Page 2 of 19 FirstFirst 123456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 190

Thread: A theory of Hubbard, Dianetics and Scientology.

  1. #11
    Unbeliever uniquemand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    North Kingstown, RI
    Posts
    8,687

    Default

    I don't think he tapped anything "off-planet". I do think that he was a lot more flexible in his thinking (at least in print) than later in his life. His unwillingness to be scientific in his approach (or perhaps his lack of understanding of what the scientific approach was) means that most of what he wrote has to be taken with a grain (or a shaker) of salt.

    The complexity of his approach grew over time. Likely, this was an income generating scheme (keep the marks buying), but also may have been indicative of declining access to the SIMPLICITY of the original understanding.

    I trust the Pilot more than I trust Ron, but both are still talking the language of religion when the language of science is more appropriate.

  2. #12
    Crusader ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Marcabian Institute of Psychiatry
    Posts
    6,404

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cat's Squirrel View Post
    If what Pilot says is true, he did reach a high state of awareness around 1952-54 and later fell away from it .

    I think some of the Tech from that halcyon period may have been channelled, but his ability to access similar off-planet data went into decline later on as he succumbed to the temptations (power, wealth etc.) the success of Scn brought him.
    Here is Hubbard in a lecture from 1952, where he was already implanting false memories into his victims.



    he's didn't become a flawed man after he acquired power and wealth. He lusted for power and wealth because he was a flawed man to begin with. Hubbard was no where close to a high state of awareness, he was a con man who ran learned hypnosis and figured out how he could use it to make his victims serve him.
    Yes lurkers you are not alone, everyone thinks Scientology is creepy, it's not just you

    http://www.mediacurves.com/Religion/...logy/Index.cfm

  3. #13
    Crusader RogerB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    5,366
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default London.

    Add London to the saga of "lost centers." The people he trusted as organizational officers; actually corporate officers with executive powers, are said to have ripped him off before he went to St. Hill. According to Dennis Stephens, in 1960-1, the execs extorted money from Hubbard to give title of the HASI corporation back to him.

    Rog
    Life is supposed to be enjoyed, Mate!

    "Twenty years of work has been put into this performance." Cadel Evans on winning the Tour de France.
    I'm with you on that, mate. Mine's taken me fifty-plus.

  4. #14
    Gold Meritorious Patron alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,955

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lkwdblds View Post
    Alex, very fine post, good points, fine summary. I just highlighted two paragraphs I wanted to comment on.

    When you say sometimes the amount of time and effort needed to accomplish what he enviosioned, were beyond him. Things ended up working out that way but there were extenuating circumstances.

    He originally felt the business tech in the USA was good, those with degrees from college in business or accounting knew their stuff. He then had bad experiences with professional business men and accountants when he brought them in to work in his Orgs. AS A RESULT, INSTEAD OF WORKING ON THE TECH WHICH HE HAD PLANNED TO WORK ON, HE HAD TO TAKE A SIDE PATH AND DEVELOP HIS OWN TECH ON RUNING AN ORGANIZATION. I think this is how things became too much for him to handle although he made a valiant effort to develop all these other techs such as management, promotion, ethics, debugging and data evaluation study tech etc..

    MAYBE THAT IS WHY HE DEVELOPED DISDAIN FOR HIS FOLLOWERS as Kha Khan asserts . In his mind, the followers could not get anything right on their own and he had to be derailed from the research he really wanted to do and develop these other techs.

    One of the techs that he did not master was how to delegate authority and responsibilty to other people. He claims to have mastered that tech but in practice he did not have a handle on it. Just look at it, he virtually redeveloped every single tech extant on Earth. He felt nothing on Earth, the medical, the government, movie making, advertising, bookkeeping, whatever, was all no good. You take something like bookkeeping and accounting. He did not like the double entry form of accounting and felt it was suppressive. He could have easily delegated the task of developing an accounting system to others, yet he spent his own time developing a single entry system. I THINK HIS REFUSAL TO SHARE THE LIMELIGHT WITH OTHERS PLAYED HEAVILY IN HIS INABLITIY TO SUCCESSFULLY DELEGATE.

    It all ties together, his high abilities to reasearch, reformat and repackage data, his initial well intendedness, his early attempts to delegate using Earth technologies, his inborn refusal to share the spotlight with others, his self imposed necessity of pulling off his research in the areas he loved to develop technologies to replace the false technologies of Earth and then the disdain he developed for his followers as a result of the above chain of events.

    Your closing paragraph is strong and makes a good point.
    lkwdblds
    Yes, I think his "flaw" could be stated as having such a degree of self confidence that he neglected to follow his own advice.

    Casewise, organizationally, and in interacting with others.

    That confidence though may be what sustained him in his work, the price the neglect of self and knowledge gained.

    I was just reading a second hand account of his final years related by the husband of one of his caretakers, that said he was still taking himself into session in his last years, still c/s ing those around him, still very active, interested and bright.

    I think it got bigger than him, and yes his flaws didnt facilitate the factors needed to handle it.
    thoughts are real, its the things you think that are the illusion

  5. #15
    Gold Meritorious Patron alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,955

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uniquemand View Post
    I don't think he tapped anything "off-planet". I do think that he was a lot more flexible in his thinking (at least in print) than later in his life. His unwillingness to be scientific in his approach (or perhaps his lack of understanding of what the scientific approach was) means that most of what he wrote has to be taken with a grain (or a shaker) of salt.

    The complexity of his approach grew over time. Likely, this was an income generating scheme (keep the marks buying), but also may have been indicative of declining access to the SIMPLICITY of the original understanding.

    I trust the Pilot more than I trust Ron, but both are still talking the language of religion when the language of science is more appropriate.
    Actually I would take issue that Hubbard didnt approach things scientifically.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

    Hubbard hypothecised things, then experientially gathered data to support it. (Or not).

    Yes, he did it without peer review, double blinding and all the accoutrama of the currently academically acceptable fashion.

    More like Tesla, than Bell labs....

    But his work in mental hospitals, (which would not be allowed these days), and his constant cycle of theory, trials, piloting and release are consistent with scientific method.

    Old timers on this board give examples of being research auditors at Saint Hill, taking the days new theories into session, reporting back and then implementing the resulting changes to test for efficacy.

    More modern scientologists on board here, tell of piloting rundowns.

    Theory, experiment, refinement, product. Consistent with scientific method.

    Scientific method and best practices in modern science are not the same thing. One is the fundemental principle, the other the refined practice.
    thoughts are real, its the things you think that are the illusion

  6. #16
    Unbeliever uniquemand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    North Kingstown, RI
    Posts
    8,687

    Default

    I almost got trite about this. While it is true that Ron amalgamated a pretty big empire during his lifetime, he did spend a huge amount of time at sea, or in a few different "orgs", and writing. Many of us, who are critics of the man and the subject, are quick to point out that he was a power-monger, or that his "research" was extremely flawed. If he was only in it for the money and power, though, he could have completely cut and run in the early 70's (or earlier) and been a very rich man, and done whatever he wanted for the rest of his life. It seems that what he wanted, though, was to continue to work on his "tech". He might have been a delusional narcissist, but he seems to have been genuinely interested. Nobody spends most of their life working on something strictly as a con. Certainly, he was also a con-man! This is part of what made him so interesting, though, that he seems to have been "legit" in his actual interest in the subject.

  7. #17
    Crusader ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Marcabian Institute of Psychiatry
    Posts
    6,404

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uniquemand View Post
    I almost got trite about this. While it is true that Ron amalgamated a pretty big empire during his lifetime, he did spend a huge amount of time at sea, or in a few different "orgs", and writing. Many of us, who are critics of the man and the subject, are quick to point out that he was a power-monger, or that his "research" was extremely flawed. If he was only in it for the money and power, though, he could have completely cut and run in the early 70's (or earlier) and been a very rich man, and done whatever he wanted for the rest of his life. It seems that what he wanted, though, was to continue to work on his "tech". He might have been a delusional narcissist, but he seems to have been genuinely interested. Nobody spends most of their life working on something strictly as a con. Certainly, he was also a con-man! This is part of what made him so interesting, though, that he seems to have been "legit" in his actual interest in the subject.
    It was more about the need to be worshiped than it was about the money. The man went as far as creating a navy of his most loyal slaves to serve him and set out to sea. It was all about "Ron" and if you don't think so, just ask those unfortunate enough to pay the price for not giving "Ron" full credit for everything which was accomplished, or those who made the misfortune of pointing out one of "Ron's" flaws or shortcomings. How can anyone even pretend the creation of the Sea Org was an act of a well intentioned individual
    Yes lurkers you are not alone, everyone thinks Scientology is creepy, it's not just you

    http://www.mediacurves.com/Religion/...logy/Index.cfm

  8. #18
    Gold Meritorious Patron alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,955

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn View Post
    snip

    How can anyone even pretend the creation of the Sea Org was an act of a well intentioned individual
    One need not pretend.

    But then it would be pretense to say that it is now a success rather than a hinderance.
    thoughts are real, its the things you think that are the illusion

  9. #19
    Patron Meritorious bluewiggirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    675

    Default

    It has always seemed to me that Hubbard starts off as an incompetent bastard and slowly degenerates into a tragic figure wrapped up so tightly within his own mythology that he can't escape. I very much believe the claim that Hubbard started a religion on a bet, but that doesn't mean he went out of his way to create a mean or crazy religion. Dianetics from what I can tell is a relatively well-intentioned attempt to create a religion that people would buy. At some point, I believe Hubbard started buying his own press, got lost in a reality that he had created and somewhat, dare I say it, mad with power. By the time OT III was written he was already in a really bad way.

    I don't know how that theory would sit with practicing freezoners, but based on the materials available to us it seems to fit pretty well.
    I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

  10. #20
    Patron Meritorious everfree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    718

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bluewiggirl View Post
    It has always seemed to me that Hubbard starts off as an incompetent bastard and slowly degenerates into a tragic figure wrapped up so tightly within his own mythology that he can't escape.
    Nothing tragic about Hubbard, only the lives of others that he consumed.

    I very much believe the claim that Hubbard started a religion on a bet,
    I think that rather than start a religion, he wanted to be taken seriously as a scientist instead of a mere peddler of tales.

    IIRC, Arthur C. Clark did some stuff re geosyncrous sattelite orbits. Asimov wrote science text books. His friend Parsons in addition to his Crowley ties was a big name in rocketry. Hubbard later said that he also knew some physicists. Who knows to what degree that is true - I don't recall him naming any - but there was definitely a scientific air to some of the circles he travelled in. I think he wanted to prove himself their superior.

    Dianetics he characterized as the "modern science of mental health" then followed it up with "science of survival".

    Even Scientology was first heralded as the "science of certainty". He seems to have later assumed the guise of religion as an expedient fall back position, and seeing the many benefits it provided stuck with it.

    The whole religious angle seems to have started with a wink and a nod, and doesn't appear to me to be a main goal until much later.

Page 2 of 19 FirstFirst 123456789101112 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. HUBBARD ADMITS DIANETICS BOOK IS A FRAUD.
    By HelluvaHoax! in forum Evaluating/criticising Scientology
    Replies: 128
    Last Post: 27th August 2012, 03:08 PM
  2. Failures of Dianetics and Scientology
    By uniquemand in forum General discussion
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 21st November 2010, 06:31 PM
  3. Dianetics R3R(A) Theory - What's Right and What's Wrong and Why?
    By Dulloldfart in forum Scientology technology
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 20th May 2009, 08:49 AM
  4. Dianetics/Scientology Clear and OT Benefits
    By Nash Rambler in forum Evaluating/criticising Scientology
    Replies: 108
    Last Post: 15th March 2008, 10:31 AM
  5. Scientology - Theory vs. Practice
    By Little Bear Victor in forum Scientology technology
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 2nd September 2007, 12:29 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •