"Confidentiality" in Dianetics and Scientology

[uniquemand]

I believe that the reason for the lack of transparency in Scientology operational policy and technical bulletins has nothing to do with danger of restimulation of cases. Instead, I'm convinced that confidentiality is used on the Admin side to protect the organization from it's parishioners (and it's staff, largely, through compartmentalization) from discovering the way they are being manipulated into giving their time and money to a group that will ultimately destroy them or entirely co-opt them, unless they have the good sense to leave. I believe the reason that tech issues are marked confidential is similar, but also includes the desire to have the person "properly set up" for the actions.

"Setup" might sound benign; it is anything but benign. "Setups" in scientology take the form of eliminating counter-intention through confessional, sec check, False Data Stripping, False Purpose Rundown, etc. A person who isn't "setup" in this manner would probably look at the absurdity of the materials in CC-OTIII, and realize immediately that he'd been taken.

Hubbard must be seen as a prophet offering you the road to his level of enlightenment, and any thoughts you have that this is not the case YOU MUST HAVE LEARNED TO SUPPRESS.

That's the reason for confidentiality. To build confidence in Hubbard and his organization, such that it over-rides your own good sense.

What's a confidence game without "confidentiality"?

GAME OVER SCIENTOLOGY. The interwebs are removing your "confidentiality", obliterating your compartmentalization, and restoring individuals ability to think for themselves with the real data at their fingertips.

Transparency and accountability are the only way out.

[Panda Termint]

I agree in the main.
Setups also include picking up and handling any Bypassed Case/Charge and completing incomplete action, especially things like Drug Handlings etc. but these things also fit nicely into the scenario you paint, U.
To me, modern scientology is more about Identity Molding than anything else.

[uniquemand]

Synthetic valence? "Sea Org Member", or "Admin Terminal", or "Tech Terminal". Each of these has their own modus operandi. Even when being a "Tech Terminal", it seems, one is adopting an identity largely as the executioner of LRH's intentions with respect to another being's mind. Even if I trusted LRH (which I most CERTAINLY don't), that would be a scary concept. When the auditor stops being there to help the other person overcome something they see as a problem or "AESP", that auditor is no longer serving the other being, IMO, and is acting, instead, as an EDITOR of the person's mind.

[Div6]

In some instances application of the CC-OT III materials can be beneficial and result in greater freedom and ability.


It does not appear to me that the SO wants people to be free, or that they are capable or willing to do what is necessary to deliver that freedom.

To them, Freedom = Slavery. Thus the chains of "confidentiality".

[Telepathetic]

I think your post is very spot on.

I especially like:

"What's a confidence game without "confidentiality?"

TP

[uniquemand]

<more self-bumpage>

[Mark A. Baker]

I agree in the main.
Setups also include picking up and handling any Bypassed Case/Charge and completing incomplete action, especially things like Drug Handlings etc. but these things also fit nicely into the scenario you paint, U.
To me, modern scientology is more about Identity Molding than anything else.

Ummmm, they CAN 'fit nicely'. They CAN also simply be addressing the actions which a pc needs to do in order to get the most from his auditing.

I had 'setups' done a few times on my lower bridge. It all went quite smoothly, no upsets, no need to turn over my bank accounts to the church, no sudden urges to sign a billion year contract.

As with any aspect of scientology tech: it's all in how it's used.


Mark A. Baker

[Panda Termint]

Ummmm, they CAN 'fit nicely'. They CAN also simply be addressing the actions which a pc needs to do in order to get the most from his auditing.

I had 'setups' done a few times on my lower bridge. It all went quite smoothly, no upsets, no need to turn over my bank accounts to the church, no sudden urges to sign a billion year contract.

As with any aspect of scientology tech: it's all in how it's used.


Mark A. Baker

Yes, I understand that Mark. There is quite a difference between the purpose behind an OT Setup Program and an OT Eligibility Program. The first is to do with ensuring that the PC is in appropriate "case shape" to address and handle the material, the second is to ensure that the person fits some pre-conceived idea of "Ethics Level and Worthiness" to receive the "priceless gift" of being allowed to address and handle these materials.

PCs often feel they benefited from both actions. That always seems to depend on the efficacy of the Program and the ability of the PC and Auditor.

I audited hundreds of Setup Pgms and Eligibility Programs on others and they always went well apart from the occasional "ineligible for OT Levels" PC. My latter day experience with these things is where I concluded that current scientology is mostly about Identity Molding.

[Mark A. Baker]

... My latter day experience with these things is where I concluded that current scientology is mostly about Identity Molding.

Absolutely no argument on that point. The truth is the "Identity Molding" has been an unfortunate aspect of at least some areas of scientology going back a very long way. Whereas now it is the dominant theme of the whole of the Co$, that wasn't always the situation, which I believe you know and agree with me on.


Mark A. Baker

[Infinite]

Its all part of the mystery sandwich, isn't it?