Questions about Scientology?

Discussion in 'News and Current Events' started by Terril, Nov 21, 2010.

  1. grebe Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    You guys asking why Terril didn't think, "windbag huckster" upon hearing five minutes of any one of Hubbard's talks need to get in the back of the line. Might as well ask why people enjoy country and western music. The answer is always the same: no accounting for taste.

    Yes, Hubbard left clues that he was trolling us. But he also took himself seriously. So he was ambiguous, meaning that if you liked him you'd interpret his ambiguity as wit and if you disliked him you'd read "moar money" as a reveal.
  2. Re: Questions about Scientology?

    That reminds me. When I first found out that Hubbard was a liar I immediatly left the cult. I had already left it physically but now I left Hubbard as well for the most part.

    I was still stuck with all these books though plus the knowledge that I had spent 10 years and lots of money in this racket. I had to salvage something.

    Somehow I started reading his books even more plus I got into Aleister Crowley a little bit. I got it into my head that, "Okay, he's a liar but maybe these books have some good in them. Maybe he's a brilliant "Zen Master" type. Maybe he has set up a great system of mental exercises designed to bust me loose and make me a more free individual." I had become an apologist.

    I remember reading one of his books and experiencing a little bit of that old euphoria. I was convinced. There was some good in this after all. Totally insane.

    I tried it again the next time and nothing happened. The next day I tried to give away my books to a used bookstore. They wouldn't take any of the Hubbard books so I threw them in the trash bin. The only thing they would take from me was my Aleister Crowley Tarot Cards.

    That was pretty much the end of it for me. I had to get used to reality. It's not so bad and it is all we got.

    I am just saying that it is amazing the mental contortions we can put ourselves through when we want to. But I guess you already knew that anyway. Just my 2 cents.
  3. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    It would be up to the individual auditor. I've never heard of this happening.

    Its worth noting that in the FZ if someone is in session its cos they want to be.
    There are no enforced sec checks for starters.
  4. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

  5. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Its rather refreshing to have a mod be so polite! And no I'm not offended.

    I can't recall the first time I heard an LRH lecture. I read the books and was very
    attracted to the ideas, and had some free student auditing and had excellent wins.
    This was back in the sixties. Heard some of the more popular and interesting tapes,
    listened to quite a few on courses. Liked them well enough and some were even
    inspiring. He can be very amusing. I'm not an avid listener to his tapes however.
    Often a lot of irrelevant stuff with some pearls of wisdom or useful technical points
    in them.

    As an anon I expect you have listened to them from an entirely different and critical
    approach, and probably the more off the wall ones. If one isn't interested in scientology
    it would be like homework in your least favorite subject to listen to them.
  6. SOJOA Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    I had a question but just deleted it. I realized while your still under Hubbards spell it would just be rationalized.

    Anyway, I hope you can teach me to win piez instead of cakez.
  7. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    As you can gather I'm not so familiar with this subject.

    False memory syndrome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Part of this actually describes something quite similar to the scientology term
    " Implant". Tech Dict def 1 " a painful and forceful means of overwhelming
    a being with artificial purpose or false concepts in a malicious attempt to
    control and suppress him. " RPF is a good example!

    In auditing one accepts the preclears data. If there is a troubled
    area one addresses it with appropriate techniques. Ideally the preclear
    cognites on what is the true data and the problem area dissolves.

    You said:-

    "To explain what I mean, consider a person who watched the movie Gladiator. Suppose an image from Gladiator flashed into the PC’s mind during session, and suppose that whatever emotion/mindstate the PC was feeling caused an interesting e-meter read. The PC, upon being requested to go deeper into that image or given some other command indicating an interesting read, could quite easily come to associate their current mindstate with their memory. This could cases a sort of feedback loop that has the effect of reifying the memory inside the PC’s mind."

    What would happen normally is that the PC would say something like " Oh that was just an image from a film that popped into my head" , when you asked me about pains in the chest
    it reminded me of that scene in the film Gladiator. However the chest pains I get are usually
    when my boss gets angry with me. "

    The process of auditing is attempting to resolve problems by getting the PC to look at
    what actually happened.

    If I'm understanding where you are coming from here, if a PC is not up to running subjective processes, engram running for example, he would do a lot of objective auditing,[ look at that wall, touch that wall etc] before running engrams or any other subjective processes. The end
    result of these is the PC being in present time, and then able to get into such processes
    and run them properly.

    You said:-

    "Rather ironically in an attempt to reduce ‘engrams’ the auditing processes seem to induce them."

    The definition of engram contains pain and unconciousness. Thus auditing can't
    induce them. However life, including bad auditing, could restimulate them.
  8. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    I'm aware of approx 5,000. In the english speaking world most were previously in COS.
    In Russia most were not. Russia is the most active area in the world for the FZ.
    There are about 2-3000 fairly active on the lines of their senior tech terminals.
  9. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Approx 10,000 GBP. Mostly co-audited, and did OT levels up to OT3 in the FZ
    for around 1000 GBP.
  10. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    I'm an old dinosaur and forgotten what someone told me about mudkips.
  11. Anonymous Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Quoting this for reference as this was the question that Terril was addressing.
    Given that your offered definition is radically different than the construct Hubbard proposed, how do you reconcile the two? If, as it appears here, that you have simply redefined the term to actually match something in existence, why bother using the term ‘SP’ at all given the monumental difference with Hubbard’s construction?

    The question was not asking what the concept meant, and I find it curious that you answered it in this way.
    Given that your offered definition is radically different than the construct Hubbard proposed, how do you reconcile the two? If, as it appears here, that you have simply redefined the term to actually match something in existence, why bother using the term ‘PTS’ at all given the monumental difference with Hubbard’s construction?

    Some examples of what the PTS construct entails which are excluded by your altered definition are:
    The first indicator an org executive has of a unit or staff member going PTS IS non-compliance. Such personnel are being overwhelmed in various ways by the SP social groups and have no energy left to undertake their duties or forward org programmes.
    Another indicator is the amount of illness and lack of case progress on the part or such PTS staff members.
    A third indicator is an executive getting the hat of such a personnel on his own plate.

    There are two stable data which anyone has to have, understand and KNOW ARE TRUE in order to obtain results in handling the person connected to suppressives.
    These data are:
    1. That all illness in greater or lesser degree and all foul ups stem directly and only from a PTS condition.
    2. That getting rid of the condition requires three basic actions: A. Discover B. Handle or disconnect.
    From HCOB 10th August 1973, ‘PTS HANDLING’

    The gulf between your construction and that offered by Hubbard is huge. Given this gulf why use the term ‘PTS’ at all?
    It appears that you have fully committed the fallacy of reification with this term.
    It appears that you have fully committed the fallacy of reification with this term.
    It appears that you have fully committed the fallacy of reification with this term.
    This appears to be the only term in the list that you recognise as reification.
    It appears that you have fully committed the fallacy of reification with this term, so much so that it is a gateway for conflating a model with a process.

    Overall I find this interesting. It does seem as if you have reified many of the Scientology concepts. What I found most interesting is the yearning chasm of difference between your construct of SP/PTS with the construct expressed in Hubbard’s own words. Where you selling that concept to yourself or to others?
  12. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Its a guerrilla network of small groups and individuals with contacts via the
    net and personal mail. Probably less organised than anonymous.

    No official, policy. We are by policy definition "SPs" and are almost by definition
    critical of CO$. Not critical of the tech.

    Most in the Freezone only discuss such matters in forums for those on upper levels.
    Or try to stick to that. Note that premature exposure to OT 3 for example can in
    rare cases cause case problems. However the upper level materials are all out there and
    can be found quite easily on the Net. Thanks to the pioneering efforts of Karin Spaink
    and Zenon Parnousis the dutch courts have ruled that freedom of religion and freedom
    of speech trump copyright. Thus "Clearbird" hosted in Holland gives details of all the
    bridge up to OT 4. Rons Orgs have a server in Holland where I believe anything can be
    accessed, but they are quite strict about revealing confidential materials to those
    that have reached that part of the bridge. Then there is Wikileaks....

    It isn't. Individual auditors charge what they wish for training and auditing.
    Typically $30-200 per hour for auditing.

    No. However individuals sometimes get cross with each other. The usual story
    is "my tech is more standard than yours". I'm sure you don't get such silliness here.

    The Freezone includes those who follow standard tech exactly [ the majority] to
    people who develop offshoots of the tech, Alan Walters Knowledgism for example,
    and even up to Paul Adams " Robot Auditor. Rons Orgs do standard bridge up to OT 3
    and then a level they call "Excaliber" which is a variation of NOTs, and many levels above

    Admin tech is not used much in the FZ. Some take it all as gospel, many on Marty's
    blog do, many pick and choose what admin policy they even wish to consider.

    Ethics tech in the FZ is primarily client centered and its just another tool in the therapy
    box. No punishment.

    I'll take the fifth on that. :)
  13. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

  14. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    depends who you ask. :)

    I left in 1991 when I had a horrendous CCRD cycle. The final part of
    this mess was after I wore down the C/S and she had to admit I WAS
    clear [ possibly the last person in COS who was allowed to attest to
    natural clear] I was then given an A-J check [ all possible types not
    allowed auditing] and then a PDH check [ pain drug hypnosis]
    When I was 3 my mum took me to see a child psychologist cos I was
    lively and naughty. Already looked at in auditing and uncharged, but
    a COS obsession. This time I was told I may have been given PDH
    and can't remember. At 3 years old in the presence of my mum!!!!


    So that ended my connection to COS. some years later brought a
    computer, found the horrific tales of the CO$ and also found the freezone.

    ...Please,no the Aperture Science Emergency Intelligence Incinerator...! [/QUOTE]
  15. Anonymous Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Kind of a given Terril. Sort of like how a geocentrist isn’t familiar with astronomy.
    I have to call out the blatant strawman here. The correct Scientology term, which was referred to in my post, is ‘dub-in’. Introducing the concept of force is so completely missing the point that I cannot give you the benefit of the doubt.
    The lack of verification of whether a memory is true/false is part of the problem, and the explicit assumption that only ‘true data’ is involved would seem to indicate a complete lack of any preventions of FMS.
    Assuming that the PC would be aware of the source of the image is simply wishful thinking Terril. As pointed out by another anon poster, the PC will be in a state where their bullshit-detector is off, making any assumptions regarding the PC’s ability to distinguish true/false memories extremely dodgy.
    To assume this end result is extremely questionable, if not outright demonstrably false. Performing repetitive processes tend more towards trance states than to fuller consciousness. This basic facet of human psychology seems completely at odds with your thesis here Terril, a thesis that appears to be unfounded assumption.
    Why not? Memories that involve pain can be involved during auditing, the source misattribution of memories are at the heart of FMS. This combined with the unconsciousness of the ‘reactive mind’ during auditing would seem to meet the definition for engram.

    Answering ‘no’ to the question of ‘So do you take any steps to prevent FMS?’ would have saved a post.
  16. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    There is much discussion of Hubbards ideas and much sophisticated analysis and debate.
    Much criticism also of his ideas, usually from people who look for offshoots of the tech but use Hubbard basics. You can see this on ESMB.

    Homo Novis? Its not an important idea IMO. One uses the tech for improvement. I've
    surveyed some of the most highly trained and highest up the bridge for the ability to
    move matter by thought alone. There is at best sporadic examples of this that that
    do not last long and thus are not repeatable. So maybe some wish to build a more
    complete bridge.

    On the whole FZers are moral fags and not in favour of lying and manipulating people
    or calling them wogs.

    There is virtually no leadership. In some ways I'm a leader in that I am list owner
    of the largest FZ forum and do more than anyone to promote the FZ. The most I can
    do is politely ask people to be more polite on my forums. On extremely rare occasions
    I actually unsubscribe people.

    Disputes in the FZ? Where did you get such an outlandish idea?

    I've tried to resolve disputes when they happen and thats a fucking tough job.
    Maybe slightly more success than failure but its a close thing!

    There is no institutional disconnection or fair game. There is no institution! Individuals
    get up to all sorts of things and may do such on an individual basis. I'm sure
    nothing like that happens here.

    I own my own folders. Mind you these are solo. In general there is no problem
    of access, one may wish to change auditors for example, least I've not heard of
    any. Its an issue thats never been raised on our FZ forums so I guess its a non issue.

    FZ ethics are strictly for the individuals gain and with his willing participation.
    Or he'd just vote with his feet!
  17. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    I think people are asking questions quicker than my two fingers can type replies. :(
  18. AuntAnonymous Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Hi Terrel. I've read some of your posts on ESMB and want to welcome you here.:)

    I've always wondered if Freezoners have expansion goals (i.e. clear the planet) and how they think about the non-Scientology world (i.e. name calling like wog).

    Thanks for the insight.
  19. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    As an individual I'm liberal in usually all matters. I have to take
    drugs for hypertension, but they don't affect me mentally.
    I along with the medical profession think aspirin is a wonder drug,
    and use it on the the rare occasions I need to handle pain.

    I partake liberally of alcohol when not auditing [ london anons can
    verify that!] Have no interest in recreational drugs.

    I Have an interesting anecdote here on this area. Virginia McClaughreys son
    posted on ESMB, and described how he had been badly the effect of her
    all his life. Could hardly sleep and lots of other stuff. Had a nice phone
    conversation with him, as I'd had many run ins with her and really understood
    his problem!. Anyway he saw a psychiatrist who prescribed.... can't
    recall what, but he wrote a "success story" that was as wonderful as the
    many I've posted around from scn. Hope he tries talk therapy so he can
    come off of whatever he's taking. Believe thats his intention.
  20. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Thats not about whether the tech works or not.

    Thats about the horrible reputation the church has garnered from its abuses. Also
    CO$ is paranoid on the subject of PR so tells lies, and get caught out.

    I'm only OT 3 but am willing to talk.

    I await being mocked and ridiculed. :)
  21. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Fucked if I know!
  22. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    It doesn't really. Its got such an awful reputation that the work of front groups will
    be jeopardized if the connection is known and no one will reach for these groups again.

    Otherwise CO$ would be taking big full page adverts talking of how all these reformed
    crims and addicts etc were reformed by scn tech.

    Well they do that to the parishioners. No one else would believe them, and quite rightly.
  23. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Mostly they started from dedicated individuals who did great stuff. CO$ co-opted
    them which was the finger of death.

    When Narconon, Or criminon first came along, then likes of Alan Walters [ FZ] would go to
    the likes of Folsom prison and give talks to rapturous reception.

    With CO$ in control it was only about more money, and this with their " admin tech"
    led to moral bankruptcy and lying CO$ PR and to hell with those they are supposed to help.
  24. Anonymous Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Thanks for this comprehensive reply. If your answers are trustworthy then I suppose the FZ is not anywhere near being the kind of abusive group that the scientology enterprise is. (I don't see ex-FZers coming out with the sort of horror stories that clients of scientology Inc do.)

    I'm glad you dropped by and I hope you stick around so that we can understand each other better.
  25. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?


    My best advice her is get the book " Dianetics Evolution of a science"

    Probably 10 cents on E-bay.

    This describes for beginners how he developed his revolutionary self help
    co-audits for the lay man.

    Note that in the US maybe 10% of the population use some form of therapy.
    This book gave a layman the DIY version. [ Do it yourself] Cheap and simple.

    Dianetics was how the whole thing started.

    Its quite readable and small compared to book 1.
  26. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    I consider there are such things as OT powers. They are not exclusive to scn.
    Search the net. But very rare.

    Clear? CO$ has had problems with this. For example many "OTs"
    have had to do many CCRDs. [ tests of clear]

    I like David Mayo's approach, one can get clearer. [ google]

    The actual "clear cog" seems to some degree universal. Thats really out there!
  27. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Never heard of that.

    Do even COS do that?
  28. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Hubbard may be lots of things.

    The tech may not be perfect but I've had wonderful gains from it, as have very many I know.
  29. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Jeez! Getting a bit swamped here.

    His thing about starting a religion to make money apparently was not his words

    Forgot details.
  30. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Later serious guy with glasses.
  31. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Find the anons that like piez.

  32. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    I'm all typed out and need to go cook dinner [ in UK]

    Thanks for all the very interesting valid questions. I'm happy to answer.

    Will get back to those I havn't answered tomorrow.

    I would prefer that people use their actual anon names rather than
    the bespectacled stern looking hero. A minor point.
  33. Anonymous Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Don’t think so. The closest question on the topic from the children’s security check is “Have you ever done something to your body that you shouldn't have?”.
  34. Miranda Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Thanks for this response. I appreciate your willingness to discuss these things in such a potentially hostile setting. I haven't listened to Hubbard very much, and you're right that what I've heard has mostly come from critical sources.

    I have to say that I find him difficult to listen to, or to read. There is something in his tone that is deeply off-putting, and his ideas are often argued in ways that contradict my education and experience. He sounds (forgive me) wily rather than sincere, and glib rather than quick-witted. Admittedly, this is a subjective impression. But I haven't felt moved to get past it.

    I know people whose history with Scientology mirrors yours: significant gains and insight, especially at first, and more focus on the writings than on the recordings. Sometimes they come away sort of a step or two away from being a Scientologist--believing that "L. Ron Hubbard had some useful ideas" but stopping short of accepting the origin myth or investing a lot of time and money. Or accepting some ideas and not others.

    Some would call that position cherry-picking; others would say, "Acknowledge truth (and falsehood) wherever you find it." This more nuanced position seems to me to be characteristic of the "critical wing" of many religions. This group often finds itself at odds with both the religious institution and its critics.There is some common ground, maybe, in the way of thinking if not in the beliefs themselves.
  35. Re: Questions about Scientology?

    I have a question.

    Do all Freezoners habitually put a space after their left brackets, and often left quotation marks?

    [edit] is the term "Freezoner" derogatory? It feels like it could be and I didn't mean it to be.

    [edit 2] An honest question now. The corruption of the GO, SP doctrine, and "fair game" are all products of Hubbard himself. How can you accept this documented indisputable cult like behavior on his part and still follow his teachings?
  36. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Can you believe I'm coming back here for rest and recreation!! Shitstorm is brewing
    in the FZ. One friend has outed another to COS to very serious detrimental effect.
    Coming here before I blast people. Note here that ESMB is VERY closely monitored.
    Got outing taken down in an hour.

    Tried to stop this. So sad. :(


    OK so your a posting Nazi. I'm a dinosaur, or are you just trying to wind me up?
    Or can I learn from you. I don't know exactly what you are referring to, please explain in simple language.

    Re Hubbard, when I met Marty he asked what was my relationship to Hubbard.
    I said none. I have a relationship to the tech.

    On the whole the tech is a brilliant approach to expanding consciousness. Hubbard
    spent 30 years trying to perfect methods that would work for everyone. The bridge is a cookie cutter approach of lots of processes on each grade which not all may get gains from.
    But many of these processes will bite and benefit all the individuals. And thus reach them
    where they are at.

    Thus grades 0-4:-

    Hostilities of life
    Past upsets
    Gaining new abilities

    The most brilliant part is that anyone can walk in off the street and
    learn to do this with skilled guidance from a veteran. Quickly.

    It may not be perfect but it works.

    Mostly scn processing is about gaining greater ability. The early steps
    are about handling specific life problems. This is I believe where much
    conventional psychotherapy is at.

    None of the above has much relation to the abuses of Daveys navy.

    Thank you for the opportunity for a more productive rant....
  37. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Real pleasure to meet such a mod. You got me where I'm at. :)
  38. Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Okay some easier ones then.

    Do you consider Scientology as you practice it to be a religion?
    Do you reject and abhor modern Psychiatry the same way mainstream Scientology does?
  39. Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Appreciate the feedback. Its great that you can come in and give honest answers in the most skeptical place of all!

    Just for the record I was actually referring to Dianetics when I said I find Hubbard unreadable. But again I am the first to admit that I hardly came to it with an open mind. I think if you have heard all of Hubbards lies first - you see things in a different light.
  40. Terril Member

    Re: Questions about Scientology?

    Thanks :)

    Don't think FZers are big on clearing the planet.

    CO$ has muddied waters so much that the term " scientology"
    is a swearword.

    I'll give my viewpoint here, FZers really look to getting others interested in tech.
    Specially me. Cos its helpful and if you read my threads of FZ success stories
    on ESMB can be revelatory.

    Looking from a historical point of view, if scn actually becomes a major world religion
    would probably take hundreds of years. I see that possibly it will become an even
    smaller minority than it is now.

    I believe the ideas will survive. For example "Metapsychology" and " TIR"
    traumatic incident reduction, are re working scientology [metapsychology]
    and Dianetics[ [TIR] and are used in some universities.

    The Author of this is Sarge Gerbode, a psychaitrist and class VI auditior and
    assisted by David Mayo, Hubbards auditor.

    Hope for better.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins