Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 59

Thread: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

  1. #11
    Gold Meritorious Patron TheOriginalBigBlue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,071

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Swundel View Post
    I'm sure that this did help CofS in some ways. Maybe that's immoral in some ways. In the end, however, I don't think social causes should be primarily driven by consumers - that's what we have legislation for. I know some disagree with me on this and will call me selfish, but it is my belief in this and most other matters.
    I find this quite comparable to visiting North Korea - yes, some will say it is helping perpetuate the regime. In the end, the effect is so small though that the value it gives me personally outweighs that cost.



    On some level I disagree - I've now read the Fundamentals of Thought about halfway, and without a staffer looking over my shoulder and insisting I go back and find my "misunderstoods" for the umpteenth time in the same chapter, the texts seem quite ridiculous. That said, they are the primary tool of brainwashing the recruits, and that's very important to bear in mind.

    LRH is constantly saying something is a "scientific fact" without providing any evidence to it whatsoever. And, as said, being a materialist myself, I am missing the most basic beliefs it would require for me to actually buy into it.

    A more spiritual person would definitely be sucked in if they seriously go back and word clear everything whenever they disagree. I'm making use of the glossary at the back of the book to see the meaning of all the Hubbardisms that appear here and there. The fact that it only contains the meaning in which it was used in the book seems like a lightweight thought stopper, though - why is there only "one true meaning" of those words in the context they appear?

    I am reading these primarily because I am interested in the false 'science' they work with. It seems really quite intricate, and some level of understanding of it might make it easier to see why the organisation behaves the way it does. It's also a great case study on crazy ideologies, and I think an understanding of it can help me identify and engage with falsehoods I carry with me on purely secular matters.

    Here are my thoughts on the chapters I've read from the Fundamentals of Thought. I can post the rest as I read them if you are interested. Be sure to warn me if I agree with something dangerous. I'd also love to hear further analysis on the purposes each of these concepts serve in brainwashing the reader!

    I Basic principles
    - pretty much a second foreword. The end "IT IS POSSIBLE TO KNOW ABOUT..." thing might be quite exciting for some, but mostly left me sceptical.
    II Cycle of Action
    - so, destruction is also a creative process. ..fine. But not being party to the creation of a wall makes the wall not exist? We're straight off to cuckoo land, it appears. This whole chapter seems to be redefining the word "create" - it doesn't appear on the glossary, though. To me it intuitively means "bring something to a state of existence from a state of non-existence", but the bolded bit definitely doesn't fit with the way it is used in the chapter.
    III The Conditions of Existence
    Such a short chapter and so full of Hubbardisms. "Havingness" is hardly a word in standard English. I see it as a half decent way to break down our perception of life. I think there could be some new angles created, though, that would not fit the three defined here. "Knowingness", for instance, doesn't seem to fit in in a neat way. What we know and remember is an important part of not just what we think, but who we are. We have the information but are the memories, one could say. Maybe I should start a religion, too!
    IV The Eight Dynamics
    I was previously familiar with the concept, and the chapter taught me very little. it's an okay (if strange) shorthand to describe different groups based on an idea where you are the centre of the universe. I mean, the picture quite literally shows that.
    V The ARC triangle
    The closest I have come to an agreement with the book. It seems workable enough when dealing with people or organisations and their relations. Fails to account for ulterior motives, but works in their absence. Can't see communication being the universal solvent, though. Perhaps if we could completely communicate our entire backgrounds, it would in theory work. 100% communication = 100% understanding. To assume that 50% communication = 50% understanding would be quite wrong, though. The path is by no means literal. Take an example of two members from two militant groups who hate each other. So long as they are unaware of each other's affiliations, there is understanding on other issues, and the two are likely to be friendly enough. If this key piece of information is then communicated, violence may ensue.
    VI The Reason Why
    What a mysterious title! In the end, we are comparing life to a game. The idea of being senior/junior to a conflict is interesting, and I'm fine with the pan-determinism/self-determinism idea for the most part. Pitting dynamics against other dynamics seems a bit strange, though. Maybe Chapter VII will make that clear.
    Dianetics started out in 1950 with the idea that the mind consisted of various compartments, however, you are left wondering what is the physical world structure of the mind. Is it bio chemical or an energy cloud created by the body, etc?

    By 1952 LRH had a fully formed concept of non-corporeal beings called Targs which were invading the physical universe and now people were clearly a 3 part composite of Mind, Body, Spirit/Thetan - Scientology.

    Also in 1952 "A History of Man" introduces the concept of the "Genetic Entity" which contains it's own form of rudimentary mind or memory.

    By 1967, in could be assumed, the Targ concept had evolved into the Body Thetan mythology - because Targs are no longer being mentioned but BTs, which fit the same concept of other non-corporeal races of beings is.

    So in reading things like the Fundamentals of Thought, you are shifting between concepts of a physical person, an energy based mind and a non-corporeal being that uses both energy or pure postulate/intention to operate. If you try to adhere to a physical concept of the nature of people this will not make sense. If you believe in people as a spiritual composite then you will be able to shoehorn these concepts into some kind of understanding or personal application. This is where things become problematic. The concepts still don't work very well and they seem to shift randomly between states of being so you keep reading, hoping that the next book or course will pull it all together.

    By that time you are on lines in a formal setting, taking courses and doing auditing, where the self reinforcing disciplines of Word Clearing and only being permitted to refer to the closed loop written or taped material from LRH as "Source" are applied. Slowly all the other control mechanisms come into play until everything is being done in conformity with "The greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics" where Scientology, being the stable datum of understanding all knowledge is the senior deciding factor over what is the greatest good in your day-to-day priorities.

    People who are starting to read this stuff in the comfort of their own homes, without the organization directing interpretation, are missing the element of control that is intended to accompany this material. This is how innocent, well intentioned people, albeit lacking analysis disciplines, start down the path to becoming obsessive controlling tyrants.

    You are missing half of the component here - the LRH policies and personal orders directing how a person studying this material is to be controlled. These policies are not written as straight management directives. They are also interwoven with LRH's world view on spirituality, which includes his theology based on whole track recall of millions and trillions of years of intergalactic history. Even the Org Board is based on such recall - with LRH's own unique modification of a Qualifications Division to correct the org's own product, something no previous intergalactic civilization ever thought of.

    Most public Scientologists have very little understanding of Admin Tech. And even if they made a serious effort to study it, they would still have the same problem. For every policy there is an equal opposing policy. The decision over which policy is senior in any given moment depends on pure force of authority and that was always ultimately LRH, or now his successor. And the criteria for making these policy interpretations existed in confidential telexes, euphemistically "advices", orders, data evals and projects. Until the internet, Public Scientologists never saw these and for the most part even Sea Org members who were not directly on LRH's lines or involved with the implementations never saw these. After the 1977 FBI raid there was a concerted effort to vet and shred LRH orders and internal Sea Org directives to cover up his direct control of the organization and funds so after all this time the hidden LRH totalitarian state has been sanitized. Public may associate much of the present day faults with current management but if you were a public Scientologist without much staff or Sea Org experience when LRH died in 1986, then you may still be stuck in a sort of limbo area where LRH and the Tech remain deserving of respect.

    So to paraphrase LRH, by studying these books in some safe enclave is like a snail trying to understand the Parthenon by crawling over it's reliefs.

  2. Thanks Jump, Cat's Squirrel, Glenda, Edwardo, Bluebell and 1 others says "thank you" for this post
    Likes Swundel, Enthetan liked this post
  3. #12
    Gold Meritorious Sponsor HelluvaHoax!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    22,126

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Quote Originally Posted by TheOriginalBigBlue View Post
    Dianetics started out in 1950 with the idea that the mind consisted of various compartments, however, you are left wondering what is the physical world structure of the mind. Is it bio chemical or an energy cloud created by the body, etc?

    By 1952 LRH had a fully formed concept of non-corporeal beings called Targs which were invading the physical universe and now people were clearly a 3 part composite of Mind, Body, Spirit/Thetan - Scientology.

    Also in 1952 "A History of Man" introduces the concept of the "Genetic Entity" which contains it's own form of rudimentary mind or memory.

    By 1967, in could be assumed, the Targ concept had evolved into the Body Thetan mythology - because Targs are no longer being mentioned but BTs, which fit the same concept of other non-corporeal races of beings is.

    So in reading things like the Fundamentals of Thought, you are shifting between concepts of a physical person, an energy based mind and a non-corporeal being that uses both energy or pure postulate/intention to operate. If you try to adhere to a physical concept of the nature of people this will not make sense. If you believe in people as a spiritual composite then you will be able to shoehorn these concepts into some kind of understanding or personal application. This is where things become problematic. The concepts still don't work very well and they seem to shift randomly between states of being so you keep reading, hoping that the next book or course will pull it all together.

    By that time you are on lines in a formal setting, taking courses and doing auditing, where the self reinforcing disciplines of Word Clearing and only being permitted to refer to the closed loop written or taped material from LRH as "Source" are applied. Slowly all the other control mechanisms come into play until everything is being done in conformity with "The greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics" where Scientology, being the stable datum of understanding all knowledge is the senior deciding factor over what is the greatest good in your day-to-day priorities.

    People who are starting to read this stuff in the comfort of their own homes, without the organization directing interpretation, are missing the element of control that is intended to accompany this material. This is how innocent, well intentioned people, albeit lacking analysis disciplines, start down the path to becoming obsessive controlling tyrants.

    You are missing half of the component here - the LRH policies and personal orders directing how a person studying this material is to be controlled. These policies are not written as straight management directives. They are also interwoven with LRH's world view on spirituality, which includes his theology based on whole track recall of millions and trillions of years of intergalactic history. Even the Org Board is based on such recall - with LRH's own unique modification of a Qualifications Division to correct the org's own product, something no previous intergalactic civilization ever thought of.

    Most public Scientologists have very little understanding of Admin Tech. And even if they made a serious effort to study it, they would still have the same problem. For every policy there is an equal opposing policy. The decision over which policy is senior in any given moment depends on pure force of authority and that was always ultimately LRH, or now his successor. And the criteria for making these policy interpretations existed in confidential telexes, euphemistically "advices", orders, data evals and projects. Until the internet, Public Scientologists never saw these and for the most part even Sea Org members who were not directly on LRH's lines or involved with the implementations never saw these. After the 1977 FBI raid there was a concerted effort to vet and shred LRH orders and internal Sea Org directives to cover up his direct control of the organization and funds so after all this time the hidden LRH totalitarian state has been sanitized. Public may associate much of the present day faults with current management but if you were a public Scientologist without much staff or Sea Org experience when LRH died in 1986, then you may still be stuck in a sort of limbo area where LRH and the Tech remain deserving of respect.

    So to paraphrase LRH, by studying these books in some safe enclave is like a snail trying to understand the Parthenon by crawling over it's reliefs.

    Outstanding!

    Your post has so much unpacked wisdom about how Scientology works and doesn't work!

    Naturally, since you are demonstrating a masterful Understanding of Scientology, we must assume that you have applied the LRH datum ARC=U.

    We must further assume, since your cognitions were non-standard, that Scientologists will launch vicious attacks against you and your squirrel ARC triangle. LOL.
    ________________________

    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.

  4. LOL! TheOriginalBigBlue, Karen#1 laughed at this post
  5. #13
    Silver Meritorious Patron ILove2Lurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Jackson Hole
    Posts
    1,823

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Quote Originally Posted by TheOriginalBigBlue View Post
    For every policy there is an equal opposing policy. The decision over which policy is senior in any given moment depends on pure force of authority and that was always ultimately LRH, or now his successor.
    An example of the "pure force of authority" which exists even to this day . . .

    The two versions of ethics tech
    How could one handle a very severe upset or blowup or ongoing bad situation with someone?

    Rules for us:
    Sit in a corner alone with a notepad and pen, get contrite and introspective, write up one's OWs (real and/or imagined) against the person, feel bad and small, get all prostrate and submissive to the group, do a condition or two or three, some mest work or financial (donations) amends would help.

    Voilà. Situation resolved.

    Rules for LRH and his successor(s):

    Sock in the jaw (Otto Roos), or "squash like a bug," demote, offload at next port, send to RPF, banish from one's universe forevermore, ban from the upper levels, write a decree, publish personal defamation, write dispatch for another to spit on the person, feel powerful and godly. Go back to one's desk and go back to work like nothing happened.

    Voilà. Situation resolved.

    There are two techs

    After reading all the "heretical histories" of Scientology and having back-channel discussions with friends, I notice the major overarching theme in all this is: "Do as I say, not as I do." (Don't imitate my behavior but obey my instructions.)

    We are seeing all this in play nowadays with DM certainly.


  6. Thanks Enthetan, Edwardo, HelluvaHoax! says "thank you" for this post
  7. #14
    Gold Meritorious Sponsor HelluvaHoax!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    22,126

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    .

    Quote Originally Posted by ILove2Lurk View Post
    --snipped--

    Rules for LRH and his successor(s):

    Sock in the jaw (Otto Roos), or "squash like a bug," demote, offload at next port, send to RPF, banish from one's universe forevermore, ban from the upper levels, write a decree, publish personal defamation, write despatch for another to spit on the person, feel powerful and godly. Go back to one's desk and go back to work like nothing happened.



    LOL LOL LOL

    Apparently, you did not get the memo. . .


    .

    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
    Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

    HCO Policy Letter of 21 October 1968


    CANCELLATION OF SPITTING


    The practice of SPITTING on people will cease. SPITTING may not appear on any Ethics Order. It causes bad public relations.


    This P/L does not cancel any policy on the treatment or handling of an SP.



    L. RON HUBBARD
    Founder



    LRH: assisted by Don Hubbard
    Copyright (c) 1968 by L. Ron Hubbard
    ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (to spit on SPs)


    .
    ________________________

    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.

  8. #15
    Patron Meritorious
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Gravityville, Jupiter
    Posts
    660

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Iceland and Denmark spring to mind as countries where young people often speak English very well.

    I'm not understanding why the buy-the-books ruse was necessary. You must be loaded. I think it would have been more fun to waste hours of their time, acting curious, open and semi-enthusiastic, and then tell them you don't want to buy a fucking thing, saying something appropriately dianutty about how "Mummy must approve of all my purchases, especially anything as frivolous as this."

    These people do not have any special powerz to cast a spell and make you join the Sea Org for a billion years. When you are onto them, it is transparent.

    Years ago, the sequence of seduction into the cult may have involved walk-ins buying books, and sometimes returning to take courses. These days anyone who reads Hubbard's meandering bullshit is going to go online, if they're curious about what it is supposed to mean.

    So, org staff would act a little panicky about anyone who is interested enough to buy books, knowing it is most likely they won't be back in for the brainwashing. Even in recent decades, people who bought books and left were probably not likely to return. And most people who come in are ready to try one of their low-priced courses or gullible enough to take their free personality test, believing Dr. Hubtard and Scientology may have all the answers.

    What would really be effective in ending Scientology though, is to walk away without buying anything, and I really wish more people would do that. Then staff would get a clue that interest in Scientology is at an all-time low, and that something is changing. Now these fools think other orgs are doing well. They never even hear the truth. In the end, they were probably very happy to sell you the books. They can go home and postulate that you'll be back to spend millions on courses and that they helped you on the bridge to total freedom.

  9. Thanks Cat's Squirrel says "thank you" for this post
  10. #16

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Quote Originally Posted by ILove2Lurk View Post
    An example of the "pure force of authority" which exists even to this day . . .

    The two versions of ethics tech
    How could one handle a very severe upset or blowup or ongoing bad situation with someone?

    Rules for us:
    Sit in a corner alone with a notepad and pen, get contrite and introspective, write up one's OWs (real and/or imagined) against the person, feel bad and small, get all prostrate and submissive to the group, do a condition or two or three, some mest work or financial (donations) amends would help.

    Voilà. Situation resolved.

    Rules for LRH and his successor(s):

    Sock in the jaw (Otto Roos), or "squash like a bug," demote, offload at next port, send to RPF, banish from one's universe forevermore, ban from the upper levels, write a decree, publish personal defamation, write dispatch for another to spit on the person, feel powerful and godly. Go back to one's desk and go back to work like nothing happened.

    Voilà. Situation resolved.

    There are two techs

    After reading all the "heretical histories" of Scientology and having back-channel discussions with friends, I notice the major overarching theme in all this is: "Do as I say, not as I do." (Don't imitate my behavior but obey my instructions.)

    We are seeing all this in play nowadays with DM certainly.

    This actually has a name.

    DOUBLE STANDARD TECH

    It's applied to Ron, Wee Wittow Davey and Top Gun Cruise.
    "Religion is free; Scientology is neither."

    "If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever." - George Orwell, 1984

    "L. Ron Hubbard is the cult leader for the crime that is Scientology." - Cleverbot

    "And while we're at it I might as well toss this in for a good laugh. We were doing a lot of "research" on Rockslams at that time and one of the Hubbard thing's rockslamming items was...(oh you're going to love this)...'unlimited wealth'" - Mystic

  11. Likes HelluvaHoax! liked this post
  12. #17
    Gold Meritorious Patron TheOriginalBigBlue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,071

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Quote Originally Posted by HelluvaHoax! View Post
    Outstanding!

    Your post has so much unpacked wisdom about how Scientology works and doesn't work!

    Naturally, since you are demonstrating a masterful Understanding of Scientology, we must assume that you have applied the LRH datum ARC=U.

    We must further assume, since your cognitions were non-standard, that Scientologists will launch vicious attacks against you and your squirrel ARC triangle. LOL.
    Application of the ARC Triangle as a Sea Org member taught me that it is completely useless without M. It should be Affinity, Reality, Communication, Motive.

    If somebody is using Affinity, Reality and Communication to screw you over - they aren't going to really Understand you very well.

  13. Thanks Cat's Squirrel says "thank you" for this post
  14. #18
    Gold Meritorious Patron TheOriginalBigBlue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,071

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Quote Originally Posted by ILove2Lurk View Post
    An example of the "pure force of authority" which exists even to this day . . .

    The two versions of ethics tech
    How could one handle a very severe upset or blowup or ongoing bad situation with someone?
    Rules for us:
    Sit in a corner alone with a notepad and pen, get contrite and introspective, write up one's OWs (real and/or imagined) against the person, feel bad and small, get all prostrate and submissive to the group, do a condition or two or three, some mest work or financial (donations) amends would help.

    Voilà. Situation resolved.

    Rules for LRH and his successor(s):

    Sock in the jaw (Otto Roos), or "squash like a bug," demote, offload at next port, send to RPF, banish from one's universe forevermore, ban from the upper levels, write a decree, publish personal defamation, write dispatch for another to spit on the person, feel powerful and godly. Go back to one's desk and go back to work like nothing happened.

    Voilà. Situation resolved.

    There are two techs

    After reading all the "heretical histories" of Scientology and having back-channel discussions with friends, I notice the major overarching theme in all this is: "Do as I say, not as I do." (Don't imitate my behavior but obey my instructions.)

    We are seeing all this in play nowadays with DM certainly.

    There is a 3rd version: Always leave a crack open so a person can come back and do it all over again.

  15. #19
    Gold Meritorious Patron TheOriginalBigBlue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,071

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Boson Wog Stark View Post
    ///
    They can go home and postulate that you'll be back to spend millions on courses and that they helped you on the bridge to total freedom.
    That in itself makes it all worth while.

    But yes, you can buy the original pre-DM books for pennies on the dollar on-line.

    They now have an opening to go back and ask some pointed questions about what they read.

  16. #20

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Boson Wog Stark View Post
    Iceland and Denmark spring to mind as countries where young people often speak English very well.

    I'm not understanding why the buy-the-books ruse was necessary. You must be loaded. I think it would have been more fun to waste hours of their time, acting curious, open and semi-enthusiastic, and then tell them you don't want to buy a fucking thing, saying something appropriately dianutty about how "Mummy must approve of all my purchases, especially anything as frivolous as this."

    These people do not have any special powerz to cast a spell and make you join the Sea Org for a billion years. When you are onto them, it is transparent.

    Years ago, the sequence of seduction into the cult may have involved walk-ins buying books, and sometimes returning to take courses. These days anyone who reads Hubbard's meandering bullshit is going to go online, if they're curious about what it is supposed to mean.

    So, org staff would act a little panicky about anyone who is interested enough to buy books, knowing it is most likely they won't be back in for the brainwashing. Even in recent decades, people who bought books and left were probably not likely to return. And most people who come in are ready to try one of their low-priced courses or gullible enough to take their free personality test, believing Dr. Hubtard and Scientology may have all the answers.

    What would really be effective in ending Scientology though, is to walk away without buying anything, and I really wish more people would do that. Then staff would get a clue that interest in Scientology is at an all-time low, and that something is changing. Now these fools think other orgs are doing well. They never even hear the truth. In the end, they were probably very happy to sell you the books. They can go home and postulate that you'll be back to spend millions on courses and that they helped you on the bridge to total freedom.

    To tell you the truth, I suppose we are a little loaded. The 38.50£ - shared between us two, making it < 20£ each - was perfectly within our budget for a joke.
    And frankly, that's how the whole idea started. As a joke. It just so happened that we had an opening and followed through with it.

    I know a lot of people on these forums have a serious grudge against Scientology. And why wouldn't they? When an organisation tears apart your family and steals decades of your life, it is completely reasonable to wish to end it.

    But that's not the viewpoint we hold. From our point of view, Scientology is a bizarre organisation consisting of less than 50 000 foreigners. Seeing it end doesn't concern us hugely. In fact, there is an individual benefit of making that staff member's life just a little easier by allowing him to "stand up in the next staff meeting" and tell his success story. And from our perspective, that small benefit for the only Scientologist I have ever spoken to (save for the reg who assigned him to us) is far less remote and more meaningful than the abstract benefit of not letting this organisation have 'almost 40 pounds'. I'm not a huge believer in consumer activism, honestly. I prefer these issues to be dealt with on a governmental level and in the courts rather than me denying myself a deal I'd rather take up. I can see why others would see this differently, but that's just my selfish little point of view from someone who, I am sure, "has still much to learn about the realities of life".

    I've now fully read the Fundamentals of Thought and The Problems of Work. The big fonts and long dictionaries make these books look deceptively big from the outside - especially the hardcover variants. Once you take off the dust covers, they look much more legit from the outside than - considering their contents - they have any right to. It often feels like I am just reading some man's shower thoughts from a fancy book with a faux leather cover.

    The Problems of Work wasn't completely useless. I can sort of relate to some of the concepts, though much of it is stuff I already knew/believed just stated using Scientology terms. Nevertheless, having these things restated to you in a different way can be helpful reminders and can give you some additional depth in understanding when it comes to those concepts. Overall, it was a fairly enjoyable read - certainly better than the Fundamentals of Thought.

    I'm now starting with DMSMH which is probably going to be even more useless than the Fundamentals of Thought in terms of real life applicability. Nevertheless, it's one of those books I just want to read 'for the sake of it' - like that 80-page committee report on the reorganisation supervision of the production unregulated traffic safety equipment and its potential future regulation dating back to the 80's. Absolutely irrelevant to my life, but I like the language and have a very low threshold for interest.

    So far I haven't had to look up a single word that wasn't the editor's glossary at the back. That said, I haven't gone on an MU hunt every time I disagreed with some idiocy like calling their definition of a Game (two or more conflicting purposes) a 'scientifically proven fact'.


    I did not visit the Church again during my trip. Primarily because I do not have a particular interest in being on any of their databases. Being a repeat visitor would make it harder to smoothly avoid those details being added to their bank.

    Of course, these people don't have magic powers that can turn anybody into a Sea Org member in an afternoon. Yet, something in me doesn't want me to take the risk. If I was ever religious, Scientology is exactly the kind of religion I would enjoy. Many of its silly gimmicks push just the right buttons for my ego. And it's not like there aren't those around who first heard of Scientology from the critics and then went ahead and joined it.
    My mind has a fantastic capacity to rationalise the irrational - that's why I can procrastinate with frightening consistency. I would probably only need to be convinced of one thing - that Dianetics really works - and I'd be in enthusiastically for half a year and then with far less enthusiasm for possibly a decade or two, depending really on how hard the process of leaving is made. I'd probably finally end up signing an NDA and shutting up about my experiences for the rest of my life.

    I don't really have that "rebellious teen" character to me, and I never did. If I ever got to the point where I accepted the C of S as the authority in my life, I'd stay loyal to it for a very substantial amount of time.
    And frankly, I see much better things in my future than a career in the Sea Organisation.

    That's why last year I simply walked past the building a few times, not daring to stop in front of it. I slowly built up the resolve to go in for 15 minutes without fearing instant indoctrination. It might take another while before I am confident enough about my position to stay inside for a couple of hours and really have a chat with the people.

    I might pay another visit in a year or two, perhaps to buy a couple more books, perhaps not. In any case, I am slowly starting to want to go there and ask pointed questions in the friendliest possible way. See how they can handle that situation where a suspiciously well-informed wog comes in and questions the tech in ways a Scientologist never would, yet using the correct terminology. Oh boy, I would have a few questions about why exactly they think you can measure engrams from past lives based on the conductivity of your skin. At what point would I be flagged 1.1 and thrown out? :P

  17. Thanks Boson Wog Stark, TheOriginalBigBlue says "thank you" for this post
    LOL! pineapple laughed at this post
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 24th September 2013, 01:15 AM
  2. London Review of Books reviews a book about Scientology's history
    By asteroid in forum Miscellaneous Reports from Newspapers, Blogs, and TV
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 28th January 2012, 11:07 PM
  3. CofS has a list of Banned books? CofS Net nanny.
    By Jachs in forum General Scientology Discussion
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 6th April 2011, 09:17 AM
  4. Scn'ists (non CofS); How do you perceive critics of non CofS Scn?
    By Voltaire's Child in forum Freezone, Independents, and Other Flavors of Scientology
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 9th November 2010, 08:14 PM
  5. Current CofS vs Hubbard's CofS
    By asagai in forum Evaluating and Criticising Scientology
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 29th September 2009, 04:34 AM

Posting Permissions

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