Dean Wilbur Rhetoric Hubbard dianetics sicientology

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

View Users: View Users
  1. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    My post and thoughts on Tony O blog regarding Chris Shelton interview with John P and Waser, for what's it worth:

    https://tonyortega.org/2018/03/08/w...to-newly-elected-ronald-reagan/#disqus_thread

    "What the troika (LOL) of Chris, Waser and John P, in their analysis of Hubbard's letter to Ronald Reagan is missing is Hubbard's rhetoric. You have to include that for a fuller picture. If you analyze Hubbard only from a logical POV, you are missing the other two points of rhetoric, persuasion, which are ethos and pathos. Afterall, CATS became a movement unto itself, you see.

    Hubbard used this:

    "rhetoric is the art of discovering all available means of persuasion. A speaker supports the probability of a message by logical, ethical, and emotional proofs. Some form of logos, ethos, and pathos is present in every possible public presentation that exists."

    So in Hubbard's letter to Reagan, what did Hubbard write emotionally and credibility wise to try to persuade Reagan? If you examine that, you see, that Hubbard was a rhetoric user. It didn't work on Reagan, but it worked on many people."
     
  2. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    for what's it's worth, long live anonymous and UTR's:

     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2018
  3. Gib

    Gib Crusader

  4. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    Here is the perfect example of Hubbard falling for his own shit, along with Mary Sue, just as Hayakawa said. This lecture is 1952, Hayakawa review was 1951 which Hubbard did not have the e-meter. Oh my.

    Just in case folks don't know, MSH and LRH are using the Mathison E-meter and the dial shows rising tone, a lot different from the present e-meter.

    [​IMG]


     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2018
    • Like Like x 1
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
    • List
  5. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    I don't know if anybody here has listened to that taped recording by Hubbard with Mary Sue, I can only state this, hide sight, LOL

    I first read dianetics and thought I'd give it a go, little did I know at the time, in 1987. But if I had first read dianetics, then allowed to listen to that Hubbard Mary Sue demonstration of Hubbard getting audited or questioned by Mary Sue on the "Emeter", why I'd would have said, mental, this guy and gal are nuts. And I would have never gotten involved!

    I guess I'm a Targ, LOL
     
  6. ILove2Lurk

    ILove2Lurk Lisbeth Salander

    We've always suspected that. :coolwink: :biggrin:
     
  7. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    Tony Ortega made a post today:
    https://tonyortega.org/2018/04/11/a...ulture-and-the-apologists-hate-it/#more-46907

    In that post he made a reference to a earlier post he made which is this:

    https://tonyortega.org/2014/11/03/s...pera-a-new-scholarly-approach-by-susan-raine/

    I just now read that article by Susan Raine, I haven't read it before.
    If you read the article in bedded in Tony's post titled:

    "Astounding history: L. Ron Hubbard's Scientology space opera"

    I think it's pretty good. She actually figures out Hubbard's game plan by looking at his science fiction works, comparing to scientology, and comes up with the theme which is that Hubbard created a game in which followers were to believe thru scientific means that Hubbard was a savior.
    There are a few things missing IMHO. And Susan admits she doesn't know all.

    1. Hubbard eventually admits he failed thru what Sarge said. And she didn't know at the time when she wrote the article.

    2. Susan never mentions in her article that the first premise of a homo novis was "clear" as depicted in Dianetics, and two, OT was to be achieved by Scientology and the Bridge to Total Freedom. She never mentions the clear and OT aspects and what is supposedly to be achieved.

    For the life of me I don't understand why these academics get stuck on religion when they should be pointing out illogic's.

    And I still think it's a great article by Susan.
     
  8. Gib

    Gib Crusader

  9. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    My post on Tony Ortega:

    (I have to give thanks to Face for repeating to read Le Bon's works)

    https://tonyortega.org/2018/04/18/s...st-stories-from-scientologists/#disqus_thread

    "
    Gib • 11 minutes ago
    I quite recall reading the Advanced Magazines for their OT stories, myself being not yet "clear" and on staff and hoping one day to get up the Bridge.

    I read and listened to a lot of Hubbard, all his basic books, a lot of the lectures, and read a lot of the OEC's Management Series volumes including the PR and Marketing Series. Although I have no Doctor of Philosophy certificate from the Scientology organization that I have done so, LOL

    Hubbard read Le Bon's works on "The Crowd", I created a thread on ESMB regarding this called Dean Wilbur,

    in those days it was not called a cult. Le Bon's works are actually a blueprint on how to create a cult and yet he was trying to explain how cults or crowds are created from the time period when he wrote his observations.

    One of the things Le Bon pointed out was that a leader of a crowd uses repetition. The other's are Affirmation, Contagion, and Prestige. In scientology and even Dianetics we have all four that Hubbard used.

    The monthly magazine of "The Advanced Magazine" is just that, repetition every month from the Advanced Orgs of the so called OT levels. Also, each Org is supposed to produce their own monthly magazine, that would be from the "clear" level of attainment. And even if we go down further, we have Letters Out as more repetition.

    This is why you can't get off their mailing list! Repetition!

    It's clever rhetoric by Hubbard.

    Le Bon:
    "Affirmation, however, has no real influence unless it be constantly repeated,
    and so far as possible in the same terms. It was Napoleon, I believe, who said
    that there is only one figure in rhetoric of serious importance, namely,
    repetition. The thing affirmed comes by repetition to fix itself in the mind in
    such a way that it is accepted in the end as a demonstrated truth."

    https://socialsciences.mcma...
     
  10. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    I did a google question, namely what is the purpose of rhetoric?

    This is what I found:

    https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/625/06/

    It's from Purdue University. I think it's a great summary for those of us that have read or listened to a lot of Hubbard. That link actually provides a checklist you might say on how Hubbard persuaded us, some might say brainwashed us or hypnotized us. LOL Whatever.

    "
    "Authors’ purposes
    In the textbook Writing Today, Johnson-Sheehan and Paine discuss purpose more specifically in terms of the author of a text. They suggest that most texts written in college or in the workplace often fill one of two broader purposes: to be informative or to be persuasive. Under each of these two broad purposes, they identify a host of more specific purposes. The following table is not exhaustive; authors could easily have purposes that are not listed on this table.

    Authors’ purposes

    In the textbook Writing Today, Johnson-Sheehan and Paine discuss purpose more specifically in terms of the author of a text. They suggest that most texts written in college or in the workplace often fill one of two broader purposes: to be informative or to be persuasive. Under each of these two broad purposes, they identify a host of more specific purposes. The following table is not exhaustive; authors could easily have purposes that are not listed on this table.

    Table: Author Purposes

    Informative
    Persuasive

    to inform
    to persuade

    to describe
    to convince

    to define
    to influence

    to review
    to argue

    to notify
    to recommend

    to instruct
    to change

    to advise
    to advocate

    to announce
    to urge

    to explain
    to defend

    to demonstrate
    to justify

    to illustrate
    to support

    (Johnson-Sheehan & Paine 17)"

    Sorry the link doesn't show what I copied here correctly. You'll have to see it.

    Basically, the first line is supposed to be informative, and the second line is persuasive.

    Hubbard did both in his rhetoric, which is why it is so hard to figure out.
     
  11. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    notes on the lectures, LOL

    My Tony O post:

    Share ›









    Gib Once_Born • 14 minutes ago
    to understand Hubbard and scientologists, one has to understand they apply "mystic logic". So do other cults.
    Hubbard read Le Bon and used it in his writings and lectures and books. To get people involved as well as rhetoric. It's all coupled together and hard to figure out.
    Using simple logic won't do it, to figure out scientology. Which is bunk.
    it's the woof and warp of dianetics and scientology, several means of logic, scientology is interwoven with different means of logic.
    Hubbard's or scientologist form of logic is actually Hubbards data series. Hubbard formed his own logic all skewed to become a scientologist, or a group member or a crowd.
    https://socialsciences.mcma...

    https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/lebon/Revolution.pdf
     
  12. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    what is mystic logic?

    In Hubbards scientology it is going up the bridge to total freedom to achieve the state known as OT. or operating thetan, or cause over life matter energy space and time.

    That's mystic logic. That's what entraped some of us, going OT.

    Remember the promo from the COS stating several promotional efforts such as join the Go OT Club and make advanced payments towards your account to get auditing. There was also the "Go Clear" promo push.

    Now it's the go "Ideal Org" push.

    ROFLMAO
     
    Last edited: May 8, 2018
  13. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    I haven't gone down the path of explaining dianetics and scientology entrapment like other blogs or voices of opinion ie Crowley, Hypnosis, brainwashing, although somewhat. It's not that I disagree, I just have a different angle (and have others), a different viewpoint mostly based on logic which of course Aristole said would eventually win.

    I believe as Cowboy said, it was a marketing effort by Hubbard and my tag line should say "no clears, no OT's". LOL

    I like this article on rhetoric and PR (public relations). Hubbard most certainly did understand it and how to get a crowd or group believing in a product. What comes to mind is Hubbard's "blue diamonds" in his exchange for abundance Policy Letter and his "four conditions of exchange" which are actually true, but his Hubbard rhetoric got us to believe we could go clear, and then OT.

    It's a PR World Hubbard said, he told his Dean Wilbur in a letter, it's a rhetoric world.

    https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu...le.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1560&context=etd

    "The Practice of Public Relations

    To understand rhetoric used in public relations, one must first understand the practice of
    public relations. Communication theorist Robert L. Heath (2001) states “the practice of public
    relations is the management function that rhetorically adapts organizations to people’s interests
    and people’s interests to organizations by co-creating meaning and co-managing culture to
    achieve mutually beneficial relationships” (p. 36). The term “mutually beneficial” is important
    in the study of rhetoric in public relations. Both parties, the organization/company AND the
    targeted public, must gain from the relationship. For instance, when a consumer purchases a
    product or service from a company, the company’s need for revenue and the consumer’s need for
    the product or service are satisfied. When a citizen donates or volunteers with a nonprofit
    organization, both the nonprofit’s need for resources and the citizen’s need to contribute to a
    worthy cause are satisfied. This symbiotic relationship between the organization and target
    audience cannot be created, developed or nurtured without an appropriate public relations
    campaign."

    Now, most if not all public scientologists have not read the PR and Marketing Series, and even Sea Org Members have not read the PR and Marketing Series, so they cannot connect dots. Wog scholars can not even connect the dots.

    Hubbard's survey tech fits right in line with the above.

    As Cowboy said, first and foremost dianetics and scientology was a marketing effort. And this is true from the very beginning of dianetics with John Campell, it was a marketing and then slowly a PR effect. Read the Campbell/Heinlien letters.

    Ultimately, after many years, and efforts by Hubbard to make it go right, why he even said he failed and wasn't coming back as he told Sarge.

    Hubbard's marketing and PR tech is rhetoric. There never has been a clear, nor anybody cleared by Hubbard, nor by anybody else, there has never been a OT, not even Hubbard as a OT.

    It's just rhetoric, PR and Marketing.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Love Love x 1
    • List
  14. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    My post on Tony O

    "
    well, I'll call Hubbard on his bullshit, as no clears or OT's.

    I'll examine from a rhetorical point of view. And there is good rhetoric and there is bad rhetoric in the sense that good is to help, and bad is just to persuade w/o proof or logos.

    In the letter, why we have this from Hubbard to his friend:

    "I’ve got to start on my book now for this publisher and said book will probably require six weeks to write or thereabouts. The thing about such work is the lack of proper academic alphabetism. A psychiatrist, who can do practically nothing for anybody; he uses psycho-analysis; he works two to three years on a customer — you can’t say patient because nothing much is being done for him but you will admit that besides being a fool he is patient — at the rate of four visits per week of one hour each at a cost of $15 per visit and after an $8,000 expenditure ordinarily manages a few minor aberrations or maybe an allergy and discharges his customer for future reference. Well, I’ve been rolling this sort of thing back to twenty hours of work average for a total cure and complete shift of personality. Takes as high as fifty hours of work sometimes, but the thing works on about 80% of all patients, sane or otherwise. Now the question is, how do I go about doing something with it? I’ll have a book, AN INTRODUCTION TO TRAUMATIC PSYCHOLOGY, but I have no alphabet trailing L. Ron Hubbard around. I have no license to practice (really none required for psychology but it looks better); I am not connected with any institution and I have no capital to start a fancy clinic. Your advice would be extremely welcome, swami."

    Here Hubbard says it works on 80%. Of course we all know, that's not true some years later and including into present time.

    Now Hubbard says to his friend, that he "The thing about such work is the lack of proper academic alphabetism"

    which means he does not have a college degree or any other advanced learning degree such as Engineer, Doctor, PHD from a college.

    Hubbard's solution is to lie that he had a degree or titles. And of course Hubbard early on surrounded hisself with people with titles.

    In other words, Hubbard lied about his resume.

    Why, because he knew he didn't have titles after his name, why nobody would listen to him. And his solution was to invent titles so that people would listen to him. It's quite diabolical and hard to believe.

    https://www.artofmanliness....

    "Ethos: The Appeal to the Speaker’s or Writer’s Character or Reputation
    If you wish to persuade, you need to establish credibility and authority with your audience. A man may have the most logical and well-thought-out argument, but if his audience doesn’t think he’s trustworthy or even worth listening to, all his reasoning will be for naught."

    Why did Hubbard lie about his creditials, simply because he wanted people to listen to him.

    Same can be said of DM, what was it he said, power is when people listen to you.
     
  15. dchoiceisalwaysrs

    dchoiceisalwaysrs Gold Meritorious Patron

    "academic alphabetism" Yes, I fell for that big time. I thought that he might have something of value to say so I looked until I was hooked.
     
  16. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    I have a PHD in Scientology, called Doctor of Scientology. Hubbard even tried that angle to get people to listen to those that have studied or have been invoked in scientology.

    Dianetics and scientology are there own culture, It fell for some people, like me. Let's see what are my titles in scientology, well they are SS1, SS2, Executive Statues 1 & 2, purif comp, ARCX comp, GRADE 0 comp, Student Hat comp, PRO TR's comp, etc. And of course I listened to people who had done the Total Bridge to Freedom, ie OT8's.

    All these completions of training and auditing are but "academic alphabetism" in the scientology/Hubbard cult, or culture.

    It's the Bridge to Total Freedom, a complete road map to be a ronbot along with "academic alphabetism" in the scientology world of sublime to reinforce with such things as success stories.
     
    Last edited: May 20, 2018
  17. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    Mike Rinder post today is a perfect example of Hubbard's rhetoric,

    https://www.mikerindersblog.org/

    In that how the rhetoric of dianetics is supposed to produce a clear only after a few hundred hours, and then Hubbard later says, opps, just a few years later, that wasn't right. LOL And Hubbard logically, I guess explains it away as not to validate the reactive mind, which is the clear cog - you are mocking up a reactive mind. LOL And lo and behold we mocked-up by Hubbard a reactive mind, this is what writers do, that is to get you to mock-up scenes or concepts or ideas, and in Hubbards case to get us to believe we have a reactive mind.

    And now he says, opps, that's not right. LOL

    Here's what's funny, in reading the campell/heinlien letters, both campbell and heinlein came to the same conclusion, no clears. They were not fair gamed as Hubbard didn't put that into motion at the time of the early 1950's.

    I gotta give Ron credit for continuing the scam, or hoax, he did make it go right, he continued to mock it up, thru persuasion, but in the end he said he failed, he wasn't coming back.

    What's the Sea Org motto, we come back.

    ROFLMAO
     
  18. programmer_guy

    programmer_guy True Ex-Scientologist

    • Like Like x 2
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
    • List
  19. ThetanExterior

    ThetanExterior Gold Meritorious Patron

    "Thus, the engram hypothesis was not substantiated by this experiment."

    Well, what a surprise.:hysterical:

    I had 50 hours of dianetics "book 1" auditing and got nothing out of it. So they said: "What you need is the new improved version - Scientology metered auditing", which of course was much more expensive.
     
  20. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    same here, I did about 200 hours, it was cheap back then, well relative to what I was making at my job, it was no big deal. I never ran an engram, but I did cry during my very first session, I thought it was a emotional release, secondary, so I continued, and then I was introduced to the sublime Scientology and it's aims. Such introductions were reading A New Slant on Life, Problems of Works. Those got me hooked you might say, I thought they were great books that introduced me to things I never heard before. Gawd, I wish there was a internet back then.
     

Share This Page