Page 51 of 101 FirstFirst ... 414243444546474849505152535455565758596061 ... LastLast
Results 501 to 510 of 1005

Thread: A test of whole track recall

  1. #501
    Crusader Mimsey Borogrove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    92,955,887.6 miles from the sun
    Posts
    5,320

    Default Re: A test of whole track recall

    Quote Originally Posted by Gib View Post
    allow me to expand. I know what Mims is saying. What I'm saying is the emotional appeal.

    Consider ARC where A = affinity = emotions. (some scientologist will probably think I'm thinking with my reactive mind, you know A=A=A, laughing)

    Hubbard taught us to go a 1/2 tone higher to control somebody, that's using emotions. Even the TR's are supposed to make auditors who give that nice simile when you get a F/N. Wax enthusiasm he said, walk into an org and everybody puts on a happy face. Scientologists don't want to be found out as being low toned, emotions. All the goofy success stories shown by the COS have people with bright shiny faces, all emotional appeals.

    Little did we know hubbard was using rhetoric, of course he changed it around a bit, made it into formula's, made it sound scientific, made procedure's and drills, etc. hence even that is an appeal to logic mixed in.
    I think the technical term is "Love Bombing" for what you are asserting. That's fine when dealing with the public. But staff on staff? Like when a girl I knew who was on staff who's senior started yelling at her, grabbed her by the throat and lifted her off the ground, up against the wall. It was all low tone emotions, no-sympathy etc. That my friend, is the other side of the coin you are holding.

    I had a thought, about all this "it's never been tested" nonsense. You know it has?

    I don't know how many of you are familiar with "life repair". It is a series of processes that the C/S selects specifically for the newby PC to fix up his life. They do some interviews first, find out the lay of the land, and hand pick processes to best handle that particular person. In the mission network, before the massacre, the c/ses had a very good handle on what to run and what not to run. It may be an ad hoc test of what worked and what didn't, but the missions boomed with that sort of approach.

    That test may not be a scientific as some here demand, but it got results. The missions were making the big bucks. Sounds like a pretty good test in my book.

    Mimsey

  2. #502
    Silver Meritorious Patron
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Here, now.
    Posts
    1,454

    Default Re: A test of whole track recall

    Quote Originally Posted by Mimsey Borogrove View Post
    I think the technical term is "Love Bombing" for what you are asserting. That's fine when dealing with the public. But staff on staff? Like when a girl I knew who was on staff who's senior started yelling at her, grabbed her by the throat and lifted her off the ground, up against the wall. It was all low tone emotions, no-sympathy etc. That my friend, is the other side of the coin you are holding.

    I had a thought, about all this "it's never been tested" nonsense. You know it has?

    I don't know how many of you are familiar with "life repair". It is a series of processes that the C/S selects specifically for the newby PC to fix up his life. They do some interviews first, find out the lay of the land, and hand pick processes to best handle that particular person. In the mission network, before the massacre, the c/ses had a very good handle on what to run and what not to run. It may be an ad hoc test of what worked and what didn't, but the missions boomed with that sort of approach.

    That test may not be a scientific as some here demand, but it got results. The missions were making the big bucks. Sounds like a pretty good test in my book.

    Mimsey
    I understand what you are getting at, but your analysis is likely to result in a wrong conclusion. That's why a scientific approach is needed for a good analysis.

    For one thing, you need a control group. That's might be a group who get a friendly environment and an understanding person to talk to privately about stuff that bothers them -- but not one bit of Scientology. Maybe the control group gets generic Good Advice on dealing with problems. I suspect that also would be successful and get results.

    Just looking at successful missions really isn't definitive in determining what actually was working there. Today's missions, supposedly using the exact same tech, are miserable failures -- so it follows that the Scientology part of the scene wasn't what was causing the earlier success. It was something else that is now missing.
    Last edited by Bill; 21st April 2017 at 07:32 AM.

  3. #503
    Crusader Gib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    7,113

    Default Re: A test of whole track recall

    Quote Originally Posted by Mimsey Borogrove View Post
    I think the technical term is "Love Bombing" for what you are asserting. That's fine when dealing with the public. But staff on staff? Like when a girl I knew who was on staff who's senior started yelling at her, grabbed her by the throat and lifted her off the ground, up against the wall. It was all low tone emotions, no-sympathy etc. That my friend, is the other side of the coin you are holding.

    I had a thought, about all this "it's never been tested" nonsense. You know it has?

    I don't know how many of you are familiar with "life repair". It is a series of processes that the C/S selects specifically for the newby PC to fix up his life. They do some interviews first, find out the lay of the land, and hand pick processes to best handle that particular person. In the mission network, before the massacre, the c/ses had a very good handle on what to run and what not to run. It may be an ad hoc test of what worked and what didn't, but the missions boomed with that sort of approach.

    That test may not be a scientific as some here demand, but it got results. The missions were making the big bucks. Sounds like a pretty good test in my book.

    Mimsey
    love bombing is not a term coined by hubbard nor a technical term but by others to provide insight, a meme if you will. It's still emotions to persuade, you ought to read up a little on appeals to emotion, don't take my word for it, see for yourself and examine your own life experiences, if true or not.

  4. #504
    Crusader Mimsey Borogrove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    92,955,887.6 miles from the sun
    Posts
    5,320

    Default Re: A test of whole track recall

    Quote Originally Posted by Gib View Post
    love bombing is not a term coined by hubbard nor a technical term but by others to provide insight, a meme if you will. It's still emotions to persuade, you ought to read up a little on appeals to emotion, don't take my word for it, see for yourself and examine your own life experiences, if true or not.
    I am not saying you are wrong, I think it is a simplistic take. I certainly didn't get hooked by emotional reasons, despite evidence to the contrary evidenced by my going postal and my fiery responses (here and in daily life). I was sitting at a friend's house, listening in to my eventual FSM run ARC Straight wire on my friend. I was answering his questions in my head, when I went release, and found myself remembering stuff long forgotten with great clarity. I then wanted to find out what had happened to me.

    There wasn't a big emotional hook or anything of that sort. I started going to NYO on weekends and getting some basic auditing and doing courses like the HAS, and ended up going on staff to get the bridge at half price. It was fun for the most part.

    Emotions are but one fishhook in their tackle box.
    Mimsey
    Last edited by Mimsey Borogrove; 21st April 2017 at 02:41 PM.

  5. #505
    Gold Meritorious Sponsor HelluvaHoax!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    22,279

    Default Re: A test of whole track recall

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill View Post
    I understand what you are getting at, but your analysis is likely to result in a wrong conclusion. That's why a scientific approach is needed for a good analysis.

    For one thing, you need a control group. That's might be a group who get a friendly environment and an understanding person to talk to privately about stuff that bothers them -- but not one bit of Scientology. Maybe the control group gets generic Good Advice on dealing with problems. I suspect that also would be successful and get results.

    Just looking at successful missions really isn't definitive in determining what actually was working there. Today's missions, supposedly using the exact same tech, are miserable failures -- so it follows that the Scientology part of the scene wasn't what was causing the success. It was something else that is now missing.
    Exactly!

    Dr. Hubbard actually discovered the "something else that is now missing"!

    Undoubtedly, many of us recall that Dr. Hubbard (at great risk to his very life) went soaring backwards in time, back down the booby-trap-laden wholetrack, in search of what had happened "back then" (trillions of years ago, to be exact) that sabotaged our earlier attempt to salvage this sector with Scientology.

    Remember?

    We tried but failed.

    So that's why "WE COME BACK!" I guess because we keep failing to Clear the Planet every few trillion years.

    Anyways, Ron (this lifetime Ron) figured it all out.

    We failed because we didn't have DIVISION V - QUALIFICATIONS! The division that does the correction.

    Now all the orgs have Div V. It's right on the org board!!!

    So that's why we will win this time and Clear the Planet.

    After only 67 years of being on this planet (this cycle) we already have around 20,000 Scientolgists!!!

    By the way, in 1950 the world's population was 2,556,000,053.

    In 2017, the world's population (at this moment) is 7,388,231,053.

    So, now that we have Qual, we're like totally WINNING!

    ...

    ps: I am looking for someone to twin with because (coincidentally) I am currently in Qual and totally bogged on a clay demo where I keep getting flunked because my demo makes it look like the 20,000 scientologists is actually an exponentially tinier percentage of the world's population than it was back in 1950. My cramming officer keeps saying that "the clay doesn't show huge unprecedented expansion" but makes it look like we are a bunch of bullshitting losers. Anyways, I need a twin to help me get through this cycle so I can fire back to my org and boom the stats like never before.
    ________________________

    Scientology literally saved my life! Without Ron's books I would have frozen to death!!! (see avatar)

    Scientology in one word? HelluvaHoax!

    I never felt as free as when I freed myself from "Total Freedom".

    For offended Scientologists reading this blasphemy about L. Ron Hubbard---my apologies for talking about real life without lying to you, like Scientology, with goo-goo theta-talk. I know you don't have a floating needle right now. You're not supposed to.

  6. LOL! JackStraw, JustSheila, Operating DB laughed at this post
  7. #506
    Goldenrod SP ThetanExterior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,975

    Default Re: A test of whole track recall

    Quote Originally Posted by Terril park View Post
    When on interneship and staff I noticed that few people
    didn't do any int/ex correction.
    As an auditor I was often asked to give the Int. Rundown to staff members. This was supposed to repair the situation of being "out-int".

    I used to consider this a total waste of time. Most staff members that I knew had very little training or processing so they picked-up information wherever they could. One piece of information most staff members seemed to latch onto was the subject of exteriorization.

    They seemed to equate being exterior with being OT so it was a desirable state in their eyes. They also knew what Hubbard said about "out-int" - that if someone was having a problem with being stably in their body then they could experience uncomfortable feelings such as headaches.

    Therefore, whenever a staff member had an "uncomfortable feeling" such as a headache they would say: "I think I'm out-int". This gave them status because it implied they were having trouble staying in their body and therefore they were more OT than average humans.

    Of course they weren't supposed to have case on post so they would just bravely soldier-on despite being "out-int" and if they were lucky the c/s would assign me to give them an Int. Rundown.

    I was also a trained c/s and if it had been up to me I would have educated them on the fact that people can get headaches without it being anything to do with exteriorization but I was just a member of public so had to do what I was told.

    To sum up, in my 15+ years as a highly trained and processed member of public I never met one single person in scientology who ever went exterior.

  8. Thanks JustSheila, HelluvaHoax! says "thank you" for this post
  9. #507
    Squirrel Extraordinaire Dulloldfart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    North-East England
    Posts
    23,895

    Default Re: A test of whole track recall

    Quote Originally Posted by ThetanExterior View Post
    As an auditor I was often asked to give the Int. Rundown to staff members. This was supposed to repair the situation of being "out-int".<snip>
    For those relatively new to the board, there's a long, informative thread started in 2010 entitled "Out-Int, Fact or Fiction" that may be enlightening:

    http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthrea...act-or-Fiction

    Paul
    PaulsRobot Iconic now available for use at www.PaulsRobot2.com. With Auto-Report. Video here. Introductory post here. Debug post here. Dipoles post here.

  10. Thanks ThetanExterior, JustSheila says "thank you" for this post
  11. #508
    Oh, a wise guy,eh? F.Bullbait's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    960

    Default Re: A test of whole track recall

    Quote Originally Posted by Mimsey Borogrove View Post

    I don't know how many of you are familiar with "life repair". It is a series of processes that the C/S selects specifically for the newby PC to fix up his life.


    Mimsey
    Not just for 'newbies'. I recall a well-to-do OT 7 was regged to do Life Repair because he had done everything else on the chart. He was pleased with the results.

    Made me realize there was no 'end product' with auditing. It just goes on and on.


    Looking at it from the entry point:







    Last edited by F.Bullbait; 21st April 2017 at 11:48 AM.
    "Go to heaven for the climate and hell for the company." –Mark Twain

    "Religion and theology must not be confounded. Religion is not doctrine, but a new birth." - R. Falckenberg History of Modern Philosophy (on German mysticism).

  12. #509

    Default Re: A test of whole track recall

    Quote Originally Posted by Dulloldfart View Post
    For those relatively new to the board, there's a long, informative thread started in 2010 entitled "Out-Int, Fact or Fiction" that may be enlightening:

    http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthrea...act-or-Fiction

    Paul
    Thats a great and long thread! Just read the first 30
    or so posts so far. It was great to read posts from those
    highly trained and experienced in auditing. In general, so
    far, the consensus seems to be that Out/Int may be
    workable to address or more often gets screwed up and
    the Scn theory is flakey at best. A brief selection here:-


    Quote Originally Posted by Panda Termint

    "Words to that effect" would be right, no Auditor or Correction List asks about Out Int in that way.
    Many people read on Out Int? simply because they don't understand what the question means.

    In answer to Paul's original question; my opinion is "both". Sometimes it's actual sometimes it's imagined.

    I have known many Staff Members who were very glad to have Out Int? reading, it obviated Sec-Checking.

    On the other hand I have delivered numerous Int RDs to, what the PCs considered, life-changing results. Go figure.

    Another from Panda

    "IMO, it's as real a condition as any scientology-based condition.
    Some would probably call it a scientology-installed condition or phobia (you don't hear too many people in everyday life saying they have Out Int but you sure do hear them saying the Int Buttons)."

    "It is my experience (at least it was what I believed to be true at the time) that auditing anything (other than Int remedies) over Out Int tended to be difficult and sometimes downright torturous for the PC. Often Out Int would be discovered as a valid read on assessing a Correction List when Auditing had become arduous for the PC. Regardless of whether or not doubters might choose to disbelieve that it was the actual reason, remedying Out Int usually remedied the PC's difficulties in auditing. That's just an empirical observation from a guy that did a lot of auditing.

    As a bit of additional data to your core question, I have never once (even when I was a scientologist) believed that being Interior or Exterior involved a Being changing location. I have always seen it as a Being changing the consideration about how much space he was willing and able to permeate. "



    Div6
    "Out-Int is a very real condition (imo), and one which is flubbed in handling consistently. Part of the problem is that people invalidate themselves on "being exterior", as if it was some mysterious thing.

    Then as Paul mentioned, to get it "handled" you need the rarest of breeds of auditor...in the meantime you cant get any other kind of auditing until it is "handled". And even then, "Int" is considered a "remedy"....you handle it to the point it isn't bothering the person any more. But that doesn't mean it won't kick in again, later on. It used to be, after an SO "production mission" came through our org, most of our execs would go "out-int" from all of the forcefull yelling that had occurred, to get them to "raise necessity level", and get their stats up. Ugh...

    And then there is another aspect of this that I haven't heard anyone else comment upon. In the NOT's materials, there are MORE Int Buttons to use to assess\handle than there are on the C\S 53. The handling of "Int" is a huge factor on NOTs, where LRH mentioned that "Out-Int" is the genus of "BT's".

    I think I had 3 "End of Endless Int" rundowns, a Full Int Rundown with R3RA (which was a great action, and the one I went "clear" on) and then have had to address it again on the solo grades....it is simply a condition that needs to be addressed so that further auditing can occur. On solo, it is usually very simple to address, and it has none of the "one week stability check" nonsense that is there in the lower grades....

    It can be some of the heaviest "charge" a person can sit in...it can be so easily remedied that you really have to wonder why it is made so difficult and "scarce" to train on it and handle it. I have seen it kick in early on the grade chart, so it tends to run with a bit of unreality early on, as the pc's tend to run shallow and are still skittish about dealing with "mental image pictures".

  13. #510
    Crusader Mimsey Borogrove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    92,955,887.6 miles from the sun
    Posts
    5,320

    Default Re: A test of whole track recall

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill View Post
    I understand what you are getting at, but your analysis is likely to result in a wrong conclusion. That's why a scientific approach is needed for a good analysis.

    For one thing, you need a control group. That's might be a group who get a friendly environment and an understanding person to talk to privately about stuff that bothers them -- but not one bit of Scientology. Maybe the control group gets generic Good Advice on dealing with problems. I suspect that also would be successful and get results.

    Just looking at successful missions really isn't definitive in determining what actually was working there. Today's missions, supposedly using the exact same tech, are miserable failures -- so it follows that the Scientology part of the scene wasn't what was causing the earlier success. It was something else that is now missing.
    Are you sure the current missions are applying the tech in the same way as the old ones? If they are, then it is the public's negative perception that is destroying them.

    I know this is a long thread, and things said are buried amongst the many comments, but I said a similar thing previously, that I thought when I was newly out of Scientology, a research project should be done, to evaluate which processes did what, which worked, which didn't, and were I to win the lottery, I would do so. My idea was to run non-scientologists on the various processes, so you would have an unbiased feedback and evaluation of the worth of the technology.

    But who would pay for such an endeavor? Scientology has no desire to improve itself, though they could easily afford such a project.

    Mimsey

  14. Likes tesseract liked this post
Page 51 of 101 FirstFirst ... 414243444546474849505152535455565758596061 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The LIE of Hubbard's Whole Track Recall in Scientology
    By Lermanet_com in forum Evaluating and Criticising Scientology
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 8th December 2012, 07:21 AM
  2. Recall Your Sea-Org Training
    By cockatoo in forum Scientology Technology
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 26th May 2009, 09:34 PM

Posting Permissions

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