Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 876

Thread: Ask Kate your questions here...

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Cabal Of One Panda Termint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    13,058

    Default Ask Kate your questions here...

    Quote Originally Posted by kate8024 View Post
    I suggest someone start a new ask kate thread then where everyone posts 1 question per message and i will give them 1 response per message.
    A new thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panda Termint View Post
    Kate considers herself a scientologist, I guess. That's fine by me, I've got nothing against scientologists unless they're harming others. Then I have plenty against 'em.

    MissWog, I've already told you that I like your posts. I'd suggest that you just ask, straight out, anything you want to know (I know that you've probably already done so but just give it a shot). Straight, unambiguous questions which even a scientologist should be quite willing to answer. The answers will either tell you what you want to know or leave you with more questions. Try to keep it simple, it's hard to teach scientology on a Message Board.

    Kate, Answer honestly to the best of your ability. If you don't know or haven't decided, just say so.
    Dave Gibbons - Sydney, Australia.
    I don't believe everything I read on the Internet.
    I do believe everything I write.

  2. Thanks Arthur Dent, sallydannce says "thank you" for this post
    Likes Opter liked this post
    LOL! exsomessenger laughed at this post
  3. #2

    Default Re: Ask Kate your questions here...

    Kate, may I ask which of the more general parts of Scientology align with your personal beliefs?

  4. Thanks sallydannce, kate8024, Panda Termint says "thank you" for this post
    Likes MissWog liked this post
  5. #3
    -deleted- kate8024's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    -deleted-
    Posts
    1,212

    Default Re: Ask Kate your questions here...

    Quote Originally Posted by JustSheila View Post
    Kate, may I ask which of the more general parts of Scientology align with your personal beliefs?
    Absolutely! This is a fairly broad question but I'll try to answer it the best that I can.

    My actual views on metaphysics go (IMHO) quite a bit beyond Scientology and I personally view time and all experiences as highly episodic and much of my philosophy regarding this has strong ties to Schema Theory with a good smattering of crazy hypothesis based on personal mystical experiences. Having said that, within this 'type' of what I call a 'scenario' there is an apparency of the following items based on mystical experiences and logical extrapolation from those experiences:

    * In general, to me Scientology is a mystical religious framework. Dianetics, "clear", "ot", etc. are to me more or less meaningless or useless concepts.
    * something resembling cartesian dualism, though I view it in a bit more of a Platonic light with multiple levels of existence once you get completely beyond the physical reality
    * reincarnation
    * existence as a true static, but with temporal emanations into this (and other) universe(s)
    * completely bizarre other universes
    * the general concept of the 'full track'
    * creation by postulate
    * pre-each-life postulates that guide certain aspects of that life (ie similar to between-lives implants though less sinister in tone)
    * that its possible to remember things from other lives
    * the overall ideas of the 8-dynamics, the ARC triangle, the overt-motivator sequence, start-change-stop, though I'm sure there are some minor differences in my views on these
    * that _something_ genocide-like happened on the whole track which LRH interpreted as the Xenu myth but I don't believe his interpretation to be quite correct.
    * I believe that doing the lists in Self Analysis can be immensely helpful even if just used to get better at this-life recall of events and nothing else
    * I believe that doing the processes in COHB can be very useful
    * I believe the clear cognition to be sort of like a Zen koan

    I also maintain a purely psychological-physicalist perspective in which I view all of these thing to be functions of the subconscious and the imagination but either way of viewing it generally works well for me as I find the associated phenomena fascinating either way.

    Hope that explains it a bit, if I didn't answer your question please let me know what I can clarify.
    -deleted-

  6. Thanks looker, Queenmab321, lotus, MissWog, JustSheila says "thank you" for this post
    Likes The_Fixer, JustSheila liked this post
    WTF? secretiveoldfag said WTF? to this post
    Huh? secretiveoldfag didn't understand this post
  7. #4

    Default Re: Ask Kate your questions here...

    Thanks, Kate! That gives me a MUCH better idea of where you are coming from.

  8. LOL! secretiveoldfag laughed at this post
  9. #5
    Goldenrod SP ThetanExterior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,965

    Default Re: Ask Kate your questions here...

    Kate, I've been reading your posts on another thread and what I don't understand is why you call yourself a Scientologist when the Church of Scientology would definitely not consider you to be one of them.

    You have said you study other religions etc. That is called "other practices" in Scientology and it is a very bad thing for which you would be sent to Ethics.

    You have said you audit yourself but you make up your own processes to audit. This is called "squirreling" and you would be sent to Ethics for doing it.

    You have said you believe some of LRH's works but not others. You will do correspondence courses but not pay for auditing. In the CofS this is called "being a dilletante" and you would be sent to Ethics for it.

    LRH said you can't be half in and half out of Scientology but you clearly are, therefore you are not a Scientologist by LRH's definition.

    So why do you call yourself a Scientologist? I think this is probably one thing that is irritating those of us who really were Scientologists.

  10. Thanks Ceedar, lotus, secretiveoldfag, Knows, freethinker and 5 others says "thank you" for this post
    Likes Ceedar, Knows, freethinker, MissWog liked this post
  11. #6
    Class Clown The_Fixer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    3,080

    Default Re: Ask Kate your questions here...

    Quote Originally Posted by ThetanExterior View Post
    Kate, I've been reading your posts on another thread and what I don't understand is why you call yourself a Scientologist when the Church of Scientology would definitely not consider you to be one of them.

    You have said you study other religions etc. That is called "other practices" in Scientology and it is a very bad thing for which you would be sent to Ethics.

    You have said you audit yourself but you make up your own processes to audit. This is called "squirreling" and you would be sent to Ethics for doing it.

    You have said you believe some of LRH's works but not others. You will do correspondence courses but not pay for auditing. In the CofS this is called "being a dilletante" and you would be sent to Ethics for it.

    LRH said you can't be half in and half out of Scientology but you clearly are, therefore you are not a Scientologist by LRH's definition.

    So why do you call yourself a Scientologist? I think this is probably one thing that is irritating those of us who really were Scientologists.
    Personally, I think she calls herself one in her own terms, not in the terms of the church. The two do not necessarily align and I don't think she gives a toss what the church thinks.

    Her thoughts of Scn have some alignment, but it ends there.

    How did I do, Kate?

  12. Thanks kate8024 says "thank you" for this post
  13. #7
    Class Clown The_Fixer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    3,080

    Default Re: Ask Kate your questions here...

    Quote Originally Posted by ThetanExterior View Post
    Kate, I've been reading your posts on another thread and what I don't understand is why you call yourself a Scientologist when the Church of Scientology would definitely not consider you to be one of them.

    You have said you study other religions etc. That is called "other practices" in Scientology and it is a very bad thing for which you would be sent to Ethics.

    You have said you audit yourself but you make up your own processes to audit. This is called "squirreling" and you would be sent to Ethics for doing it.

    You have said you believe some of LRH's works but not others. You will do correspondence courses but not pay for auditing. In the CofS this is called "being a dilletante" and you would be sent to Ethics for it.

    LRH said you can't be half in and half out of Scientology but you clearly are, therefore you are not a Scientologist by LRH's definition.

    So why do you call yourself a Scientologist? I think this is probably one thing that is irritating those of us who really were Scientologists.
    Personally, I think she calls hersaelf one in her own terms, not in the terms of the church. The two do not necessarily align and I don't think she gives a toss what the church thinks.

    Her thoughts of Scn have some alignment, but it ends there.

    How did I do, Kate?

    And yes, as per CoS definition, she is a squirrel.

  14. Thanks kate8024 says "thank you" for this post
    Likes Ho Tai, MissWog, kate8024 liked this post
  15. #8
    -deleted- kate8024's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    -deleted-
    Posts
    1,212

    Default Re: Ask Kate your questions here...

    Quote Originally Posted by ThetanExterior View Post
    Kate, I've been reading your posts on another thread and what I don't understand is why you call yourself a Scientologist when the Church of Scientology would definitely not consider you to be one of them.

    You have said you study other religions etc. That is called "other practices" in Scientology and it is a very bad thing for which you would be sent to Ethics.

    You have said you audit yourself but you make up your own processes to audit. This is called "squirreling" and you would be sent to Ethics for doing it.

    You have said you believe some of LRH's works but not others. You will do correspondence courses but not pay for auditing. In the CofS this is called "being a dilletante" and you would be sent to Ethics for it.

    LRH said you can't be half in and half out of Scientology but you clearly are, therefore you are not a Scientologist by LRH's definition.

    So why do you call yourself a Scientologist? I think this is probably one thing that is irritating those of us who really were Scientologists.
    Well for one thing, all of the things you described wouldn't stop someone from being an independent Scientologist which is a specialization of the class 'Scientologist' in my book so to call oneself a Scientologist does not necessarily imply the things you mention. While I'm on good terms with the Church of Scientology in that they bug the living sh-- out of me with phone calls and emails and I do extension courses with them I don't look to them for validation and especially I don't look to them for auditing - thus Ethics is 100% a non-issue. I can have an Ethics folder a meter thick and it doesn't affect me at all. So far I've not run into any problems and if I ever do its no real loss; I mean I might not get to finish my extension courses but that not something I would shed a tear over.

    If you can come up with a better name for the set of beliefs I outlined in my earlier post in this thread I'm all ears but IMHO Scientologist describes it fairly well.
    -deleted-

  16. Thanks MissWog says "thank you" for this post
    Likes Axiom142 liked this post
  17. #9

    Default Re: Ask Kate your questions here...

    Quote Originally Posted by JustSheila View Post
    Thanks, Kate! That gives me a MUCH better idea of where you are coming from.
    And, IMO, the "start" button pushed on enough trolling material to make the mythical troller Vinnaire look like a pipsqueak.
    I was in a Space Alien Cult called Scientology. Scientology: the prison of belief.

  18. LOL! Gadfly laughed at this post
  19. #10
    Goodby Goodluck
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Home Sweet Home
    Posts
    2,671

    Default Re: Ask Kate your questions here...

    Quote Originally Posted by kate8024 View Post
    Absolutely! This is a fairly broad question but I'll try to answer it the best that I can.

    My actual views on metaphysics go (IMHO) quite a bit beyond Scientology and I personally view time and all experiences as highly episodic and much of my philosophy regarding this has strong ties to Schema Theory with a good smattering of crazy hypothesis based on personal mystical experiences. Having said that, within this 'type' of what I call a 'scenario' there is an apparency of the following items based on mystical experiences and logical extrapolation from those experiences:

    * In general, to me Scientology is a mystical religious framework. Dianetics, "clear", "ot", etc. are to me more or less meaningless or useless concepts.
    * something resembling cartesian dualism, though I view it in a bit more of a Platonic light with multiple levels of existence once you get completely beyond the physical reality
    * reincarnation
    * existence as a true static, but with temporal emanations into this (and other) universe(s)
    * completely bizarre other universes
    * the general concept of the 'full track'
    * creation by postulate
    * pre-each-life postulates that guide certain aspects of that life (ie similar to between-lives implants though less sinister in tone)
    * that its possible to remember things from other lives
    * the overall ideas of the 8-dynamics, the ARC triangle, the overt-motivator sequence, start-change-stop, though I'm sure there are some minor differences in my views on these
    * that _something_ genocide-like happened on the whole track which LRH interpreted as the Xenu myth but I don't believe his interpretation to be quite correct.
    * I believe that doing the lists in Self Analysis can be immensely helpful even if just used to get better at this-life recall of events and nothing else
    * I believe that doing the processes in COHB can be very useful
    * I believe the clear cognition to be sort of like a Zen koan

    I also maintain a purely psychological-physicalist perspective in which I view all of these thing to be functions of the subconscious and the imagination but either way of viewing it generally works well for me as I find the associated phenomena fascinating either way.

    Hope that explains it a bit, if I didn't answer your question please let me know what I can clarify.
    * In general, to me Scientology is a mystical religious framework. Dianetics, "clear", "ot", etc. are to me more or less meaningless or useless concepts”.
    Great, you are on your way Kate! Now that you have realized that these are “meaningless or useless concepts", all we have to do is wait until you stumble upon the realization that these concepts are the backbone of $cientology and the entire reason that I got in. Then connect the dots…
    By the way, I like to add the $ because I don’t feel like they are worthy of my writing their name as they spell it. After all there is no real correct spelling as the flubster simply made up the word, just like I made up flubster. Maybe that makes me "the Son of Flubber" or Flubster.
    And shame on you for leading off with a term like “Schema Theory” which is a classic Flubster tactic for MUing somebody early on in the text so as to slide them into “aneten” with the resultant effect of reducing their ability to think through the rest of the text and more or less just assimilate it into their subconscious to be figured out later. That was part and parcel of hypnotizing people into blinded abeyance, like hitting them in the face with handful of magic warlock powder. You just knew no one would bother to look up the term due to general lack of interest in it didn't you, you little scamp! :-)
    Have you figured out which one it is yet, meaningless or useless?
    I’ll read further into your post manana and maybe you can further enlighten me with your kind response.
    Last edited by DagwoodGum; 22nd February 2014 at 05:36 PM. Reason: piss poor grammer corrections
    Crack cocaine and booze are gateway drugs to Scientology

  20. Thanks MathScience, MissWog says "thank you" for this post
    Likes WildKat, Sidney18511, MissWog liked this post
    LOL! MissWog laughed at this post
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Kate Bornstein on Life After Scientology
    By Smilla in forum Miscellaneous Reports from Newspapers, Blogs, and TV
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 22nd July 2012, 06:10 PM
  2. CBC Radio, Day 6....Kate Bornstein interview
    By apple in forum Conferences, Speeches, Radio Shows, and Live Public Presentations
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 24th June 2012, 05:27 PM
  3. Kate Bornstein's Amazing Voyage
    By Sock Puppy in forum Tony Ortega
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 9th May 2012, 01:18 AM
  4. Sorry Kate. I'm not impressed.
    By GreyWolf in forum General Scientology Discussion
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 29th March 2010, 11:35 AM
  5. Kate in tune with wacky Tom
    By Neo in forum Tom Cruise/Katie Holmes
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 3rd May 2008, 12:16 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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