Fear and Scientology

[Cat's Squirrel]

Hi. Those of us who know a bit about the tone scale in Scn will recall that fear is at 1.0 on the scale, above propitiation and sympathy but below covert hostility, no sympathy etc.

This has always puzzled me because of the clash with other teachings I respect such as "A Course in Miracles" which state that, far from being just one point on a scale, fear is an all-pervasive phenomenon inhibiting our spiritual reach. The choice is between fear and love at every level.

According to this model I could envisage something like two huge magnets at either end of the tone (and probably other) scales, fear pulling you down towards the lower tones and love pulling you upwards towards the higher ones. Simplistic perhaps, but I'm trying to suggest that fear isn't just "one more tone."

So, who is right? LRH, or A Course in Miracles and other teachings with the same data?

Incidentally, the first independent scientology practitioner I came across after I left the Church was also a Rosicrucian and he said that the only thing preventing us being enlightened was fear in its different forms.

[Dulloldfart]

I don't see fear and love as opposites at all. If you think they are, try running them with my Robot "Dipoles" module and seeing what happens. :)

A reasoned "I'd better not do that or the unpleasant consequence would be ___" is not fear as such. My example, not yours, if it helps.

Paul

[Cat's Squirrel]

I see them as opposite motive forces. Fear tries to withdraw from the feared object etc., love tries to embrace the object and permeate the space. May have a look at that dipole though.

[Iknowtoomuch]

Each emotion has mental and physical "reactions". They may vary between people but are very much the same or similar.

Al I know is the church holds it's members by way of a lower tone.

[asagai]

Hi Cat,

Ron's Tone Scale was designed to try to control the thought and behaviour of his "slaves".

Course in Miracles was designed to try to free people's thoughts and behaviour.

Both have some basis in reality otherwise they wouldn't have any resonance or attraction for us. The intentions behind them set them apart.

If an orignators motives are pure, the released info is more likely to stand up to the sort of scrutiny that you are applying.

[Dulloldfart]

I see them as opposite motive forces. Fear tries to withdraw from the feared object etc., love tries to embrace the object and permeate the space. May have a look at that dipole though.

What I found was that real opposites tend to spring to mind when you start running a pair. Your mileage may vary, of course.

Paul

[Cat's Squirrel]

Thanks for the responses everyone, all of which are good thus far; I may reply properly when I've got more time.

For now, I think the tone scale at least as used in the CofS is too narrow a picture of what happens although I've got no reason to believe it's wrong as such (one of my favourite books in Scn, Ruth Minshull's "How To Choose Your People", is based on it). My guess is that it's a one-dimensional representation of a phenomenon that's probably at least two-dimensional.

[Andrew]

"Fear leads to Anger. Anger leads to Hate. Hate leads to Suffering..."

Sorry, couldn't help myself. :D

[Rene Descartes]

Tone Scale?

Love?

There is no "love" on the "emotional" tone scale.

Love is a "particle" that is the most sought after.

I am suspicious that Ron did not hug his kids enough when they were young.

Rd00

[gomorrhan]

I don't see love as an emotion. The tone scale is an interesting plot of emotions, particularly from about fear through contentment, which look like they mirror fight/flight pretty well. Emotion to me is about what hormones are being released to prepare the body for various reactions to the environment. I see love as being a motivation to nurture. Emotions might be engaged based on whether they threaten the "love object".

[SchwimmelPuckel]

Tone Scale is a mindcontrol tool.. Try look at it with a view to flow.. Ie: Judging someone elses 'tone', an employee or a slave... Or look at it as being 'your own tone'..

The tone 1.1 is covert hostility.. That is judged to be the worst of the worst. As indicated by it's placement on the scale. Well below 2.0 and thus these people should be 'deleted' from society.

That 'opinion' of a guy who conceals his hostility only makes sense for the dude he conceals his hostility from.

Viewed as 'your own tone' covert hostility may be the intelligent and sane thing to do.. When you find yourself trapped in a criminal and warlike group as an example. Then hide your dismay and hostility.. And get the hell out!!!

Also, James Bond is generally covertly hostile while infiltrating all those criminal organizations and saving the world.

Seems to me that 1.1 doesn't belong any particular place on the tone scale. 1.1 is there only to suggest and indoctrinate about loyalty and treason.. Loyalty and treason being the key control points for warlords and false prophets all down history.

If Hubbard can be credited with anything, it's the sheer deviousness of all these manipulations..

:yes:

[gomorrhan]

Perhaps the term "covert" is the manipulation or simply incorrect phrasing. To me, a better term would be "repressed hostility", where this isn't a deliberate or self-imposed strategy, so much as a response to hostile reactions netting you a beating commonly. Where this is not an emotional vice around you, but instead a deliberate strategy, it can be an intelligent thing to do, as you show above. But if you are incapable of expressing your anger out of fear, because every time you expressed anger in the past it lead to beatings or torture, this is an incapacity, and highly disabling, and probably a serious warping of the personality.

[SchwimmelPuckel]

Yes.. One could analyze that way. I even believe it is so.. An example would be the situation as a CoS staff.. Constant pressure and threat happening while the 'philosophy' makes it 'evil' to feel hostile'..

I see it working that way.

It will warp the mind of a scientologist!

Thing is: It's fine hating folks that are 1.1 when you use the tone scale to judge others...

When you get your weekend CSW denied because you were 12 seconds late wednesday and have the 'ethics officer' watching you closely for BI's.. Then you get the personal viewpoint of the tone scale and the tone 1.1... And you get 'persuaded' that you are a traitor..

Loyalty and treason.. All Djenghis Khan was interested in...

:yes:

[Rene Descartes]

Speaking of "cover hostility", now that homosexuality is more acceptable in society today, does this make Ron's tech on 1.1 and homosexuality

1. obsolete
2. incorrect
3. stupid
4. all of the above

All I can say is life is much more grand these days not spending more than 0.1% of my time contemplating where people are on LRH's "emotional tone scale".

Rd00

[gomorrhan]

Ron's tech on homosexuality and 1.1 was obsolete, incorrect and stupid from the day he voiced it. It was simply a reflection of the biases of the culture that Ron had adopted. It was never valid, and still isn't. That's pretty obvious to anyone who is gay or who knows anyone who is gay, and sees them as a person, and not through a filter.

[Voltaire's Child]

My theory is that tone scale positions can be wrapped up in other tone scale positions. It's evident to me that one can experience more than one emotion or misemotion at the time.

[Voltaire's Child]

Speaking of "cover hostility", now that homosexuality is more acceptable in society today, does this make Ron's tech on 1.1 and homosexuality

1. obsolete
2. incorrect
3. stupid
4. all of the above

All I can say is life is much more grand these days not spending more than 0.1% of my time contemplating where people are on LRH's "emotional tone scale".

Rd00


Hubbard also says that promiscuity as at 1.1 yet I rarely, if ever, see critics mentioning that. The two phenomena are discussed as being 1.1 and that's all in the same PL.

My speculation is that Hubbard had a rather Gnostic attitude toward sex particularly as his body began to deteriorate and he couldn't sustain erections.

[FinallyMe]

Good points, all. I also think that more attention should be given to making sure you are viewing the purported emotional tone correctly. For instance (being way more familiar with ANGER than I would like to be) -- when you think you are seeing "anger" is it really self-protection, is it frustration, is it from overwhelm, etc? Seems to me if you go "one tone level above" what you think you're seeing, you could miss the mark and REALLY screw things up.

On the other hand, I think it would be a most valuable tool if you could actually identify the emotional tone you are looking and or personally experiencing, as maybe you could then figure out a way to change or support that tone?

[Wisened One]

Got a question on the how scn vs gays thing:

Several times over the past years, I'd see scn celebs like TC, Leah Remini, Priscilla Presley, Kathy Najimi, etc. on Rosie's and/or Ellen's show,

Isn't that sort of 'frowned' upon by Co$ that they were doing that? Wasn't that a sign they were condoning it, etc?

Seeing them do stuff like that would confuse me....


Ron's tech on homosexuality and 1.1 was obsolete, incorrect and stupid from the day he voiced it. It was simply a reflection of the biases of the culture that Ron had adopted. It was never valid, and still isn't. That's pretty obvious to anyone who is gay or who knows anyone who is gay, and sees them as a person, and not through a filter.

[Cat's Squirrel]

I agree and this is the one thing I don't like about Ruth Minshull's book; she follows the party line on the subject of gays and 1.1.

For me it was very liberating to read that book and note, for example, this on the subject of 1.1s;

If you're uncertain whether a person is 1.1, notice how you feel with him. Do you get thrown off balance? Feel self-conscious? Worry about whether you're witty enough, cool enough, sophisticated enough?

This is a common social tone. People of higher or lower levels will adopt a somewhat false politeness for superficial contacts. Such "good manners," however, do not carry the destructive intention of the chronic 1.1. The tones below this are more destructive (especially for the poor chaps who are in them); but they are weak. Unless your relationship is very personal, they will have little influence on you. The 1.1, however, can seldom be ignored. He impinges. He makes his presence known.

That "impingement" was something I sensed but didn't recognise for what it was until I had the tone scale to refer to.

I also think Kevin's right about "fight or flight".

[thetanic]

Hubbard also says that promiscuity as at 1.1 yet I rarely, if ever, see critics mentioning that. The two phenomena are discussed as being 1.1 and that's all in the same PL.

He also said abortion's 1.1 (SoS?).

[gomorrhan]

Got a question on the how scn vs gays thing:

Several times over the past years, I'd see scn celebs like TC, Leah Remini, Priscilla Presley, Kathy Najimi, etc. on Rosie's and/or Ellen's show,

Isn't that sort of 'frowned' upon by Co$ that they were doing that? Wasn't that a sign they were condoning it, etc?

Seeing them do stuff like that would confuse me....

It's not whether they condone it or not (and remember, scientology celebrities who are going on talk shows are given training or 'mini-hats' on PR, so they aren't going to talk about whether scientology approves of homosexuality: they don't care about the host, they care about communicating their concepts through a big microphone to the population), it's whether or not the megaphone is big enough to reach a lot of people.

[Voltaire's Child]

He also said abortion's 1.1 (SoS?).


Yeah, he did and it's on one of the sec checks.

[Iknowtoomuch]

Are you kidding. Talk to a hard core Scientologists about gays. They hate them with a passion.
There's no room for immorality like that in Scientology.

[Voltaire's Child]

Yes, you are correct in that, I've seen it myself- but if one is going by "scripture", promiscuity, homosexuality and abortion are all treated the same.

[Björkist]

...but if one is going by "scripture", promiscuity, homosexuality and abortion are all treated the same.

Are all three enforced in the Sea Org? :idea2:

[gomorrhan]

Silly wabbit, Scientologists don't abort fetus', they abort FAMILIES

[Voltaire's Child]

Are all three enforced in the Sea Org? :idea2:

So I hear!

[BarMoshiach]

"You hold the key to Love and Fear, all in your trembling hand." (Dino Valente)

As presented in A Course In Miracles, the ego operates from fear, his false belief in his separation from the Infinite Oneness of Love.

In that sense the whole "tone scale" could be seen as the scale of fear, a measurement of how much separation we are vibrating with.

"We are stardust, we are golden, and we've got to get ourselves back to the garden." (Joni Mitchell)

[sandygirl]

Quote from IKTOM:
Are you kidding. Talk to a hard core Scientologists about gays. They hate them with a passion.
There's no room for immorality like that in Scientology.

No f***ing kidding. Don't wanna give too many details but...on vacation, my family members who were "in" (we were at the time also-but I was never a freak like some of my family) would not let their kids in the hotel pool.

Why?

There was a lesbian couple swimming and my family members thought their kids would get AIDS!!!!:omg: :omg: They were extremely rude and shooting dirty looks at the couple while the kids were crying!!! Very embarrassing and a sad example of how out of touch you are the further you're in!!

[Cat's Squirrel]

"You hold the key to Love and Fear, all in your trembling hand." (Dino Valente)

As presented in A Course In Miracles, the ego operates from fear, his false belief in his separation from the Infinite Oneness of Love.

In that sense the whole "tone scale" could be seen as the scale of fear, a measurement of how much separation we are vibrating with.

"We are stardust, we are golden, and we've got to get ourselves back to the garden." (Joni Mitchell)

I've started a thread here about ACIM in which you might be interested;

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=4900&highlight=ACIM

[nexus100]

"You hold the key to Love and Fear, all in your trembling hand." (Dino Valente)

As presented in A Course In Miracles, the ego operates from fear, his false belief in his separation from the Infinite Oneness of Love.

In that sense the whole "tone scale" could be seen as the scale of fear, a measurement of how much separation we are vibrating with.

"We are stardust, we are golden, and we've got to get ourselves back to the garden." (Joni Mitchell)

Joni Mitchell is my favorite artist. And I agree with your assessment of the tone scale.

[Cat's Squirrel]

Joni Mitchell is my favorite artist. And I agree with your assessment of the tone scale.

Fair enough, the only problem I have with this is that it implies that people further down the tone scale are worse off than people higher up the scale, whereas it's my impression that this is true only superficially.

Some so-called "high tone" people have no spiritual awareness at all, whereas others with, say severe depression have a lot of it.

[nexus100]

Fair enough, the only problem I have with this is that it implies that people further down the tone scale are worse off than people higher up the scale, whereas it's my impression that this is true only superficially.

Some so-called "high tone" people have no spiritual awareness at all, whereas others with, say severe depression have a lot of it.

You are absolutely correct in my opinion. I meant that the scale is designed on rejection, not understanding. I should have been more careful with my post.

[Pierrot]

"You hold the key to Love and Fear, all in your trembling hand." (Dino Valente)

As presented in A Course In Miracles, the ego operates from fear, his false belief in his separation from the Infinite Oneness of Love.

In that sense the whole "tone scale" could be seen as the scale of fear, a measurement of how much separation we are vibrating with.

"We are stardust, we are golden, and we've got to get ourselves back to the garden." (Joni Mitchell)

The ego could operate from fear, or from grief or exhilaration - depends where one puts the fundamental tone...

In colors we have three basic hues - red, blue and green. From those, plotting them on the "black-grey-white" scale we get all the other colors. But seldom we see true primary colors "alone" in nature. They all are mixed with others, and we have thus harmonics.

In music, "when a tone is sounded, it generates an array of supplemental tones (harmonics, or overtones)" - Ron Gorow, Hearing & Writing music.

If you push any key on a piano, and stop that note, you will still hear some sound from the piano, because of the sympathetic resonance of all the other strings. They pick up the harmonics of the fundamental note.

Same in the Tone Scale. The primary tones are - a flow, a ridge, a dispersal. Fear is a dispersal. When "contacting" fear, feeling it, other dispersals, as harmonics, will resonate too.

Thus I feel (lol) the tone scale somewhat limited if one tries to plot an emotion against one tone. Usually there are more harmonics to it, and the mixture + character of the person is what makes the experience of any emotion so unique. In other words - a tone is seldom displayed on its own, as would be a primary color, or a note that would sound without its harmonics. It's complex actually, even though taking it apart and reducing to the simplicity might be useful for study.

So - while I like to be able to distinguish between a G or a Bb or F#, a person cannot be reduced to one (emotional) tone - a being is a whole symphony.

[BarMoshiach]

Yes, it was a different definition of "Fear" being used in A Course In Miracles than in the SCN tone Scale. In ACIM, everything below Serenity of Beingness, any illusion of separation from the Oneness, is a variety of fear.

Cat's Squirrel, you reminded me of how the tone levels were used as make-wrong and inval, especially in the registrar game. All these "high toned," shiny, happy "OT's" off to play volleyball on other planets or whatever. It's more of a "social tone." Get them in session, you see the whole SCN tone scale.

Please see my entry on your ACIM thread.