The 1st Red Flag

[I told you I was trouble]

Oooppppps. You are right! What is 2.0? I am just not up on the Tone Scale these days.

Antagonism?

[Gadfly]

Antagonism?

Yep, I think so. A "mellowed anger".

[pollywannacracker]

My first red flag was seeing all the tired faces. These poor folk scurried around at top speed, drank Diet Coke like it was going out of style, and still seemed to be one step away from falling asleep.

I recall querying about it later to my Scn friend. Their pat OT answer was that they do soooo much work clearing the planet....

-PWC

[Spirited]

Watch some of the vidios this guy is in and you will see.

links?

[Human Again]

Where is anger on the tone scale? Around 1.0?

Now that we're out, we can look at the theory of the Tone Scale and see that actually there is no better or worse emotion - there is an apporpriate emotion, depending on our entire history, the situation in front of us, the goal we have in mind, the realtionship with the object of possible anger etc.... there is our actual and natural emotion (OMG! Natural ? Has that word ever been heard in s Scientology org without disgust???) and then there is plain old overreaction, which is neither evidence that you are lower than Homo Novus oer supresed reaction which is not rock solid proof that you are above everyone else on the planet.

These days intead of a rigid scale of better and worse, insane and sane, OT and DB, I see emotions as existing as points on the surface of a sphere, none in a more revered position than another. Some more enjoyable than others, for sure ( and some downright horrid) but none criminal and none holy.

Scientology took away from me the inaliable right to feel what I felt and instilled instead a false scale of value of emotions - I am grateful to have that right back and I defend it mercilessly. I wish all those still in the SO and still caught in the mind trap that is Scientology a return of their inaliable right to feel what they feel.

Natascha

[I told you I was trouble]

Originally posted by Human Again
Scientology took away from me the inaliable right to feel what I felt and instilled instead a false scale of value of emotions - I am grateful to have that right back and I defend it mercilessly. I wish all those still in the SO and still caught in the mind trap that is Scientology a return of their inaliable right to feel what they feel.

Here here!

Taking it back felt like a gift.

[Gadfly]

Now that we're out, we can look at the theory of the Tone Scale and see that actually there is no better or worse emotion - there is an apporpriate emotion, depending on our entire history, the situation in front of us, the goal we have in mind, the realtionship with the object of possible anger etc.... there is our actual and natural emotion (OMG! Natural ? Has that word ever been heard in s Scientology org without disgust???) and then there is plain old overreaction, which is neither evidence that you are lower than Homo Novus oer supresed reaction which is not rock solid proof that you are above everyone else on the planet.

These days intead of a rigid scale of better and worse, insane and sane, OT and DB, I see emotions as existing as points on the surface of a sphere, none in a more revered position than another. Some more enjoyable than others, for sure ( and some downright horrid) but none criminal and none holy.

Scientology took away from me the inaliable right to feel what I felt and instilled instead a false scale of value of emotions - I am grateful to have that right back and I defend it mercilessly. I wish all those still in the SO and still caught in the mind trap that is Scientology a return of their inaliable right to feel what they feel.

Natascha

Actually, that is pretty much what I always thought after studying Hubbard's info on the Tone Scale. The idea, as I understood it, was to address and handle the emergence of inappropriate emotions that swell up from the deepest recesses of ones unconscious - feeling sad when the situation should make you feel happy, feeling afaid when no actual reason to feel fear exists, feeling happy when your wonderful and good friend dies, etc.

I recall reading Hubbard state quite clearly that a being in good shape would simply feel the appropriate emotion for the situation at hand. But also, for me, I find that the more I am unattached to the physical body, that emotions are less of a factor in experience. I also have done many drills of my own mocking up joy, serenity, golden light and spaciousness, and in the end, emotions seem to be created entirely by YOU. Whether you know it or not. That is also an idea of Hubbard's and it has always rung true for me, based on my own experiences and observations. For the most part, I can now turn on "joy" at will. A truly face-bursting, ear-to-ear grinning joy!

In effect, it seems that you have to put the emotion "into anything" you feel, and to experience the full impact of emotions, one conveniently forgets that one is mocking it up or participating to such a large degree in the process, and thus can better "be the effect of the emotional energy". It seems that on the emotional level, many beings enjoy "being the effect". But, it is far easier to "be the effect" of emotions (or any energy) when you conveniently forget that you are causing it in the first place!

In eastern studies, the "emotional body" is its own thing. As with anything, it needs to be understood and mastered (from an eastern adept sort of viewpoint).

[BAYCB]

In effect, it seems that you have to put the emotion "into anything" you feel, and to experience the full impact of emotions, one conveniently forgets that one is mocking it up or participating to such a large degree in the process, and thus can better "be the effect of the emotional energy". It seems that on the emotional level, many beings enjoy "being the effect". But, it is far easier to "be the effect" of emotions (or any energy) when you conveniently forget that you are causing it in the first place!.

Gadfly, great post. I completly agree. One definition for emotion that I heard on an briefing course tape was "emotion.... is just thought in motion." I always felt this simple definition really nailed it as to it's source.

[GoNuclear]

What was the first "red flag" that you saw upon entering an org, or the very first weird thing that you noticed that you let go or ignored?

Mine was watching a video of a supposed marital counseling "session", and noticing that the couple in the video were really real actors. I commented on that to my then boss and DSM, not knowing how to express how weird I thought that was.

Later that evening I was walking by the auditing rooms and saw a label on the door that said "confessional". And when I commented on that, she said to the org staff that I was being "keyed in" because of my Catholic background as a child.

I should've been a lot more critical than I was at the time.

the very first red flag was seeing some staffer at the SanFran org in 74 or
75, some chick that I didn't know, yelling at some other chick who was down on her knees with a bucket and water and cleaner to do some cleaning. The chick on the floor seemed really, really, really beaten down, and it wasn't just the work, I could see she was being made to feel like shit. I somehow put this out of my head and kept on going without any inquiries. Had I inquired and pushed the issue it may have saved me a great deal of time and money.

Pete

[Irayam]

My first red flag was watching a supposed OTVII looking for some papers that she had lost somewhere.
No perfect memory ? No amazing searching OT abilities ?
I had then a lot of other similar red flag (OT with a broken leg, OT with glasses, OT with a cold, etc...)
And what about the supposed brilliant Ron's achievements like his boring photograph "skill" and pathetic "music" ?

Irayam