How Hubbard created a 100% workable technology

[lionheart]

Hmm.. Why talk figures at all? - The principle is quite visible without the math. Those who make no case gains from scientology processing are.. well.. No Case Gain cases! - As I recall, Hubbard said that is the one sure sign of an SP... So dispose of that asshole.

So waht about people who become disaffected for some other weird reason.. Why they too are SP's! - Throw those jerks overboard.

And people who can't pay for anymore services, since the registrars have literally bankrupted them.. You don't go 'reasonable' with this you know! - These people have counter intentions. They fail to make things go right.. Ample indicators that they are SP's! - Dispose of them with no sorrow. They don't support the GI anyway, so why waste yer' time?

Since all these people are fuck'n SP's, make sure they keep their mouths shut. Intimidate 'em and shudder 'em into silence. Use reverse processing too.. But make the basterds pay for it!

Keep this up for a while until there's only 3 hookers and a pickpocket left in the org, who for some strange reason thinks that Scientology is better than sex and sliced bread.

Oh.. Lest's not forget.. These are the Homo Novis. The Able. The Übermenshen who deserves to live and have rights.

Ask them, and they will guarantee you that the tech works every time!

On the walls are a pictures of Mussolini.. no.. Hubbard. It was just the pose and circumstances that made me think it was Mussolini.. Hmm..

Weelll.. I'll be.. hornswoggeled!

You've got it! The numbers are only relevant in explaining the mechanics of the betting scam.

Disconnection is the vital ingredient to the Scientology con.

Like the woman whose view was limited to only her experience of the tipping system, Scientologists have to have their view limited, as much as possible, to just their experience of it. So long as they continue to get gains they can be conned some more. Those that don't get gains, ditch them quick! Separate them from the ones still getting wins.

Paul said elsewhere that disconnection was the vital ingredient, which if it was abolished, the whole house of cards would come tumbling down.

But disconnection won't get abolished by the CofS because it is the vital element that keeps the whole scam going.

Disconnection may also be an indicator of Hubbard's madness, his paranoia, etc. That may be true, but the point is whether or not it is fuelled by madness it is highly utilitarian in that the winners must be disconnected from the losers otherwise the con is exposed.

Hubbard used suggestion and repetition and other tricks to increase the percentage of "winners", but that is secondary. The Scientology scam would still work with a lower success rate so long as you ditched and separated off the losers. Just like the betting scam would work with a 1 in 6 success rate or a 1 in 16 success rate, so long as the winners are kept uninformed of the losers.

Leon, your example of recovered failures is just another numbers game that Hubbard used to increase the successs rate. A percentage of such people will respond and turn from losers to winners.

But it is nothing to do with dice or lucky chance. It is purely a psychological numbers game.

Hubbard knew that a percentage of people will respond to suggestion and will experience something that is close enough to what he told them they would experience, that they will then identify this experience as proof that the "tech" works.

Add some clever people who help Hubbard synthesise spirituality and psychology into some sort of procedure and you have a "workable tech" so long as you ditch the ones it doesn't work on.

And above all don't let the winers talk to the losers! They may just find out that there are hundreds or thousands of losers for every winner and may actually realise that eventually they too will become losers themselves.

 

[shader]

lionheart, you rock.

That's weak, Lionheart. Really weak.

Seconded. Seems to me to have been written by quite a sad, bitter person.

Always attack, never defend

For starters, it means that many of us are on a 30 to 40 year winning streak. That's quite something!

[snip]

All due to lucky chance!

Reread the bit about the 10 heads in a row.

Alternatively,there is a really good bit at the start of "A Random Walk Down Wall Street" about the "champion coin tosser" that explains it very well. A very good book to read, and very relevant to this topic.

But to add my 0.02, I think the mechanism described above explains the early stages of becoming a scientologist. Once you've swallowed the world view, however, the tech really _can't_ fail, only your application of it. You have a ready-made, circular, explanation for it all.

 

[Leon]

And above all don't let the winers talk to the losers! They may just find out that there are hundreds or thousands of losers for every winner and may actually realise that eventually they too will become losers themselves.

On the other hand the losers could easily all become winners. All they need do is get the real stuff - not the fraudulent crap that was dished up to them by the CofS.

 

[Hanover Fist]

Excellent post Lionheart. You have managed to articulate this aspect of Ron's Con very well. This also emphasises the fact that the 'tech' (Hubbard's own brand of psychiatry/psychology) is as twisted, psychotic, and corpulent as Hubbard himself.





Hanover Fist

 

[Leon]

But by your own earlier statement you have never studied it - you didn't even know what a clay demo was. Yet with all your claims to being all scientific and logical you yet feel free to condemn it in this way.

I'm sure you have quite another agenda than intelligent discussion. That is just the smokescreen.

 

[lionheart]

On the other hand the losers could easily all become winners. All they need do is get the real stuff - not the fraudulent crap that was dished up to them by the CofS.

You are not seeing the wider view. You are like the woman who got tipped all the winners, She knew it was the real stuff because it worked in her experience.

Hubbard knew some would never take the wider view, in fact he relied on that fact.

Read Derren Brown's book that I recommended. Read what he says about hypnotism and how it isn't what people think it is. Read about how he controls people's psychology and experience. Watch the videos of him on YouTube and how easy it is to influence people's reality.

See for yourself how these ideas apply to Hubbard and how they don't. Take the wider view than the one Hubbard presented to you.

Or don't. If you wish, carry on being like the woman who knew the system was a winning system. She was very happy to have her faith in the system. She was much more unhappy when Derren explained the con.

In fact she found it harder to believe he had conned her than it was to believe in the system. Similarly my friend who I watched the progam with found it harder to believe my explanation of the con than it was to believe that Derren Brown had a winning racing system.

These are powerful matters and "magicians" like Derren Brown and Hubbard understand how powerful they are.

 

[Leon]

Believe me mate, I DO see the wider view.

Like Butch Cassidy said "I got such vision - the rest of you are wearing bifocals."

 

[Bea Kiddo]

Anyone else wanna try calling my mom? She is doing some sort of recovery project so would expect phone calls from names she never heard of. PM me.

 

[lionheart]

But by your own earlier statement you have never studied it - you didn't even know what a clay demo was. Yet with all your claims to being all scientific and logical you yet feel free to condemn it in this way.

I'm sure you have quite another agenda than intelligent discussion. That is just the smokescreen.

Amount of experience is not proportional to the accuracy of judgement, for exactly the reason I have given in this thread. Accuracy of judgement depends on the width of view not on personal experience.

The wider the picture you see, the more accurate the picture is. The closer and "me" oriented the picture, the less accurate the picture being viewed.

Simple way of proving this: Go and speak to a hundred people who kicked Ron's "tech" into touch. I have done this. Talk to some who fell out with him in 65, 68, 74, 82, every major disaffection trauma in Scn's history, like I have done. Broaden your view. I did, I broadened it from my experience of the tech personally as a PC, auditor & C/S. I shifted from the view of the one winning lady to the other 7,775 losers.

Speak to those for whom the tech didn't work or stopped working and see what that does to your "reality" of the tech.

Or don't!

 

[lionheart]

Believe me mate, I DO see the wider view.

Like Butch Cassidy said "I got such vision - the rest of you are wearing bifocals."

 

[Free to shine]

Excellent points LH!

While I was reading this thread I remembered something that happened when I was a child. Long before Scn became their life, my parents wanted to handle a situation with my young brother and decided to take him to a psychologist who used hypnotism. As the elder sister I went along to keep him company. I can't remember our ages, probably around 7 or 8.

We were left in a room with a large bed, at the end of which was a spinning wheel. Soft music played and we were supposed to concentrate on watching the wheel spin. This was to relax us apparently. My brother got a bit sleepy but damn it I could just not! I tried but it became so boring that I ended up playing a game instead, just waiting until I could get out of there.

Then we all had to sit in a circle with about 10 other people and I remember him explaining that our thoughts could influence our feelings.

To test this out we had to take a needle and prick it into the back of our hands, one by one. So people did this and were nodding that yes, they made their hand numb and couldn't feel a thing. When it was my turn I just could get that needle not to sting!

I SO wanted to be a grown up and do the same as everyone else, so I pretended and happiness reigned in the room. 100% success rate.

Now I know why auditing didn't work for me.

 

[Free to shine]

The wider the picture you see, the more accurate the picture is. The closer and "me" oriented the picture, the less accurate the picture being viewed.

Yes, yes YES!

 

[nw2394]

Sheesh I must be very close to the truth to get such a response!

What "seems" to you is what your restricted view is showing you. Try viewing the wider picture rather than your own reality. Are you like the woman who was only shown the "winning system" or are you the person seeing 7,776 bets?

Look LH, there is plenty of evidence to say that Hubbard nicked various bits of tech without giving proper credit to the originator. There is adequate evidence that he was hardly guilty of underselling. And there seems to be quite a few folk who have problems for one reason or another with some of the no interference zone stuff. Fair enough.

However, for someone such as yourself who has, on this board, posted that you had gains from Scn and, further that you also continue to this day to use some things of what you have learnt from whatever source in a processing like manner, to then turn round and basically try to shit on Hubbard is, as far as I am concerned, evidence that you are simply an ungrateful sod who hasn't got what happened straight in your own mind yet. So, yeah, I am calling you bitter. I see no reason to retract the comment.

Nick

 

[Leon]

I think Hanover and LH would be more at home on Clambake than here.

 

[shader]

I think Hanover and LH would be more at home on Clambake than here.

Emma has stated that this board is not just for people sympathetic to the tech.

I think threads like this may be helpful for some people - you disagree.

If your ideas have merit, you can refute Lionheart's argument. Go for it.

 

[Alanzo]

But by your own earlier statement you have never studied it - you didn't even know what a clay demo was. Yet with all your claims to being all scientific and logical you yet feel free to condemn it in this way.

I'm sure you have quite another agenda than intelligent discussion. That is just the smokescreen.

But Lionheart has studied it, and so have I.

And I say that Hanover Fist's assessment agrees with mine.

You don't have to be a Class 8 to tell shit from Shinola.

In fact, once you become a Class 8, you often lose that ability!

 

[Free to shine]

I think Hanover and LH would be more at home on Clambake than here.

Why exactly?

 

[Lovesnightsky]

There is one HUGE mistake with your theory LH.
If we apply your example to the CofS; there is NO WAY that the CofS will let the 1000+ people who did not get the results they want to go on their way. They will Reg them for other courses, processes and repairs UNTIL AND ONLY UNTIL they have ran out of money and credit and if possible, when they have no more possessions to sell, the church will recruit them as staff so they get the services for "free", thus keeping them as slaves.

 

[Alan]

How Hubbard did it

Warning if you are a Scientologist or ex-scientologist, reading this may make you feel conned and cheated, You may become angry or sad. Don't read this if you wish to retain your faith in Hubbard's "technology".

Warning if you are a Game-Player or ex-Game-Player, reading this may make you feel conned and cheated, You may become angry or sad. Don't read this if you wish to retain your faith in the Games Leaders and "technology".

This expose of how Game-Players and their Leaders did it was prompted by a discussion about the validity of the level of Games experience and some people's assertions that they knew from their own experience that some Games worked, or parts of it did, and that was sufficient proof to them of its validity.

The 1100 soccer playing people were divided into 100 soccer teams of 11 people and each team were given a different opponent in a best of a 100 team race.

You get the idea?

In the first round 555 people experienced a 100% successful system.

In the next round 261 people experienced a 100% success.

In the next round 116 people were convinced that their soccer playing team had a 100% successful soccer playing system.

This continues until 11 people in the ultimate winning team experience a 100% successful soccer playing system.

All subjects come under the rule of survival of the most effective and competent - unless you live in the UK

To succeed at any game you use the above: (BTW scamming is a game!)

In poker you discard the bad hands and invest on the good.

To win in the stock market you discard your bad stocks and invest in the good.

Building a winning sports team you discard the losers and keep the winners.

This is how different levels of competency or divisions in sporting events are decided.

I believe even science uses this method!

Alan

 

[PirateAndBum]

LH, this is very interesting. I think there is something more to be considered. Probability in a series of five 6 horse races is a given. There is going to be a winner in each. Thus there is a probability that Scn works a certain % of the time, witness the number of remaining winners in the CofS. You are talking about a far longer series of winning streaks for many of these individuals. Every process run could be considered a "race". This makes for quite a series!

The question is, why are there any winners? Is it because those "winners" are ultra suggestable beings, "the upper 10th of the upper tenth of suggestable beings on the planet"? Or is it in fact actually producing some real benefit? Is this the 22% that Hubbard so often talked about. Do anything for 22% of the population and you'll get some remediation of their situation. In the early days he spoke often of the percentages of cases on which a process "worked" - the workability quotient if you will.

It seems you would like to attribute hypnosis as the underlying factor to whatever success people have in Scn processing. An interesting theory. I don't see that it has been proven - at least not to me - yet.

Your survey of ex-scios I'm afraid was not likely to have been broad enough to be meaningful - so as others do regarding the "wins" people express in Scn - relegating them to being anecdotal, I think the losses you found must also be so relegated even if they are a much larger percentage. THis brings to mind the numbers the church quotes: 8 million vs what I estimate to be actual at somewhere between 100-200 thousand.

This does bring a couple questions to mind. I know you use The Sedona Method, I found it to be interesting as well. I have to say that what struck me immediately when I listened to Hale Dwoskin was how hypnotic his voice was I'm not saying the method involves any hypnosis, but could'nt your same explanation be applied to it or any mental/spiritual practice in existence? That it is merely a matter of probability, some % will get something from doing anything and those will then carry on with it in the false belief it actually did something for them.

If this is the case then is man an immortal spirit or just a collection of chemical reactions? If the former then what are the capabilites of this spirit and is it possible to do anything for it? Per Hubbard these were the questions he was asking (amoung others like finding out how to make all men grovel at his feet and not know why). He seemed to find some, what seemed to me, plausible answers.

I think it is possible to test certain aspects of the tech. For example rudiments. Get 1000 people, upset each of them badly. Handle 500 of them with a rudiments session and leave the other half alone. Or if you wish add another 500 and have someone nice talk to them about the upset and compare the results from all 3 groups. It would have to be a fairly nasty upset I think but hey it's all in the name of science.

I was 1st introduced to this "100%" guru tech fraud in regards to stock-pickers, this has actually been done by some to get clients to invest large sums of money with said guru or to subscribe to his stock-picking service. Of course the scam becomes pretty clear at some point - the point were the scamee has endured enough losses/bad predictions to lose faith - (I'm sure the time required varied wildly individual to individual). While they may leave - they may never understand what has really been done to them. Your exact reason for this thread

Thank you for this most thought-provoking thread. I am learning a lot from many people here.