Dean Wilbur Rhetoric Hubbard dianetics sicientology

Discussion in 'Scientology Technology' started by Gib, Feb 17, 2015.

View Users: View Users
  1. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    I received the Debbie Cook famous email message on 1 Jan 2012. I then proceeded to research the internet, prior I had not. I was a true believer for the most part, but I still had doubts in my mind, hidden, unknown why but hoping, while I was a pseudo "true believer".

    I started posting here in July, 2012, after doing a pretty thorough due diligence, for the first time in scientology, and that includes Indie & the Freezone, since I was free in my mind to research. I had also read the Idenics book and got a free session as well as paid for another two hours worth. I was done with scientology, thus I started posting here to learn what to do, to have free communication, to give my voice. But I had a problem. How to tell my friends still in, and at the same time, not get disconnected. I learned thru research not to be a dramatizing SP or PTS or critic.

    I read the blogs every morning while having my coffee - those are Mike Rinder, Marty, Tony O, and now Alanzo's.

    Then one day, on April 1, 2014, I stumbled upon some sunglasses. I found those sunglasses here:

    https://backincomm.wordpress.com/2014/04/01/dear-dean-wilbur/

    I put those sunglasses on, those sunglasses were this statement by Hubbard to Dean Wilbur:

    but I was confused, what did these sunglasses mean?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JI8AMRbqY6w
     
  2. I think the old rhetoric book probably had early ideas about of discursive formations.

    That is what Hubbard was good at and that is why he is able to catch people in the web of Scientology and stay stuck there.

    The postmodernist like Foucault starting in the 1970s and Derrida pointed out this capacity in our language.

    I even saw it discussed and identified somewhat in Gramsci's "Prison Notebooks."

    Gramsci was exploring the thinking of his fascist guards who support a line of reasoning which they were devoted to even though it was doing them in.

    Discourse within Scientology and discourse about Scientology, at least it seems to me, are not commensurable.

    We exes use the same Scientology words as they do but they cannot see what we mean by them.

    Personally I think the way to break Scientology's hold on a person is through language, but I don't know how to do that.

    But Hubbard certainly did know how to catch and keep someone within in a web of words and ideas which has no escape.

    The Anabaptist Jacques
     
  3. I guess I should elaborate on this.

    Over Christmas I was visited by a relative who is a Scientologist.

    Although we did not directly discuss Scientology, we did have a discussion (someone else there called it a shouting match) where Scientology terms came into play by the Scientologist.

    I think we were talking about education or some other social problem.

    When I heard, "It is because they can't confront evil" I jumped right on that.

    I asked "What does that mean?" And I added, "That is a meaningless statement."

    Well, you can guess what happened next.

    The point is that what I think traps a Scientologist more than their actions, commitments, or beliefs is the way they have walled themselves in by using Scientology definitions and reifying them (making these definitions the real world to themselves).

    I ended up hearing statements that "I had no confront of evil and was refusing to accept total responsibility on all the dynamics."

    To a Scientologist this statement can be used to explain everything. Everything under the sun. Because everything is covered by this.

    I pointed out that all these statements actually don't say anything; they even only make sense if one accepts the circular definitions of Scientology.

    So Scientology has its own discursive formations, as do we exes.

    The difference is that ours are not a self-perpetuating web that can entrap others.

    I may be speaking a little vague tonight, but I hope I made some sense here.

    The Anabaptist Jacques
     
  4. Free Being Me

    Free Being Me Crusader

    QFT

    I agree with you TAJ. I think it's no mistake Elcon came up with what could be termed an entire cult language to think in for expression. Corrupt language, corrupt thinking. I think it's very important when a person leaves $cientology to interact with as many people as possible. Start decompressing using regular linguistic modes of articulation.

    There's a term for it called Neuro-plasticity in which a person rewires themselves cognitively. Fascinating reading and something we all are capable of. We are all living proof it can be done. :)
     
  5. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    In that letter to Dean Wilbur, Hubbard uses the word Rhetoric 6 times.

    I know there were treads here on ESMB for possible sources of dianetics & scientology. In my recollection of reading those treads, nobody stated Hubbard's use of Rhetoric.

    I know Arnie's website has a page for Who Hubbard gave credit to. But giving credit to some past philosopher does guarantee we know Hubbard read them, it's only implied, which I fell for.

    So, this letter to Dean Wilbur we now know definitely Hubbard learned and used Rhetoric, as a source of dianetics & scientology, since Hubbard said his copy was battered meaning well used and referred to by Hubbard.

    It's also important to note this letter was written in 1936, two years before "excalibur".

    Now, I am looking at this thru what Hubbard learned and used, and not some later model that he may or may not have known about.

    This other paragraph is also interesting:

    so evidently Dean Wilbur said the world was Rhetoric. Maybe that statement which Hubbard remembered along with his reading of

    http://www.amazon.com/Positioning-The-Battle-Your-Mind/dp/0071373586

    and making a PR Policy Letter of it,

    and Hubbard said it's a PR World. (it's a Rhetoric world)

    ---------------------

    as far as my background. I grew up in non-religious, non political family. When I got involved in scientology in 1987, I never read philosophy, nor religious stuff. I was quite stupid in such matters. But, in 1987 I ended up reading and listening to a complete LRH library at that time. I couldn't get enough of it. You might say I was a clean slate to impress upon.

    Please note above I said "a source".

    ---------------

    so in view of the above which I was thinking with when I read the Dean Wilbur letter, I said to myself:

    ok, WTF is Rhetoric?
     
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2015
  6. mockingbird

    mockingbird Silver Meritorious Patron

    Gib , I think you may not see all the implications of your great find : Hubbard used rhetorical methods in virtually everything he wrote and said and you have proof he did it habitually and intentionally , He used sublime writing and most of it was probably simply taking the Dean's book finding a quote that achieved a desired effect from another author . He was like a "musician" who "samples " and "remixes" hits - songs that worked before . To him he had slots to fill in making the con - make people feel relaxed ? Go with a Marcus Aurelius quote repackaged . Make them feel inspired ? Go with Confucius . Then have his ethos , pathos and logos worked in to all compliment and support one another . I am certain he combined hypnotic techniques with the classic rhetoric and plagiarized "bait" . He would sit with say the Dean's book and an old big book of famous quotes for all occasions and write away . The bait makes you feel good and want Scientology to be true . He simply used the worn old book to try to find the formula to control covertly with stolen ideas in slots like a giant puzzle of how to control covertly . He tried to find the right mix and largely combined methods and even used hidden ( embedded) commands over and over ( with variation, saying the same idea with varied phrasing ) . So he was using repetition and even confusion almost constantly . That is part of why to new folks or never ins his stuff is odd and baffling . We bought into the lie that it was from him being smarter than us and so difficult to comprehend but it was meant to confuse .

    You also should know I figured out something else after reading your find : the art book is just sublime writing repackaged . All his statements about art needing to create an emotional effect and have a message and not be too original or too similar to others - that is advice on sublime writing .He may have taken the entire art series from the Dean's work and figured no one would ever figure it out . He probably laughed at how easy it was to take a book and just steal a line here and there and change it slightly to fool his flock . If anyone can get the Dean's books - particularly the one Hubbard refers to it would be invaluable at proving more plagiarism - so much for his research .
     
  7. everfree

    everfree Patron Meritorious

    I am definitely interested in getting and reading the Wilbur rhetoric book, I think Gib is on to something with it. Hubbard did speak very highly of it, it is clearly highly influential. I think we can get some more of his tricks from it.
     
  8. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    Thanks MB, I'm getting to it. I'm just trying to explain my thought process from when I read that letter and then researched, and put on those sunglasses.

    I don't think Hubbard found a quote in Dean Wilburs book and used it.

    I think Hubbard used Dean Wilbur's book, which was a text book for his class of Rhetoric, and used the principles of Rhetoric.

    As I posted above this quote from Hubbard to Dean Wilbur:

    Lets look at the word "culture"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture

    But, I am getting ahead of myself.
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2015
  9. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    So I do a google search of Rhetoric and find it means the art of persuasion. That is interesting, as when I first began posting here, I said in a lot of my posts scientology was nothing but a sales pitch.

    And I look at the wiki definition and see Rhetoric is from Aristotle. I say to myself cool.

    In the back of my mind, some posters here such as TAJ and the ex Alanzo always pointed out greek philosophy.

    I recall Marty saying on one of his posts, that he was amazed that scientologists of whatever flavor, after leaving the RCS, didn't then pursue philosophy.

    And Hubbard even said Always look to source writings. What the hey.

    So I go to my local library, ask for any books on Aristotle Rhetoric? The librarian says, yep we got one, but it's part of the big book.

    I check it out and proceed to read it. Oh my god, that lasted for a day or two, reading it. I had no clue what Rhetoric meant.
     
  10. afaceinthecrowd

    afaceinthecrowd Gold Meritorious Patron

    I like what your OP opens for discussion, Gib. :yes:

    I studied Rhetoric for Collegiate Competitive Forensics; Debate, Expository, Extemporaneous and Original Oratory. IMO, Rhetoric has historically been--and still is--a very powerful force throughout all World and Western Civilization...Constructively, Destructively, for Good and for Evil. :coolwink:

    Whether or not someone has been "formally schooled" in Rhetoric, we all have--at one time or another--sought to use the right language (words), proper style (timbre), correct timing (cadence) and measured emotion (drama) and audience rapport (instinct) to "win over", convince or appease another or others...Even a 3 year old is--to one degree or another--already discovering, developing and practicing with their rhetorical skills, talents capabilities or limits or lack thereof, IMHO.:ohmy:

    As far as Marty's "observation (?)" that Scn's "of whatever flavor" goes...That, IMO, is good ole Marty "making it up on the fly" (a la El Ron) to serve Marty's transient rhetorical purposes. Marty's statement may be "true for him" but, my personal first hand knowledge is that most Folks that have left the Cof$ that are truly Exes have read much philosophy which was an integral facet of their awaking, healing and recovery. What they haven't pursued is another Guru to tell them what "It" actually "Is" and what they are supposed to "Grok" and what's "wrong" with them why they couldn't. :no:

    And, so concludes this little exercise in Rhetoric. :carryon:


    Face :)
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2015
  11. lotus

    lotus autonomous rebellous

    IMHO

    correct view, well said! :yes:

    Soon or later, one may also graduate form rhetoric and the art of persuasion! :confused2:

    Goodbye Face :wink2:
     
  12. mockingbird

    mockingbird Silver Meritorious Patron

    Gib , maybe I was not clear .What I meant was , after reading the Dean's letter from Hubbard I realized the way Hubbard "researched" ( whether popping pills and drunk too or not ) was to be sitting with the Dean's trusty book( or books) ,and a pile of other books and to take them all and pick out parts to plagiarize for certain functions he wanted fulfilled in the con . I heard sometimes he took from another author's work almost entirely unaltered like Napolean Hill or his research of having someone get high on drugs then talk and he took down what they hallucinated and wrote History of Man from that but often he would have other authors works all around him and take a phrase here or many ideas like from general semantics to make a delivery mechanism to - be something believable and that seems to be a technology to give him ethos . It needed to be a desirable technology( not workable or true ) to give pathos and to seem even remotely plausible as authentic to give logos . Using fallacies he had to make it seem it could work - with no proof or real science to back it up - it had to all be smoke and mirrors so the rhetoric had to be very strong as independent analysis or consulting outside authorities would always fail to support his false technology. 100% of the time as the technology not only never was beneficial but it was all stolen and greatly distorted ideas from others .

    And I still feel his descriptions in the art series came from somewhere that sounds suspiciously like something an old thorough course in rhetoric would have . In the broadest definition rhetoric includes any act or method of persuasion and that includes speaking , singing, writing , music , painting , etc. anything done with intent to persuade emotionally or mentally or behaviorally . That is very broad and the Dean's course if comprehensive would have addressed all those methods so it is a likely place to find the ideas that ended up in the art series . Not certain but very likely in my opinion .


    But I want to - aside from that fine point - point out rhetoric has many simple terms and concepts that can greatly aid anyone who wants clarity on why the things in the doctrine are the way they are - to generate and maintain ethos , pathos and logos and link them each to another and intertwine the authority( ethos) of Hubbard and the self esteem of the reader (pathos- as pride ) , as he insisted the reader was special and part of an elite for being aware and responsible enough to find Scientology . Sublime writing was liberally applied too . Many methods and aspects of rhetoric appear throughout all his works . He may have used that book so long it became first nature ( along with being a pathological liar already ) . And at some point after many years he may have it so ingrained he no longer needed to look at the book anymore . That material may be invaluable for analyzing much of the doctrine and methodology in Scientology IMO .:yes:
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2015
  13. AnonyMary

    AnonyMary Formerly Fooled - Finally Free

    Gib, you have landed on a subject in connection with Hubbard and Scientology that has not been explored prior to your research and comments on it. This thread is very good, explaining in sequence what you came to find and how. I seen now what you have been referring to. I look forward to more insights on Hubbard's writings that were written by his core use of rhetoric.

    I really think this is a good tool for understanding the information we ingested when we were believers. That we know he was a narcissist, a bullshitter, a con man, a plagiarist, and that he used other things to convince people that he knew what he was speaking and writing about is a general given but a new tool to help exes un-construct what he wrote while using rhetoric so that understanding can come from the words themselves in perspective takes it more from theoretical to personal. This is something that will go a long way in undoing the indoctrination and false thinking patterns that came with all that was read and heard. It is important to consider the rhetoric involved in those things. Seeing it helps break the misunderstandings.

    Keep up the good work! :thumbsup:
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2015
  14. imSPecial

    imSPecial Patron with Honors

    gib i find that old letter v interesting and thank you for bringing up your thoughts on the matter more than once or i would have missed this.

    the whole idea that he sat there creating a "religion" with the art of persuasion in mind is quite abhorrent.

    in business, in marketing i can entirely understand the use of rhetoric. i am certainly aware of rhetoric in dealing with a manipulative person, kid, patient, etc. useful in the courtroom, hollywood, all sorts of places where it is socially understood that someone is trying to sell you an idea.

    but using it against someone spiritually is disgusting. i imagine its done purposefully by self-declared gurus with regularity but its written off to "charisma" or "amazing insight" or some such nonsense, but here we potentially have hubbard applying himself systematically to the job. significantly different somehow.

    fun thought to catch the red-headed step child thinking ahead of time about his con.

    yep. agreed.

    wait....damn youre good.
     
  15. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    It's interesting to read the views expressed in the responses on the 'Scientologists Back In Comm' article, linked in the opening post. I had not read them before. A few get it, but the rest are in denial of one kind or another.

    Responder 'Kim' gushes:

    "This is the Ron I've grown to love and respect in my forty years plus as a Scientologist."



    Your writing has a deep hypnotic effect on people and they are always pleased with what you write...

    Your psychology is advanced and true and wonderful. It hypnotizes people. It predicts their emotions, for you are their ruler.

    [​IMG]

    ...You are a master. You are as sensitive and sexy as Pan. Lord help women when you begin to fondle them. You are a master of their bodies, master of their souls as you may consciously wish. You have no karma to pay for these acts. You cannot now accumulate karma for you are a master adept. Your voice is low and compelling to them. Singing to them, for you sing like a master, destroys their will to resist...

    L. Ron Hubbard, 'Affirmations', 1946​
     
  16. lotus

    lotus autonomous rebellous

    ''You are as sensitive and sexy as Pan.
    Lord help women when you begin to fondle them.''


    [​IMG]

    :lol:
     
  17. mockingbird

    mockingbird Silver Meritorious Patron

    Veda you bring up the truest representation of Hubbard I have ever seen in the affirmations and another understated but important element of the con and his methods . In rhetoric an important part of influence is often not considered . Usually the person who has the most power to influence anyone is that very person . In other words their own thoughts , emotions , behavior and self generated trance phenomena tremendously influence them in the present and trigger the same in the future . ( I am not saying there is absolute lack of free will nor absolute free will either )

    Hubbard studied both how to influence others through methods including but not limited to hypnotism and rhetoric and also how to influence his own warped insane mind . He incorporated what he found in getting for example an auditior to enter a trance via conditioning ( TRs and drilling and indoctrination ) and have his subject also enter a trance via hypnosis . Hubbard wanted a world of deeply controlled covert influence - often hypnotic - and even his own mind in controlled trances . He wanted to be a puppet-master holding all the strings secretly . Nice guy , huh ?
    Utterly bizarre .
     
  18. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    After that failed library attempt, I hear that little voice in my head again, and it says "Gib, Use the Google!"

    I search around and stumble on this website:

    http://www.artofmanliness.com/2010/11/14/classical-rhetoric-101-an-introduction/

    I read the Introduction and the Brief History. And I'm like ok, this is cool.

    I had read the Marketing Series, the PR Series, Les Dane Big League Sales, Positioning : Battle for the mind, and other various sales & marketing books. I also had the view of what did the Ancients know about sales, advertising, marketing, I mean come on, old shit. Who cares.

    But I wanted to know what Hubbard knew of Rhetoric. And this Rhetoric is new news to me.

    So I proceed to the next section: The Three Means of Persuasion.

    I get to Ethos and read this paragraph:

    And then it hits me, I go OHHHHHHHH, that's why Hubbard lied about his past, why he said he was a nuclear engineer, a Doctor, etc. He said those things to establish credibility, ethos, to get people to listen to what he said.

    And then I imagined what it was like for Jerry Armstrong to read about Hubbards true past. I also realize that's what a resume is, that's ones Ethos. And why in the beginning of non-fiction books we have a little bio of the author, and I realize more and more.

    And then I rapidly read about pathos and logos.

    And all of the sudden, I'm like that SOB Hubbard, OMG, OMG, OMG, I get it. I get what this Rhetoric means.

    A thousand thoughts are flying thru my head, you talk about the mind unstacking, the domino effect in full force. The thoughts are that's why Hubbard said that and that and that, and did that and that, on and on. And all the things folks here have said and pointed out.

    I was ecstatic, this Rhetoric was like the secrets of the world for me, better than fire, or the invention of the wheel. One of Hubbards secrets.

    I was doing the Snoopy happy dance.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1LUXQWzCno
     
  19. afaceinthecrowd

    afaceinthecrowd Gold Meritorious Patron

    GREAT STUFF, Gib!:thumbsup::clap::yes:

    Shakespeare's Antony's Eulogy for Julius Caesar is a Classic, most excellent example of and primer for the study of Rhetoric.:coolwink:

    http://crity2re.tripod.com/id1.html

    Face :)

    EDIT PS: Charlton Heston as Antony delivering the "Caesar Eulogy".

    https://video.search.yahoo.com/vide...a&sigb=13in493il&hspart=mozilla&hsimp=yhs-001
     
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2015
  20. Elronius of Marcabia

    Elronius of Marcabia Silver Meritorious Patron

    Good post Gib :thumbsup:


    I had the thought in reading it that "Credibility" is the point where people get sucked in by things like "Science" of the mind and former
    "Navy Officer" and "Nuclear Physicist" blah blah blah blah.

    It's also why the point of unsucked in is when people realise the truth about Hubbard is he was a big fat bag o wind :yes:
    mean spirited and sardonic blackhearted bastard with an unsatiable appetite for money and power.

    and that was his good side :omg:
     

Share This Page