Side effects of Scientology on exes.

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

One of the side effects of Scientology I see affecting Scientologists and ex-Scientologist is the latent effect of Hubbard’s ideas about knowledge and definitions of words.

The arrogance inherent in Scientology is that knowledge is an internal thing. “Knowledge is certainty,” I believe is the quote.

But knowledge isn’t certainty; knowledge about something may make you feel more certain.

But a person can be totally certain and completely wrong. Certainty is a subjective state of mind; knowledge is not.

This idea of Hubbard’s about knowledge affects a person’s relationship with knowledge.

I have seen many Scientologists and exes believe that with the help of the internet they can become experts about anything.

In fact, many discredit the idea of their being experts outside of themselves.

Such thinking results in much of the conspiracy theorists mentality seen on this board, as well as the condemnation of officials by those who clearly show little understanding of the forces and factors involved in the subjects they are criticizing.

Now of course, this is a human trait, and not one that only involves Scientologists and exes. But it is very common among Scientologists and exes.

Scientology breeds this kind of thinking.

This anti-intellectualism and ignorance of the concept of professional discipline, experience, and training is one consequence of believing Hubbard’s word view, definitions, and his study tech.

So one then believes he is his own expert.

The study tech stresses definitions of words with no context.

Try and find a Scientologists or an ex that knows the difference between tradition and custom or convention. They don’t.

Study Tech omits context. And it dismisses the important fact that dictionary definitions are also about word usage, not just meaning.

In Scientology, Study Tech itself is a tradition, not a custom.

It is taught as a tradition, performed as a tradition, and never makes it to use as convention or custom.

So people using Scientology Study Tech lose perspective and judgment. And eventually become woefully literal in their interpretation and use of language.

And learning in the absence of mass, well, that is one thing that separates us from the animals.

I am not making the claim here that experts all know what they are talking about. They obvious don’t all know what they are talking about.

But for the most part they have more understanding of the forces and factors involved with their area of expertise than someone whose only exposure are internet links and the news media.

I am no intellectual or expert about anything. But I know I’m not.

I don’t pretend that by looking something up I therefore become more knowledgeable than people who spend their time actively engaged in the subject.

But Hubbard has convinced many people that they are the experts by simply adopting his data.

And even after leaving the cult, many people still believe it and act like they know all that there is to know about the matter at hand.

The Anabaptist Jacques

[SchwimmelPuckel]

Well, I think I do know the difference between tradition, custom and convention... But I won't put it to the test in public.. heheehhehehehe.... (I might even look it up!)

[Outethicsofficer]

One of the side effects of Scientology I see affecting Scientologists and ex-Scientologist is the latent effect of Hubbard’s ideas about knowledge and definitions of words.

The arrogance inherent in Scientology is that knowledge is an internal thing. “Knowledge is certainty,” I believe is the quote.

But knowledge isn’t certainty; knowledge about something may make you feel more certain.

But a person can be totally certain and completely wrong. Certainty is a subjective state of mind; knowledge is not.

This idea of Hubbard’s about knowledge affects a person’s relationship with knowledge.

I have seen many Scientologists and exes believe that with the help of the internet they can become experts about anything.

In fact, many discredit the idea of their being experts outside of themselves.

Such thinking results in much of the conspiracy theorists mentality seen on this board, as well as the condemnation of officials by those who clearly show little understanding of the forces and factors involved in the subjects they are criticizing.

Now of course, this is a human trait, and not one that only involves Scientologists and exes. But it is very common among Scientologists and exes.

Scientology breeds this kind of thinking.

This anti-intellectualism and ignorance of the concept of professional discipline, experience, and training is one consequence of believing Hubbard’s word view, definitions, and his study tech.

So one then believes he is his own expert.

The study tech stresses definitions of words with no context.

Try and find a Scientologists or an ex that knows the difference between tradition and custom or convention. They don’t.

Study Tech omits context. And it dismisses the important fact that dictionary definitions are also about word usage, not just meaning.

In Scientology, Study Tech itself is a tradition, not a custom.

It is taught as a tradition, performed as a tradition, and never makes it to use as convention or custom.

So people using Scientology Study Tech lose perspective and judgment. And eventually become woefully literal in their interpretation and use of language.

And learning in the absence of mass, well, that is one thing that separates us from the animals.

I am not making the claim here that experts all know what they are talking about. They obvious don’t all know what they are talking about.

But for the most part they have more understanding of the forces and factors involved with their area of expertise than someone whose only exposure are internet links and the news media.

I am no intellectual or expert about anything. But I know I’m not.

I don’t pretend that by looking something up I therefore become more knowledgeable than people who spend their time actively engaged in the subject.

But Hubbard has convinced many people that they are the experts by simply adopting his data.

And even after leaving the cult, many people still believe it and act like they know all that there is to know about the matter at hand.

The Anabaptist Jacques

I like this very much, I am currently undertaking a course of study on, and beleive it or not, studying I am doing this through an Open University... now the biggest challenge I face is to not involve the 'Study Tech', it is quite difficult, there are more than just a few example of Hubbardisms, Study tech being one of them which enter in and fuck with your mind.

When I joined the SO I listened to the "Welcome to the Sea Org Tapes" there is one piece of tripe in those tapes that is probably responsible for more crash and burns than any other I know, and it goes something like this; "There is no excuse anywhere for not being able to do anything under the sun, moon and stars, no excuses! Not being trained in an area is no excuse, for we have done it all before..." The gist of this was, we will not accept any reason for failure on your part even if you haven't been trained in the area and what is so wrong with you that you cannot access your past life/lives training and get it done!

I could rattle through a whole lot more of these examples, and there are plenty of them however I am sure many here have their own they could put forward.

Good OP.

James

[Reasonable]

But knowledge isn’t certainty; knowledge about something may make you feel more certain.

But a person can be totally certain and completely wrong. Certainty is a subjective state of mind; knowledge is not.

I have seen many Scientologists and exes believe that with the help of the internet they can become experts about anything.

In fact, many discredit the idea of their being experts outside of themselves.


Now of course, this is a human trait, and not one that only involves Scientologists and exes. But it is very common among Scientologists and exes.

This anti-intellectualism and ignorance of the concept of professional discipline, experience, and training is one consequence of believing Hubbard’s word view, definitions, and his study tech.

So one then believes he is his own expert.


But for the most part they have more understanding of the forces and factors involved with their area of expertise than someone whose only exposure are internet links and the news media.

I don’t pretend that by looking something up I therefore become more knowledgeable than people who spend their time actively engaged in the subject.

And even after leaving the cult, many people still believe it and act like they know all that there is to know about the matter at hand.

The Anabaptist Jacques

Yes yes yes yes yes I totally agree with you, I have said what you said many times especially the part on certainty. The word they should use is confidence not certainty......but on the other hand I did learn to study better through the student hat. But I don't feel that once I read a book on law I know as much as a lawyer. But believe it or not no one ever told me (or maybe I wasn't listening) to look up words I don't understand until I got to Scientology and no one showed me how to make models or demonstrations and when I did that I studied and learned much better. And even if Hubbard did not invent that idea he was the first one to show me and for that I am thankful.

[subrosa]

"The arrogance inherent in Scientology is that knowledge is an internal thing. “Knowledge is certainty,” I believe is the quote.

But knowledge isn’t certainty; knowledge about something may make you feel more certain.

But a person can be totally certain and completely wrong. Certainty is a subjective state of mind; knowledge is not.

This idea of Hubbard’s about knowledge affects a person’s relationship with knowledge."

Very well put.

[uniquemand]

Knowledge can be gained a few different ways. One is to read a book, another is to attend a class, another might be a youtube instructional video, a lesson from a musician, etc. Getting knowledge this way ultimately comes down to receiving facts from the outside world, which is extremely legitimate, particularly when you need knowledge of the world around you to operate in that world.

There is another path, equally valid, though the knowledge gained along it may or may not have applicability outside the subjective realm, and that knowledge is gained through gnostic experience, or exploring your own memory, decisions, emotions, attitudes, etc. You can do this by yourself, by journaling, meditation, yoga, writing poetry, whatever brings you to reflection. Another way is through guided processes, as Scientology does, though I would NOT recommend the Scientology route. The reason people stay with Scientology, other than the crooked arm-twisting that the Church does, is that they do gain some perception of themselves. While it is not empirically valid information, it is nonetheless valid, concerning themselves.

Ultimately, any knowledge you come to, whether from an external source or generated within, arrives through your senses. Any validation of that information also arrives through your senses. Thus, while it may not have been generated by you, you cannot know it without processing it through your senses, whether physical or mental. Perhaps it seems a negligible point, but to me it is an important distinction. There is nothing known by an individual that is actually objective.

[Challenge]

Neither Knowledge nor Data equates with Wisdom.


challenge

[Voltaire's Child]

Yah, I can see that. Things get redefined, concepts are put in a certain narrow framework.

[UnifiedField]

Neither Knowledge nor Data equates with Wisdom.


challenge

Agreed. There's the old quote - "I am now much better informed but no wiser".

[smartone]

When I joined the SO I listened to the "Welcome to the Sea Org Tapes" there is one piece of tripe in those tapes that is probably responsible for more crash and burns than any other I know, and it goes something like this; "There is no excuse anywhere for not being able to do anything under the sun, moon and stars, no excuses! Not being trained in an area is no excuse, for we have done it all before..."

What a bunch of BS.