearly so blind as it would appear based on the info that filters thru to us on the outside.
. I personally know 2 who I’m quite sure are UTRs and 4 I strongly suspect are UTRs. The 4 that I know moved to a state where the closest org is many hundreds of miles away! These people had been staff members for years and years in a VERY solidly entrenched Scientology family. And yet they now live in the middle of nowhere – beautiful place but not a scrap of Scientology in the entire state. So, what’s that all about? Putting physical distance between themelves and the tentacles of the cult, it would appear.
One of the 2 I know of whom I’m certain are UTR said to me, “We are QUIET Scientologists” (emphasis mine).
I refrained from asking, “What the hell is a “quiet” Scientologist?” I didn’t ask because I didn’t have to, and this person knew that I knew and didn’t have to ask.
So to sum up: I know 6 people still in, keeping their heads down and making no waves. Now, are they anti-Miscavige (Type 1) or Anti LRH (Type 2)? My guess would be likely Type 1 but I don’t know.
TC,
Much as we all compulsively try to ‘box in’ everyone so as to pre-answer what they will do next, it really is abberative. I am reminded of one special attempt to be free. As Patrick McGoohan said in The Prisoner TV series, 1967-8:
“I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered! My life is my own.” –No.6; Arrival (Episode #1)
Terra, this all works for me, over imagination or not, (I am included)! These are spot on observations imho! Great article! VWD!
Perfectly clear!
“Type 2s feel betrayed by LRH. ”
Great article TC. I’m a type two-er and while I basically agree with your breakdown, the above comment really isn’t true for me. I did (and do) agree with many of the things El Con put into his books, lectures and so on but in examining these concepts, realize that they were not necessarily ‘his’ but plagiarized by him.
I have often looked back at several of those concepts such as “you are responsible for your own condition”. Ok ….. I see that it is sometimes true ……. and sometimes not so much.
No doubt he had skills in creative writing and used them to his benefit. But the situation for me is not betrayal by El Con but rather a lack of critical thinking skills on my part. It isn’t his doing that I chose to overlook some obvious inconsistencies. I guess it is what I wanted to ‘believe’ at the time.
But relative to the beliefs of the cult I do consider that I am responsible for my condition as I did not have to accept them without critical examination. I just did ……. for awhile.
Yo Dave,
Not so much anymore good buddy. Have a nice ‘rest of your life’ and watch out for your dentures ……………….. you will need them with all of the teeth gnashing you have ahead of you.
Newcomer,
I hope you don’t mind my pointing out that the fact of you being responsible for your own condition does not extend to being SOLELY responsible for it! Each of us is responsible for our own condition. Given that most of what a person does or doesn’t do involves other people, this would make each of us to some degree responsible for their conditions as well. Just saying. OK, Atlas?
Important clarification. Thx Aqua 🙂
Thanks Aqua. And now that you mention it, I think Foolproof is the one really responsible for my condition!
Unfortunately I have not made it to the state of idiot proof so I will stay the course.
Newcomer, LOLOL! and thumbs up, too 🙂
Newcomer has just assigned me as Cause (over him)!
Foolproof, I took that as a humorous comment of Newcomer’s. A quip.
Good comment, Newcomer.
“No doubt he had skills in creative writing and used them to his benefit. But the situation for me is not betrayal by El Con but rather a lack of critical thinking skills on my part. It isn’t his doing that I chose to overlook some obvious inconsistencies. I guess it is what I wanted to ‘believe’ at the time.”
Myself and most people who got into and out of scn had little or no background in science, religion or philosophy. There was no basis for comparison! Hubbard seemed like a “pretty smart guy” to me and why bother reading a bunch of books about philosophy and religion if he already did the work for me?! LOL
The lower grade chart seemed sensible and the Oh Tea levels were secret and hidden. My point of view about “Super Powers” was “Well, maybe. Let’s see what happens.” LOL
P.S. Lot’s of great comments here today. “Terra Conversation” usually continues for a few days so there’s time for some back and forth conversation. Replying to some comments will keep me busy for awhile. 🙂
I haven’t read the topic yet but I always like Terra Day. It’s an opportunity to logically and illogically discuss scn. Sometimes I learn something new, share something which might benefit someone else, and get some false notions of my own corrected. All good. After three years of reading and blogging on scn blogs I’ve pretty much learned how not to unintentionaly insult people. Where’s Skyler Dumbrosky? He was an interesting character but “someone” insulted him and he went away.
Good points Richard. There is without doubt a casualty list associated with the lack of manners at times.
But the main point, either Type 1 or Type 2 is the one of ‘belief’, and that may be the core of the matter.
In other words, read a Book of Hindu Religion and you’ll find some things that are useful to you and your life. Or read the Bushido, the Code of Samurais and there are things that also can be of use. Or simply a novel where the writer provides some thought that you agree with and makes you feel good.
Or speak with people, good friends, family members and within the exchange you may come to realize something, or make things easier for you.
Or as simple as a datum such as: using baking soda to clean your vegetables and fruits is more effective, and natural, than using the chemical ones.
So, is not a matter of believing; it goes more on the realm of feeling good, experiencing a good change in your life, or having something that improves your health, having a good time with those you love, sharing moments with other people and so on.
I will drop the ‘believing in it’ o the ‘does it work’ and simply will live life and experience every moment of it as it comes, or as you keep creating it and as you decide to enjoy it.
Life is simple and a lot, a lot of fun.
There is always a belief system. Otherwise, how do you say that David Miscavidge is wrong when he hurts people? You need some sense of purpose in life and sense of good and bad. That doesn’t need to be etched on stone tablets or dictated by an angel, but it is part of your life.
There’s always a question of whether something works. Does baking soda clean veggies well or not? What type of meditation is best at getting you to the place you want to be at?
I can understand not wanting to obsess over those questions, but they are still probably part of your life.
Great comment, Silvia!
Type1 is not an Ex-Scientologist but a Miscavige-bad-Hubbard-good-Scientologist and doesn’t care about that Hubbard was a chronic liar and a con man, about his despicable doings and his real persona opposed to the PR-persona.
For him the “tech” works, Hubbard’s space opera is real and Hubbard spoke the truth. Everyone who doubts this is beneath him and “doesn’t get it” or … anyway, exactly as Hubbard labeled anyone who was questioning him and his “tech” and his wheelings and deelings.
“Barefaced Messiah” or Hubbard’s “Affirmations” or his cruelties, his boasting and lies and his miserable end … who cares? Type1 is a Hubbardite.
The REAL third type are those who are truly Ex-Scientologists and includes those who have actually moved on and don’t care a whit about the subject. They’re the ones who don’t bother keeping up with sites like this and don’t get riled when something about SCN comes through their world. Of course that includes automatically trashing anything that comes from scientology in the mail, email, ads, whatever.
Thanks.
IMO your most useful posting yet.
Love your “type 1” and “type 2”.
Retooling takes a tremendous amount of work especially if you get out in your forties or worse fifties.
And especially if you were invested for hundreds of thousands not thousands.
I now see LRH as some bad relative who died 30 some years ago.
As time goes on it is easier to assign the correct “time space form and event”what happened to you or rather what you made happen to yourself.
It is too easy to blame LRH or DM.
The painful truth is you:You kept on seeing what you believed instead of believing what you saw.
I do not even hate DM that much.He just has to adjust to the IQ of the last remaining Scientologist (90% type 1) Scientologists whose IQ hovers around room temperature and who have nowhere left to go.
90% of the type 2 have already left.
Yep, Xenu’s son,
Whenever a died-in-the-wool Scientologist steps into a room of people and opens his/her mouth, it’s IQ drops some 15-20 points. I need to go to target 2 and ask hubbard what the IQ of a ‘clam’ is, because that seems to be where they are headed.
“who have nowhere left to go”……..Now that is Really Sad!
By all that is Xenu, you are right. Yet the rhetoric is thick in an org with all the talk of clearing the panet, spiritual salvation for a trillion years, marvel-like super powers, and being part of the evolution itself – homo.novis. Not to mention an end to all life’s ills, mental and physical. You are literally promised the world and a trillion years of freedom, all for mere MEST dollars. It can seem like a bargain when you’re in.
They don’t tell you that you’re going to be sec-checked, put on a ‘no-go’ list for events, routed to ethics for trivial issues, harrassed for thousands of dollars in coerced donations, and eventually declared and never allowed to step foot in their money-making Temple again.
Nice follow-up on last week’s posting Terra. Personally I like the back and forth between Type 1 and Type 2 ex-scientologists. It lets me reflect on the merits of both view points and perhaps change my own views on various subjects. As long as the debate remains civil, I think this is a good thing. It was something that was not allowed in scientology. If I had an opinion that conflicted with the official line, I was told to “clear my words”. Only once did a course supervisor ever admit to me that they were wrong and had forced me into accepting a wrong view. Something to do with one of the ever changing definitions of ‘clear’ if I recall.
I regard myself as a Type 2 (some would say Type III). Did I have ‘wins’ as a scientologist? Absolutely. Have I had a ‘win’ just going for a walk? Lots of times. Does scientology work 100% of the time on 100% of the people when applied 100% correctly? Nope. Do placebos work? Sure.
For my Type 1 friends, I have no doubt that you have experienced great gains using scientology methods. Good for you. For my Type 2 friends who have found that the ‘tech’ was built on a foundation of zero research into the mind and mostly on plagiarism and hot air, we were duped. We tend to be the types called seekers who are not content with the everyday world we live in but want something better. That world might be out there, maybe not. We bought into a world-class con and paid the price of our ignorance. Time to take in a breath of fresh air and move on. At least we are more foolproof as a result of our experience with the cult.
Placebos work?
What’s the placebo in a random, controlled trial testing the efficacy of placebos?
I don’t have access to all controlled trial testing for various products, but the number I hear thrown around most often is around 20%. Personally I don’t think the number is that high. I suppose one could conduct an informal study of this matter by comparing the number of people who frequent the placebo isle in Whole Foods to the general population of customers.
Any guesses on the percentages of ex-Scientologists that fit into these two buckets (e.g. 10% are 1’s, 90% are 2’s)?
I think over 99% of ex-COS members have said goodbye to Scientology alltogether. Not sure but I think there was some kind of conference for Indies recently. A whopping dozen or so people showed up.
Also there is the the Indy 500 list. AFAICT there are a lot of names there who do not subscribe any longer to the Scientology tenets. And that list has not even reached 500. 😉 http://www.scientology-cult.com/declarations-of-independence/the-indie-500.html
And remember initiatives like Milestone 2, and others. Almost all, if not all, of them defunct.
Only exception may be the Ron’s Orgs and Freezone groups. I don’t know how small or big they are. Besides, as a lot of them have further ‘developed’ the ‘tech’, you might want to not see them as Scientologists.
Never in here, so what do I know. 😉
Thank you for describing this distinction, Terra, more thoroughly than I have seen before. The reverence some former Scientologists have for Hubbard is something that has driven me absolutely bonkers at times. He was so clearly out for personal financial gain from the very beginning. He was a conman (as Aleister Crowley recognized after Hubbard conned Jack Parsons out of $10,000) since before he wrote Dianetics. He did not understand the meaning of scientific inquiry yet claimed to have discovered and founded a supposed “modern science.” He did no scientific research ever. He was a pathological liar to such an extent that his biographers are surprised when something he said about himself turns out to have a kernel of truth in it. He REDEFINED ETHICS to make himself and his organization infallible by definition. He justified lying, framing people for crimes, and even murder to protect him and his organization from any consequences of his choices. The man was one of the most blatant, most unethical, most narcissistic sociopaths who ever lived. It simply boggles my mind that anyone, once out of that organization, can still look up to him. I don’t think I’ll ever understand it. I’m just glad that the evolution is for the most part (Rathbun notwithstanding) from Type 1 to Type 2.
I would like to point out that since I left the cult, I have realized there are levels of
End Phenomena’s exiting Scientology
It all depends on ability to confront the whole truth about Hubbard, Miscavige and this cult.
It is a painful process for sure – filled with emotions we were hypnotized and trained into blocking
Confronting these blocks are extremely painful due to EP of cognitive dissonance.
One has to really keep looking and confronting the whole truth and work through all of the emotions we trained ourselves to block…with L Ron Hubbard’s tech.
I can honestly say – it is like getting through a WALL OF FIRE.
The EP of exiting Scientology is
The being discovers the whole truth and by looking and confronting it until they can “have it”
he or she realized that they have been completely and utterly bamboozled beyond belief….(BBB).
and the being is willing to talk about it
the being speaks out….
is declared an SP by the cult
AND REALIZES HE / SHE WON’T GET ANY WORSE
If the being is not willing to confront the WHOLE TRUTH
The being remains convinced that he or she is still a BIGGER BEING THAN OTHERS
still ” knows all ”
and gets worse.
Hence we have the product of Marty Rathbun and Alanzo – who are stuck in an incident of long duration.
Over 2,850 people already spoke out!
http://whyweprotest.wikia.com/wiki/Former_Church_of_Scientology_members_who_have_spoken_out
For a short history of this list
http://johnpcapitalist.com/2018/02/spotlight-on-anonymous-big-list/
Hey, Traveling: Kinda glib. Very either/or. How long were you in?
Great post today!
I think you are missing
Ex Scientologist Type III
An Ex Sciobot Type III is willing and able to confront the truth and nothing but the whole truth and
***knows Hubbard was a criminal con, a charlatan, a crazy psychopathic drug addict that destroyed everyone in his path and is willing to tell others.
***knows David Miscavige is a product of L Ron Hubbard’s psycho tech and cult activities. Miscavige is an evil criminal that has committed horrendous crimes against humanity and if he were not hiding behind the religious cloak – would be in prison for life…blood is dripping from every part of his beingness…. and is willing to tell others.
***knows there are no levels of awareness to obtain by being a Scientologist and doing Scientology – there are only levels of confusion and unawareness.
***knows with insouciant certainty that Scientology is an evil, destructive cult and members are completely wasting their precious lives and destroying themselves and others……and is willing to tell others.
Type III’s have moved on with their lives as far as trying to justify any involvement in Scientology. They grant beingness to the Type I or Type II out of compassion but they don’t engage trying to prove anything. They simply suppress Scientology every chance they get.
Type III’s will continue to expose the evil cult of Scientology and do whatever it takes overtly and covertly to get people out of the cult and shut this organization down for eternity.
It is the right thing to do.
How is that different from Type II?
Give him some leeway in his vitriol – he’s confused and reeling, the poor boy. It’s the right thing to do!
Neither type applies in my case … Not even close. I had great wins as a pc, auditor and CS, still successfully apply many Scientology principles as a world traveler. While I could still audit well I guess, I have had no desire to since I left twelve years ago. I consider that LRH left a body of valuable philosophy, but I disagree with him on MANY points including a number of HCO Bs, not just policy , much of which I dislike intensely. While I found great value in auditing procedure, I also feel that much of Keeping Scientology Working was purposely designed to greatly lessen Scientologists’ self determinism and put them under complete CoS control. And as much as I appreciate much of LRH’s work on the nature of the spirit and human behavior, I also view him as a man with huge psychological problems, ranging from delusion to paranoia to extreme authoritarian tendencies, almost to the point of implanting his followers with his designed mental circuitry.
Very well stated!
I feel the same way about most of this.
I have also been out of Scientology for 12 years.
I was never a CS but was an auditor and reached OT V on the auditing side.
I also have major disagreements with much of policy and with some of the HCOBs. (technical bulletins) but I also had huge wins that I still feel the benefit from decades later.
I always saw a lot of problems with Hubbard but felt at the time, rightly or wrongly, that the benefits of Scientology far outweighed its liabilities. Under Davey Boy, this was no longer true for me, so I headed out the door..
Hi Joe – I totally agree with you except I believe that any of the “workable” tech was completely plagiarized by Lcon.
Ms. P … I’ve asked a number of people who claimed that, the following question and have never gotten even one response … Who previously designed specific processes/procedures that in being done with a person, had a required result of the person having a realization about life as well as being bright and cheerful?
I’ve asked a number of people who claimed that, the following question and have never gotten even one response … Who previously designed specific processes/procedures that in being done with a person, had a required result of the person having a realization about life as well as being bright and cheerful?
That’s kinda spurious, no? Context is everything. Because that wasn’t the only result was it? There was also delusion, disassociation, mental enslavement, psychosis, financial ruin, even death. The processes he developed and improved upon so rigorously were hypnotic. They were created and used to improve customer retention and control. If just feeling “bright and cheerful” was the sole result of his therapy then I’d clap that fat bastard’s picture without hesitation. It wasn’t. It isn’t. But credit where it’s due. When it comes to designing hypnotic processes to ensure customers remain delusional and compliant, Hubbard is a one-of-a-kind. Hip, hip!
mwestern, so sorry to hear you experienced those terrible results from auditing.
But the question I posed was that if LRH stole EVERYTHING, as is often the charge, then from whom did he steal the concept of specific processes/procedures from with specific ep requirements ?
(no need to respond if you simply don’t want to, but if you do choose to, please before you do, focus like a laser beam on the actual question this time)
I did focus on your question…specifically the fallacious way you framed it…but I’m agreeing with you in principle.
Joe – I agree is why I wanted to train and be an auditor. For me there is validity in the Grades processes. I had my wins up the bridge and will never invalidate them or others. I am simply decompressing and learning that he was far from the end all and be all. There are others here that have researched and have more answers than me.
Ms. P, I think we are in general agreement. As you can see from my original post, I feel that LRH was FAR from the end all and be all. Actually I charge him with some very seriously bad qualities.
As in the current social media give and take on politics, the great majority of comments on Scientology or really any controversial subject or person, tends to absolutism, either completely condemning said person or subject or completely praising/defending such (and often lacing the comments with personal insults, which you certainly didn’t do). I never think I am always right, I just like intelligent give and take, and love opposing viewpoints, as long as the expression of them is not the usual “slam licks”, which as soon as I recognize them, I quickly stop reading the post and move on.
Thank you for your intelligent feedback.
We are on the same page. I want to add that I always like and appreciate your comments. 🙂
“Who previously designed specific processes/procedures that in being done with a person, had a required result of the person having a realization about life as well as being bright and cheerful?”
Who knows? Since “designed” and RESULTS are completely different things…
I’m one of those Type ???? who got a lot out of my 16 years in, all while Hubbard was purportedly in command. Happily bailed just as Miss Cabbage took control and saw nothing worthy in the future. Had no real dealings with the SO. But was pleased with the dear friends I made, many of whom are still in my universe. I truly feel badly for those who got nothing from the experience. That was was NOT what happened to me. And not what those I taught got from it, either. (As an aside, having studied and worked with the subject for several years, I believe that “hypnotism” being the basis of either auditing or training, is a cop out. I neither experienced it while in, nor saw it being applied to anyone else. So there! 🙂
Peter, what ARE you rambling on about now? Your response is totally non-sequitur to what I wrote.
Joe P, you pretty much said it all for me, except that, although I wanted to I didn’t train as an auditor, as money I wanted for auditor training I allowed to be siphoned off for straight donos, i.e., IAS, Libraries, Ideal Morges, etc. Point being, I didn’t get those auditor wins that you got, which must have been terrific. I’m glad you got out when the getting out was good.
Reckon there’s nothing wrong with certain auditing. Things like Green forms, L1Cs, prepchecking, grades processes etc are fine if done in the right & caring hands. But and it’s a BIG BUT, the fact those methods of therapy were moulded into the most despicably degrading scam is beyond belief. And then passed off as a religious organisation with profit making installed as an inbuilt mechanism (hidden poorly), and it all placed behind the legal protection of being classified as a religion… Sheesh, words fail me to protest what Hubbard/Miscavige have done to well intentioned people with organisational policy, paranoia and money is everything. No wonder the organisation began imploding from the very beginning. It’s organisational aspects, formulas and intentions (lies from above) are insanely unworkable, but appear as though they will.
imo take the OT & God like immortality bs out of it, disregard all the policy and all NOTs fairy tales, along with OT3, scrap 90% of the ethics dribble & drop the term “Bridge” from it completely. Disband the SO immediately! Remove 99% of the PTS/SP policy to HCOBs references, give it a hobby/interest like status and leave it at that for people to do what they will with it, blend it, whatever… Scientology’s own history and PR status are probably the best safeguard guarantee it will never again develop into the criminal scam it is. Or forget about it completely, go do something else – it’s your call! But jail time for the ring leaders of Scioland I believe should be mandatory.