”Evaluation” and ”Invalidation”

[Adam7986]

Good Morning folks!

I have been slowly trying to change my thought processes as I let the mental conditioning of scientology slowly wear off of me.

It came to my attention that scientologists often hide behind the ideas of evaluation and invalidation. Anytime you try to question their beliefs or challenge their gains. For example my father who is OTIII has severe asthma. He almost died a couple of months ago. Were I to mention that in relation to his case level as proof that he did not gain what LRH promised, he would simply use the thought stopping words ” that's evaluation and invalidation of my case”.

This method of thought control is very interesting. It prevents a scientologist from acknowledging the existence of objective truth.

I think perhaps what qualifies as ”invalidation” and ”evaluation” within the scientology world is actually very important input from people that allows you to understand yourself better and prevent you from becoming a detached, delusional, egotistical maniac.

Another example is my father was spouting random bullshit last night as usual and out of his mouth pops this conspiracy theory that they put wood pulp in food. I turned to him and said, dad I have heard that one and I researched it myself and it is not wood pulp. It's called cellulose and it's in any plant that you eat.

He became visibly upset that I had dared challenge his OTIII genius and do my own research.

This is a regular occurrence in my home. I think this is something very important to the grip that scientology holds on its clientele. I think it is also something that former members need to let go. Its okay to tell people what is wrong with them. Do not be afraid to tell someone how they feel or what is going on with them.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

Cool thread!

While Scientologists are being so terribly fearful and upset by "Inval" and "Eval", they would regard it as "Inval" and "Eval" if anyone pointed out to them that Scientologists are perhaps the most invalidate and evaluative people in the entire world.

While they were lecturing & sermonizing another about the evils of Inval/Eval, they would be dropping invalidate and evaluative bombshells about the person's bank, case, out-ethics, dramatization, counter-intention, evil purposes, whole track implants, dwindling spiral, etc. Here watch....

OT
...and then Ron discovered the secret of the universe
and [STRIKE]died on the cross[/STRIKE] broke his back for our [STRIKE]sins[/STRIKE] overts
when he went thru the Wall of Fire.

WOG
Didn't Ron actually injure himself because he fell off his
motorcycle and wouldn't that mean that he was PTS?

OT
Hey! Knock off the inval and eval on the Commodore!

WOG
How is that inval/eval--the nurse that took care of him
during that time said it. Wouldn't that just be the truth?

OT
Hey! Ethical people don't invalidate and evaluate Ron's
case!

WOG
You mean the way that Ron invalidates and evaluates your
case when he told you that you have been a degraded
being for 75 million years because you were implanted
by Xenu?

OT
Hey, we Scientologists don't inval or eval! The only reason
you say that is because you are dramatizing your evil purposes,
from mental charge of a time when you were overwhelmed by
an SP, causing you to go down the tone-scale to covert hostility
and then you went into the winning valence of an SP--and now
you are not able to have big beings because you fear then and
that is why you attacked me.

WOG
(slowly reaching for keys
and backing away towards door)
Yeah.....Okayyyyyyy.......Rightttt......​

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

Good Morning folks!

I have been slowly trying to change my thought processes as I let the mental conditioning of scientology slowly wear off of me.

It came to my attention that scientologists often hide behind the ideas of evaluation and invalidation. Anytime you try to question their beliefs or challenge their gains. For example my father who is OTIII has severe asthma. He almost died a couple of months ago. Were I to mention that in relation to his case level as proof that he did not gain what LRH promised, he would simply use the thought stopping words ” that's evaluation and invalidation of my case”.

This method of thought control is very interesting. It prevents a scientologist from acknowledging the existence of objective truth.

I think perhaps what qualifies as ”invalidation” and ”evaluation” within the scientology world is actually very important input from people that allows you to understand yourself better and prevent you from becoming a detached, delusional, egotistical maniac.

Another example is my father was spouting random bullshit last night as usual and out of his mouth pops this conspiracy theory that they put wood pulp in food. I turned to him and said, dad I have heard that one and I researched it myself and it is not wood pulp. It's called cellulose and it's in any plant that you eat.

He became visibly upset that I had dared challenge his OTIII genius and do my own research.

This is a regular occurrence in my home. I think this is something very important to the grip that scientology holds on its clientele. I think it is also something that former members need to let go. Its okay to tell people what is wrong with them. Do not be afraid to tell someone how they feel or what is going on with them.

Great Stuff, Adam! Absolutely G-R-E-A-T S-T-U-F-F!

There's a fabulous folk witticism that was told to me by a person that grew up in the Soviet Union during the 60's-70's. It goes something like this, "They pretend to pay us and we pretend to work."

The Scn corollary goes something like this, "They pretend to make me an OT and I pretend to be one."

Face

 

[Idle Morgue]

"COVERT INVALIDATION IS THE SOCIAL INTERCOURSE OF THE SP!"

I am seeing everything you are saying as well. I am catching myself and allowing my thoughts to flow. I have a great mind and Scientology is not going to have it. I am working on clearing out the "thought stopping" mechanisms I adopted. It is a journey but my goal is to get back to normal, rational, objective thinking that made me a powerful person.

Scamonology wanted to take that all away and replace it with Blubbtard's delusional mind.

I love this little clever mechanism: You have a legitimate complaint about something with the Cult:

Your next step is a "repair" in which the F/U C/S is instructed per the tech to pull your overts - get the attention OFF OF THE CULT and ONTO YOU. After all, you are 100% responsible for everything!

So you purchase a package of intensives at the cost of $25,000, go into session and hear those wonderful words:

"Do you have a similar OVERT of your own?" That takes the attention off of the criminal activity we all witness in this CULT and puts the attention on us. Very clever - that little Ronnie Hubbturd!

I think I will pass! while I agree that we are basically good. we all have to work at never sinning or committing overt's everyday - that is the way it is. Hubbtoad says: the guy committing continuous overt's every day is the Criminal - well, take a look at the Co$ -- everyday, every staff member - breathing life into the devils workshop. ICKY ICKY ICKY

 

[Adam7986]

Great Stuff, Adam! Absolutely G-R-E-A-T S-T-U-F-F!

There's a fabulous folk witticism that was told to me by a person that grew up in the Soviet Union during the 60's-70's. It goes something like this, "They pretend to pay us and we pretend to work."

The Scn corollary goes something like this, "They pretend to make me an OT and I pretend to be one."

Face

Excellent analogy my friend!

The technical term for what you have said is cognitive dissonance. I would recommend everyone study up on that one.

 

[phénix]

And what about the line saying that at the basis of all overts there are MU's...(if I remember well)
what kind of an assertion is that?

I find that scn mechanisms get you more and more looking inward, watching what you do, what you think...am I committing an overt? Do I understand that word? Etc...
At least that was the result for me, others were not as affected as me...

 

[TG1]

I am guessing your dad wants to minimize his stress. He's looking for alignment, not controversy. He would rather believe he's right than he's wrong.

"That's evaluation and invalidation of my case!" is code for "I don't think I can win this debate, so I'm stopping it now" or "This conversation is so far outside my comfort level that I'm going to cut the discussion off right now." It might also be code for "I've begun to suspect I'm in a cult, but cannot confront the implications of admitting that to myself, much less you, right now." You would know better than we what this particular language is code for, in your dad's case.

Similar code language:

"That's not what MY God says!"
"That's just the Devil talking!"
"Obviously, you're not doing it right."
"Well, it works for me."

We all do this to some extent. I see it here on ESMB all the time.

I even see it in myself from time to time.

It's tough being human.

TG1

 

[Adam7986]

Cool thread!

While Scientologists are being so terribly fearful and upset by "Inval" and "Eval", they would regard it as "Inval" and "Eval" if anyone pointed out to them that Scientologists are perhaps the most invalidate and evaluative people in the entire world.

While they were lecturing & sermonizing another about the evils of Inval/Eval, they would be dropping invalidate and evaluative bombshells about the person's bank, case, out-ethics, dramatization, counter-intention, evil purposes, whole track implants, dwindling spiral, etc. Here watch....

OT
...and then Ron discovered the secret of the universe
and [STRIKE]died on the cross[/STRIKE] broke his back for our [STRIKE]sins[/STRIKE] overts
when he went thru the Wall of Fire.

WOG
Didn't Ron actually injure himself because he fell off his
motorcycle and wouldn't that mean that he was PTS?

OT
Hey! Knock off the inval and eval on the Commodore!

WOG
How is that inval/eval--the nurse that took care of him
during that time said it. Wouldn't that just be the truth?

OT
Hey! Ethical people don't invalidate and evaluate Ron's
case!

WOG
You mean the way that Ron invalidates and evaluates your
case when he told you that you have been a degraded
being for 75 million years because you were implanted
by Xenu?

OT
Hey, we Scientologists don't inval or eval! The only reason
you say that is because you are dramatizing your evil purposes,
from mental charge of a time when you were overwhelmed by
an SP, causing you to go down the tone-scale to covert hostility
and then you went into the winning valence of an SP--and now
you are not able to have big beings because you fear then and
that is why you attacked me.

WOG
(slowly reaching for keys
and backing away towards door)
Yeah.....Okayyyyyyy.......Rightttt......​

I like that little dialogue. That's exactly the kind of thought stopping that occurs in serology. Members are unwilling to understand the difference between objective and subjective truths. This blurs the line between fantasy and reality and they end up delusional and misguided.

 

[Adam7986]

And what about the line saying that at the basis of all overts there are MU's...(if I remember well)
what kind of an assertion is that?

I find that scn mechanisms get you more and more looking inward, watching what you do, what you think...am I committing an overt? Do I understand that word? Etc...
At least that was the result for me, others were not as affected as me...

interesting point about the idea behind misunderstood words: the study tech is actually designed to break down your ability to comprehend and actually inhibit you from using your normal mature cognitive faculties. It literally reduces your thought process to that of a child. It makes you more malleable and prevents you from looking at the concept of something as a whole, but instead viewing it in small parts. Much like the bridge to total freedom starts off small and with small amounts of money, but becomes increasingly more crazy and expensive at the top.

Its like the classic analogy of boiling a frog, which I think Hubbard (ironically) uses himself.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

I like that little dialogue. That's exactly the kind of thought stopping that occurs in serology. Members are unwilling to understand the difference between objective and subjective truths. This blurs the line between fantasy and reality and they end up delusional and misguided.

We agree! But, then again--

...humans only agree on things that are from the R6 bank. Ron said it.

It's a good thing that Ron rose above our banks so he could tell us who the not-banky person is that we should agree with.

 

[Adam7986]

I am guessing your dad wants to minimize his stress. He's looking for alignment, not controversy. He would rather believe he's right than he's wrong.

"That's evaluation and invalidation of my case!" is code for "I don't think I can win this debate, so I'm stopping it now" or "This conversation is so far outside my comfort level that I'm going to cut the discussion off right now." It might also be code for "I've begun to suspect I'm in a cult, but cannot confront the implications of admitting that to myself, much less you, right now." You would know better than we what this particular language is code for, in your dad's case.

Similar code language:

"That's not what MY God says!"
"That's just the Devil talking!"
"Obviously, you're not doing it right."
"Well, it works for me."

We all do this to some extent. I see it here on ESMB all the time.

I even see it in myself from time to time.

It's tough being human.

TG1

You say this almost in defense of Scientology as if you're saying ”well everybody does this anyway so who cares”.

That's not actually the case. Most people have a logical argument behind their faith in something, or they understand and acknowledge that there is no scientific proof or objective proof of their faith. They understand the difference between objective and subjective truths.

Scientologists do not. They believe going clear makes it so you don't have to wear glasses, and yet they continue to wear glasses, for example. That is pure insanity and it is a sign of a radicalized following.

 

[Adam7986]

We agree! But, then again--

...humans only agree on things that are from the R6 bank. Ron said it.

It's a good thing that Ron rose above our banks so he could tell us who the not-banky person is that we should agree with.

I am forever grateful that he was able to tell us the right way to do things. If it weren't for him we might spend our money on useful things like medical care. its a good thing he showed us that auditing is all the medical care we need. And taught us not to trust the evil medicos

 

[Adam7986]

I like that little dialogue. That's exactly the kind of thought stopping that occurs in serology. Members are unwilling to understand the difference between objective and subjective truths. This blurs the line between fantasy and reality and they end up delusional and misguided.

Serology should be scientology. I wish I could edit that.

 

[Claire Swazey]

Although I agree that a person should be able to examine his or her beliefs without a bunch of drama and although I also think that the cult uses the inval/eval thing as a way to drive a wedge between non Scn/skeptical/ex, etc parties and the "faithful" (so to speak), I still feel it incumbent upon me to point something else out:

Being defensive about ones' beliefs is hardly the sole province of Scientologists. Some Christians and Moslems (particularly those of fundamentalist bent) can be every bit as defensive as any Scn'ist. For that matter, so can exes and other critics. Just look at how upset a number of people here get at any idea that their beliefs might be wrong or that (gasp!) they have to share the board with others who don't believe as they do.

I think the thing with unindoctrinating Scientologists is really two categories, and not one.

1) I think quite a few exes are mainly interested in blowing the whistle on what goes on in the cult. I think that many of us would like any family and friends still in to see that they are being ripped off and preyed upon. I think quite a few of us are revolted by the idea of people being bankrupted by the cult, losing their kids to the SO and that sort of thing.

which is different from

2) trying to or hoping to get someone to reevaluate his or her personal ideology.

However, in the cult, if you try to do anything with anyone and show them how they are being lied to, the member will often think you are trying to disabuse him of Item #2 rather than Item #1...

That is one of the ways the cult preserves itself and keeps its hooks in its members.

 

[Disinfected]

This is another case of an all-to-common Scientology malady - taking a concept that has validity in one sphere and trying to apply it in others.

A prohibition on "evaluation" and "invalidation" makes sense in the Scientology therapeutic model. It might also be proper in some non-Scn therapies and improper in others, but in Scientology, the auditor is simply supposed to ask a question and get an answer - not challenge the pc.

To then think that it is somehow wrong for one person to challenge another outside an auditing session is patently ludicrous but many Scientologists operate on that basis to prevent them having to have any real discussion of difficult topics. Even more damning, it acts to prevent them even touching on such topics in their own thoughts. This is just one example of such that goes along with many others such as "entheta", CI, black PR, etc., etc.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

You say this almost in defense of Scientology as if you're saying ”well everybody does this anyway so who cares”.

That's not actually the case. Most people have a logical argument behind their faith in something, or they understand and acknowledge that there is no scientific proof or objective proof of their faith. They understand the difference between objective and subjective truths.

Scientologists do not. They believe going clear makes it so you don't have to wear glasses, and yet they continue to wear glasses, for example. That is pure insanity and it is a sign of a radicalized following.

I am wearing glasses while reading your post.

But did you ever hear the tape where Ron talks about how a being is so huge that they can't get down in the little MEST universe space to handle tiny things.

So, naturally I am so OT that I need MEST glasses in order to see the small details that small beings post in small websites using small fonts.

Eventually, you will be a big being like me and then we can talk about big games on a cosmic scale.

 

[Disinfected]

I am wearing glasses while reading your post.

But did you ever hear the tape where Ron talks about how a being is so huge that they can't get down in the little MEST universe space to handle tiny things.

So, naturally I am so OT that I need MEST glasses in order to see the small details that small beings post in small websites using small fonts.

Eventually, you will be a big being like me and then we can talk about big games on a cosmic scale.

Think fast, I'm pitching a galaxy at ya!

Ga-lax-ee

 

[Adam7986]

Although I agree that a person should be able to examine his or her beliefs without a bunch of drama and although I also think that the cult uses the inval/eval thing as a way to drive a wedge between non Scn/skeptical/ex, etc parties and the "faithful" (so to speak), I still feel it incumbent upon me to point something else out:

Being defensive about ones' beliefs is hardly the sole province of Scientologists. Some Christians and Moslems (particularly those of fundamentalist bent) can be every bit as defensive as any Scn'ist. For that matter, so can exes and other critics. Just look at how upset a number of people here get at any idea that their beliefs might be wrong or that (gasp!) they have to share the board with others who don't believe as they do.

I think the thing with unindoctrinating Scientologists is really two categories, and not one.

1) I think quite a few exes are mainly interested in blowing the whistle on what goes on in the cult. I think that many of us would like any family and friends still in to see that they are being ripped off and preyed upon. I think quite a few of us are revolted by the idea of people being bankrupted by the cult, losing their kids to the SO and that sort of thing.

which is different from

2) trying to or hoping to get someone to reevaluate his or her personal ideology.

However, in the cult, if you try to do anything with anyone and show them how they are being lied to, the member will often think you are trying to disabuse him of Item #2 rather than Item #1...

That is one of the ways the cult preserves itself and keeps its hooks in its members.

The problem inherent in scientology is that item #2 and item #1 are the same. The whole of scientology would be considered disproven if only one part is disproven. Scientology as an ideology, as the various doctrines, as a church and as a therapeutic technology all exist as one inseparable unit.

 

[Claire Swazey]

No, Adam, they are NOT the same.

Someone believing in theta or the tone scale or whatever else may or may not be believing something that is correct or false or whatever else, but those things do not rip a person off or cause him to lose his or her family or anything else. A person can practice Scn outside CofS, even do it outside the FZ.

But the cult convinces people that if someone says to him "Hey, those stats they keep publishing, they're not true and the pix of the crowds at the events are photoshopped, and have you looked at all the people who lost money in the Ideal Org campaign?" that this is the same thing as "oh, hey, there's no such thing as a thetan etc etc."

If I agreed with your thesis (which I don't) then nobody could be any sort of Christian, Jew, Hindu, etc.

 

[Adam7986]

This is another case of an all-to-common Scientology malady - taking a concept that has validity in one sphere and trying to apply it in others.

A prohibition on "evaluation" and "invalidation" makes sense in the Scientology therapeutic model. It might also be proper in some non-Scn therapies and improper in others, but in Scientology, the auditor is simply supposed to ask a question and get an answer - not challenge the pc.

To then think that it is somehow wrong for one person to challenge another outside an auditing session is patently ludicrous but many Scientologists operate on that basis to prevent them having to have any real discussion of difficult topics. Even more damning, it acts to prevent them even touching on such topics in their own thoughts. This is just one example of such that goes along with many others such as "entheta", CI, black PR, etc., etc.

It is Orwellian thinking.

The Scientology model is centered around dissolving the barrier between imagination and reality; between subjective and objective truth.