The emphasis on finding and describing "knowledge structures" that are somewhere "inside" the individual encourages us to overlook the fact that human cognition is always situated in a complex sociocultural world and cannot be unaffected by it. - Edwin Hutchins
This seems to indicate that when some parts of "the body of work" are applied in certain ways, that people have actually gotten the results they expected and wanted.
I think basing a global conclusion on the "evidence" found on one single Internet board is very short-sighted. ESMB is a little village in a big big world. I doubt "the Final Answer" will be found here, but perhaps you could be more specific about what the "compelling evidence" you refer to actually is....?
We also do not know much about his family other than what his parents did for a living at one point in their lives and that Hubbard did not missed them when they died.Originally Posted by Voltaire's Child
Somebody screwed him up pretty good during his childhood, few people carry their childhood fantasies and delusion into adulthood with them, Hubbard carried them right to his grave, and few people hate children as much as Hubbard did, he didn't even like animals. He was not capable of unconditional love, anyone who received anything from Hubbard had to earn it and they allows paid too much for it.
I think this thread may have a lot of validity to it
It would explain his hatred of children.
"With realization of one's own potential and self-confidence in one's ability, one can build a better world."
I'd like to know what "making progress up the bridge" actually means, since Scientology was never intended to be anything more that a fantasy role playing game.Originally Posted by Atalantan
Does "making progress up the bridge" mean they are that much closer to full blown insanity?
There are other posts on Marty's blog and other blogs, from people who have had similar positive experiences outside after having been stalled for many years in the Co$.
Nice post with many good points. However, I think your paragraph on his failure to create "sub -heroes" needs to be tweeked a bit. He did inadvertently create lots of "sub heroes". Prime examples are John Mac Master, Yvonne Jentzsch and Otto Roos. Other earlier sub heroes were the Kemps, Ray and Pam and the Halperns, who developed the TR's not to mention Dr. Winter, who wrote the forward to his original Dianetics book, John Campbell his publisher and Volney Matheison who developed the E-Meter. There is a list of many others as well. Mary Sue Hubbard, herself, was a created sub hero.
He had a line of succession established. Mary Sue Hubbard could have run the organizations and he hand picked David Mayo to be Senior C/S International and establish his own corporation, separate from C of S, so that he could run the tech division without being corrupted by other parts of the church. In the 50's he was grooming L Ron Hubbard, Jr. (Nibs) to be his heir apparent and in the 70's he was hoping that Quentin might assume that role. Diana figured as well in his line of succession. Perhaps for several years, Ken Urquhart may have figured into his succession plans as might have Captain Bill Robertson.
At the end of his life, he was off the major communication lines of his church and the communications into him were controlled by you know who. By this time his physical and mental capacities were seriously impaired and MSH and Mayo were now taboo as far as he was concerned.
In a last gasp effort to provide some succession, he named two relative nobodies, Pat and Annie Broeker as his successors. These people were loyal to him and took care of his "household" type of activities such as his housing, his food and his personal care. They had no real talents either in "Tech" nor "admin" but they were the only ones whom he had seen in his last years so he passed on the baton to them in a last ditch effort to preserve his legacy. Of course, DM was able to take them down with ease just a short time later.
What a sad and pathetic ending for a once "larger than life" and vibrant man. All he could do at the end was promote himself to "Admiral" and sail off into the Galaxy, leaving behind two "loyal officers", who were just ordinary people with no special skills, to run his empire.
"I have never understood why it is "greed" to want to keep the money you've earned but not greed to want to take someone else's money."
For them, it means they feel they are again getting what they came into scientology to get, whereas they were not getting it in the Co$ environment.
If you want to know what that might be, get yourself a copy of an older Grade Chart and look it over in some detail.
Beyond that, why not ask them yourself? I could be telling you any manner of lies and you would have no way of knowing, right?
"The road to Hell is paved with good intentions." It takes more than good intentions to get anywhere.
As Korzybski said, "The map is not the territory."
Just ask the people who were in the Donner party in 1846:
"The pass received its name, however, from another group of California-bound emigrants. In early November 1846, the Donner Party found the route blocked by snow and was forced to spend the winter on the eastern side of the mountains. Of the 81 emigrants, only 45 survived to reach California; some of them are alleged to have resorted to cannibalism to survive."
But good intentions are important, too. The Grade Chart is a record after-the-fact. I think there are few who would argue that ARC Straighwire, the Grades 0-IV, Dianetics, Power and Power-plus, Clear, and OT1 and OTII are boob-trapped and misleading. There are too many who have done them and gone just where they were led to believe they would go, at least back in the 1960s and 1970s. Beyond those the picture seems to be more murky.
That said, I always saw scientology as a process, not as a fixed map leading to a fixed destination.
For one thing, each person is an individual and becomes more individual as s/he goes along applying the methodology.
"To tell you something you don't already know is hard
for in your giant laughter strides open
and the road you carry you lay before you."
You end up where you've always been, only this time you are fully aware and know it. And can then move on or be anywhere you want to be, from then on, forever.
And that's a unique and individual "place" for each person.
Or as the Grateful Dead had it, "And if you go, no-one may follow, that path is for your steps alone."
That's why it is silly to talk about "double-blind studies" and all that claptrap that pertains to MEST. It's not principally about MEST.