Scientology 101.....

Discussion in 'Modern Religions' started by 17th Angel, Jun 12, 2008.

  1. Vajradhara

    Vajradhara One of Many

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,786
    Likes Received:
    43
    Namaste Alex P,

    thank you for the post.

    i am a Buddhist such to the extent that a label applies. generally speaking i tend to self identify with my current beliefs and views rather than with my former beliefs and views. i studied $cientology for 12 years.

    which quote? the one that i quoted in our discussion?

    whilst that may be true it is somewhat irrelevant to the point which is precisely as indicated. the treatment of beings on the Tone Scale is covered in other literature within $cientology. this is precisely the sort of answer which is given to beings that are raw meat. that doesn't mean, however, that the Science of Survival doesn't contain it's own ideas on this subject.

    "There are only two answers for the handling of people from 2.0 down on the Tone Scale, neither one of which has anything to do with reasoning with them or listening to their justification of their acts. The first is to raise them on the Tone Scale by un-enturbulating some of their theta by any one of the three valid processes. The other is to dispose of them quietly and without sorrow." - L. Ron Hubbard, SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL, p. 170


    "The sudden and abrupt deletion of all individuals occupying the lower bands of the Tone Scale from the social order would result in an almost instant rise in the cultural tone and would interrupt the dwindling spiral into which any society may have entered." - L. Ron Hubbard, SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL, p. 170


    "A Venezuelan dictator once decided to stop leprosy. He saw that most lepers in his country were also beggars. By the simple expedient of collecting and destroying all the beggars in Venezuela an end was put to leprosy in that country." - L. Ron Hubbard, SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL, p. 171


    "Unfortunately, it is all too often true that suppressors to a creative action must be removed before construction and creation takes place. Any person very high on the Tone Scale may level destruction toward a suppressor." - L. Ron Hubbard, SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL, p. 159

    "Somebody some day will say 'this is illegal.' By then be sure the orgs [Scientology organizations] say what is legal or not." - L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, 4 January 1966, "LRH Relationship to Orgs"


    metta,

    ~v
     
  2. Vajradhara

    Vajradhara One of Many

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,786
    Likes Received:
    43
    Namaste gp,

    thank you for the post.

    why is that?

    no, quite the contrary. the vast majority of $cientologists demonstrate the ineffectiveness of the Tech. you and i may have had interaction with very different beings and thus may have had very different experiences.

    Catholics are Christians. that said, i don't know what a "vatican level" means. it seems that you are suggesting that as a being, in any religious tradition, enters into the priest/minister/clergy aspect of a tradition different teachings are made available to them as they progress through the hierarchy. is that a fair summation?

    you are correct, i would not make such a claim. i would say, for instance, that Naropa has an excellent Sanskrit and Tibetan language class and the courses related to those are exceptional though the school completely lacks any athletic endeavors and thus is horrible at them. it is, in my estimation, quite difficult to generalize an entity composed of many parts with the same term and come close to the actuality of the entity. some parts may be excellent and others may not be. it would allow a more accurate understanding of the whole to have a proper appreciation of the parts excellent or otherwise.

    only fallacies can be declared as fallacies. that which is not fallacious is without fallacy by definition. the fallacy remains whether pointed out or not. the difference is that once it becomes clear all parties can avoid it in the course of the discussion whereas they may have not been able to.

    hmm.. i've not checked the CIA factbook pages in quite a while and i didn't figure they would have files on $cientology, perhaps the IAS would be more feasible to me.

    actually we both joined Alex P's conversation and as near as i can tell his OP isn't asking for a comparison to other religious traditions, it seems to be focused on $cientology, as am i.

    why are my feelings relevant to information in a text? i'm simply curious if you know of any that talk about ARC Break or Tone Scale, things which LRH asserts are spiritual or religious in nature. i'm not saying he didn't borrow things from others, quite the opposite in fact, but there are original teachings of his as well.

    memory.

    Memory: 1. The ability to recover information about past events or knowledge. 2. The process of recovering information about past events or knowledge. 3. Cognitive reconstruction. The brain engages in a remarkable reshuffling process in an attempt to extract what is general and what is particular about each passing moment.

    i mean that there was only one M.D. involved with the creation of Dianetics and the opening of the Dianetics Institute. when the claims made were demonstrated to be false he left.


    i am and you should. it is common enough to have tangents arise in an internet discussion and it is often better to start a new thread when the tangent takes on its own conversation since there may be people that would contribute to the new conversation but are not reading the current one.

    who said that you couldn't mention them? you can and have. it is not the point of the OP which you can re-read for yourself. if you would like to create a thread comparing the horrible and fraudulent things in $cientology with other religions no one will prevent you from doing so.

    the argument is premade for the simple fact that the OP was narrow with his questions. he could have started a thread, like you can, that sought to compare and contrast the horrible and fraudulent things of $cientology with other religions but he didn't.

    you are, as you've already admitted, wanting to include the other religions and their horrible and fraudulent things in this discussion to water-down the impact such a discussion has upon $cientology. it is a fallacy which you are well aware of now and has no place in our conversation.

    i am happy to participate in a thread which seeks to compare and contrast the horrible and fraudulent things in $cientology with those of other religions. i read the forum every day but on some days do not have time to post. if i've not responded to your thread in a few days send me a PM, please, and i'll hop on and give it a go.

     
  3. gp1628

    gp1628 Old Man

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2008
    Messages:
    133
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well it was a rather crude author, and in the 1950's.
     
  4. gp1628

    gp1628 Old Man

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2008
    Messages:
    133
    Likes Received:
    0
    Scientology is more into mental health than physical health. Plus in the 1950s Im not sure if it was considered a bad thing. Amazing enough that they condemned many common practices that later were also condemned by others but I guess they didnt catch them all. :)
     
  5. gp1628

    gp1628 Old Man

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2008
    Messages:
    133
    Likes Received:
    0
    Because both declare the arguments of the other to be worthless. A logician considers the opinions of the crowd to be a fallacy. A diplomacist considers logic arguments a fallacy when it doesnt change the opinions of the crowd.

    Well at least you have met some in real life. Its not worth much otherwise.

    More along the line that its generally of the opinion outside a religion that the higher attainers within the religion are privy to non-public learnings.

    Noted and I shall.
     
  6. Vajradhara

    Vajradhara One of Many

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,786
    Likes Received:
    43
    Namaste GP,

    thank you for the post.

    i think you are confusing some terms or simply making them up to describe the situation. every being uses logic, you are using it here to explain why you dislike using logic in a discussion. you use logic when you are deciding which brand of dishwashing detergent to use, when you determine which brand of motor vehicle to purchase, which pair of shoes to wear on any given occassion yet when it comes to discussing $cientology you would prefer not to discuss it logically.

    the definition of a logical fallacy doesn't depend on whom is doing the speaking nor their particular position they adopt within the context of a formal debate. a fallacy is a fallacy and arguments based on fallacies are, by definition, fallacious.

    the implication that a pursuasive argument is the only valid form of argument is rather dubious since it is clear that an argument can have a purpose other than persuasion.

    indeed.

    interestingly, none of the OTVIII that i know are at cause over MEST.

    i thought that such was what you were referring to.

    metta,

    ~v
     
  7. 17th Angel

    17th Angel לבעוט את התחת ולקחת שמות

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    9,437
    Likes Received:
    3
    Anyone know where I can find out more about L. Ron Hubbard's parents?
     
  8. Vajradhara

    Vajradhara One of Many

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,786
    Likes Received:
    43
    Bare Faced Messiah has some information on them.

    metta,

    ~v
     
  9. 17th Angel

    17th Angel לבעוט את התחת ולקחת שמות

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    9,437
    Likes Received:
    3
    My thanks :)
     
  10. 17th Angel

    17th Angel לבעוט את התחת ולקחת שמות

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    9,437
    Likes Received:
    3
    I think my research of Scientology is coming to an end, in my opinion it is a very complicated thing lol... Most fo the time I feel as if LRH is just tying words together instead of writing sentences... Some parts I am like "what the hells is he talking about!"

    From the first impression (quite commmon for most religions or hobbies or 'things') It looked quite good, anti drug campaigns, support of human rights, support to those around the world that need it, that's all cool I am down with that. But within Scientology you -have- to take courses... To improve and advance.. Again yeah that is logical I am cool with that too.. Just the books you learn from seem to not add up personally in my opinion. Some times I cannot make heads or tails of some chapters in books.

    And from all the Scientologists I have met I don't honestly believe many of them know what the hells is going on.

    The major thing I am concerned with, the main idea is to become 'clear' which is to have total recall, better sense of sight, hearing, smell, taste and so on... The book even says a clear will get improved vision and over time he will gain perfect sight again... So why have I met clears with glasses? And one in particular with quite a thick pair of glasses? He's improved? From what? Blindness?

    I also put one Clear (otIII) to the test and asked her over the phone to tell me what I was wearing the first day I came into their church and asked questions about what did I smell like what aftershave was I wearing and so on and so forth... I am concerned because she didn't know.. But she has total recall?

    Not 100% sure, but I feel my studies are soon to come to an end. If this is the real deal then I guess my IQ is too inferior to handle it, as I cannot fathom most of it... I get looking after one another and being good to one another and so on, but Dianetics... Ok... I'll say it lol to me is gibberish lol...

    Anyway that's my update.

    And Tommy Davis is still my hero! lol.
     
  11. Vajradhara

    Vajradhara One of Many

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,786
    Likes Received:
    43
    Namaste Alex P,

    thanks for the update.

    did you get a chance to meet any OT's in person?
    when a being becomes an OTVIII they are said to "be at Cause over MEST".

    that's Scilon for "they can use their mind to manipulate Matter, Energy, Space and Time." they can fly, teleport, cure all illnesses, journey to other planets, become immortal and so on... indeed, that is how we know that Venus has a busy train system, LRH was nearly run over there by a locomotive and complained about how busy it all was.

    yet... as you noticed with your Clear <your test was a variation of the test that the first Clear underwent, and failed>, the claimed powers and abilities do not manifest and the beings on The Bridge cannot provide any evidence that they are at Cause over anything let alone MEST. they are clearly not immortal and die of the same ailments as every other human.

    there is a reason that the writings, the Source, seems rather disjointed and it mostly has to do with LRH using amphetamines and drinking rum. he wrote his first wife, Mary Sue, about how the pills made him all loopy and whacked out when he had first gone to sea with the Sea Org.

    metta,

    ~v
     
  12. 17th Angel

    17th Angel לבעוט את התחת ולקחת שמות

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    9,437
    Likes Received:
    3
    So it isn't 'just me' ? Thank goodness for that... I was listening to the audio books to make it easier to learn.. But, I just cannot grasp most of it :\ Like yeah, I understand the basics and their belife system. but you go into detail and you've freaking lost me.

    I met a few OT's but not a lvl VIII The highest I have come into contact with is a V. have only tested as I previously said an OTIII... And found their memory to be worse than mine as I can clearly recall what they were wearing. I cannot picture it as they say.. I never picture anything, one of the examples they give in Dianetics think of a rose, and you most likely will see a rose, it's stem it's thorns, petals and so on.... I see nada... I -know- what a rose looks like but I do not see the rose.. Such as I knew what she was wearing, although I didn't see it in my head I just know what it was.

    So this is where my concern stems from... I then thought screw it, I am going to take the risk and read the OTIII book... Remembering you will drop dead if you read this material when you're not ready for it... Alas... Here I am a pre-clear, typing and living infront of your very eyes. A miracle.

    It is a shame... I am to a degree upset... As I really thought I was going to learn and benefit from my research of this group, like I've taken from everything I have studied at least something... At this point, (it is late at night and not being a clear or being that alert I cannot truly recall as of now.) I cannot think of one thing that I have come away with as good that I haven't already learnt...

    I am gonna stick to just his mission Earth books lol I like them. And they are more my level ;)
     
  13. Vajradhara

    Vajradhara One of Many

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,786
    Likes Received:
    43
    Namaste Alex P,

    thank you for the post.

    nope, it's not just you :) it would appear that your ability to follow an ideas logical progression is not impaired in the least ;)

    what you experienced and rejected was a classic mind control technique whereby the adherent has to create a dichotomy between what they intersubjectively know and what they are told they are supposed to know. it can be a very powerful technique used against beings that have already accepted the primary axiom namely that the leader is unquestionably correct regarding every field to which they turn their attention.

    indeed it seems clear that ones memory is completely unaffected by $cientology training despite it's heavy insistence upon memorization.

    very interesting.. i'm trying that myself and it seems that i'm rather like you.. i don't see a rose in my minds eye.. i have to choose to invoke its image.. when i hear the term "rose" is more like some sort of dictionary... attributes and interactions but it seems to stimulate my olfactory sense more than my visual sense. a fascinating topic for it's own thread :)

    well.. you could be mad <mentally unstable> now... it's going to kill you or drive you mad.... that said, it's a miracle that happens so frequently as to be unmiraculous at this point.

    there are parts of $cientology that work. those parts were taken from other systems of thought, religious practice and psychology so if you've been studying these things you've come across them in their pristine state, so to speak, which is always more satisfying than a derivative, for me at any rate.

    metta,

    ~v
     
  14. 17th Angel

    17th Angel לבעוט את התחת ולקחת שמות

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    9,437
    Likes Received:
    3

    Almost time to go home! So haven't time to reply to the majority of this post, thank you however for your reply... I agree this would make for a good thread as it seems to fascinate my beloved, she tends to frequently test and be amazed at what I can recall... Using visual tools of the eyes and then listing in the mind where everything is... I then when on look back will go through this list so yeah there were five cracks in the floor twenty tiles six books in the far corner the colour of them and their titles in left to right.... An so on... And it isn't because I can see the room, it is just I know what is in the room I've physically been there I have seen it, so I know it's there... I am glad to find someone else who does the same! She made me feel slightly like an oddball for not being able to "see" the room or the images.. No matter what I try I cannot make an image in my mind...
     
  15. Vajradhara

    Vajradhara One of Many

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,786
    Likes Received:
    43
  16. Francis king

    Francis king New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,318
    Likes Received:
    0
    cheers for the link, Vaj
     

Share This Page