LACK OF MASS : PURE FRAUD

[mockingbird]

Okay , I have been away awhile to handle some things and do research , BUT I broke that off to write this as a brief addition to Insidious Enslavement : Study Technology and the Black Heart of Dianetics and Scientology ; the Black Heart of L Ron Hubbard.

I , while reviewing some excellent material on hypnosis and different hypnotic states at Lermanet.com realized what the purpose of the demo kit is .

The student ( if study tech does it's intended job ) , in Scientology , enters a deepening trance while on course , due to reasons explained in my earlier threads .

A person in hypnosis , INCLUDING self-hypnosis , can be in a light , medium or deep trance .

In most models and theories I've seen on hypnosis, in deep trance critical and independent thinking is shut down , or off.

The student in using study tech very often enters a deepening trance the more they use study tech , and this is helped by the hypnotic language and writing patterns LRH liberally used in Scientology and Dianetics doctrine .

As the trance deepens very often it produces pronounced hypnotic symptoms and phenomena , such as muscle relaxation , difficulty keeping eyes open or seeing , eyes that hurt , feeling sleepy , falling asleep etc. ( if you don't believe me LOOK at hypnosis symptoms , online and compare them to Barriers to study phenomena)

Some of these symptoms and "weird feelings " are actually the result of altered states of consciousness , and these states CHANGING while hypnotized .

To keep the self-hypnotized student from falling completely asleep LRH designed a countermeasure : the use of demonstration .

Doing demos helps focus a student's attention on something in front of them , misdirects part of their mind from EXAMINING the content of doctrine , helps keep them "awake " AND "EXPLAINS'" the hypnotic symptoms.

In other words it helps condition a student to - while hypnotizing themself with M3 word clearing , AND the hypnotic writings and tapes of LRH -
to enter a deep trance , BUT not close their eyes , NOT fall asleep , and not become completely physically inactive !

It causes the student who is already hypnotized by other elements of Study Tech to , while in deep trance - and blindly intaking LRH doctrine , rather than reading -
enter a kind of somnambulant (like sleepwalking ) super-hypnosis , where you have the VERY HIGH suggestibility of deep trance married to a pattern of just enough motion and activity to (often )keep a student moving , and not fall completely asleep !!

I'll now include a relevant LRH quote Jon Atack was kind enough to find after I e-mailed him , it is from a story he did on the underground bunker.

. Perhaps it is time to listen to the Great OT himself: “Any time anybody gets enough altitude he can be called a hypnotic operator, and what he says will act as hypnotic suggestion. Hypnotism is a difference in levels of altitude…if the operator can heighten his own altitude with regard to the subject…he doesn’t have to put the subject to sleep. What he says will still react as a hypnotic suggestion….With parity, such as occurs between acquaintances, friends, fellow students and so on, there is no hypnotic suggestion” (Education and Dianetics, 11 November 1950, Research and Discovery, volume 4).


I'll also include my earlier posts , as without them this will make little sense.

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...AND-SCIENTOLOGY-THE-BLACK-HEART-OF-L-RON-HUBB

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?36369-INSIDIOUS-ENSLAVEMENT-STUDY-TECHNOLOGY


Please share this info with anyone you feel it may help, and as usual I advise NEVER thinking in or using ANY cult terms , concepts or methods.

When reading it is okay to USE a dictionary to look up words , IF you know you need to BUT I would never use any LRH tech .

Additionally , the Course Supervisor (unknowingly) has the job of protecting and enforcing the hypnotic environment AND reinforcing the hypnosis with his own commands- intended to activate the pattern of conditioned self-hypnosis in the student !!

 

[Intentionally Blank]

Welcome back!

 

[Kemist]

IMO demos, like other things in "study tech" are based on common sense approaches in pedagogy but pervert them beyond recognition so that the "student" becomes more or less incapable of complex abstract thought while stuck in this system.

Like "word clearing" (I haven't cracked open a dictionary in over 10 years and it boggles my mind why anyone would need to do that in the age of search engines) and "gradients" (which are an insult to intelligence), demos infantilizes the student by denying his/her capacity for abstraction, synthesis and reasoning.

In the wog world,demonstrations are often used to teach complex concepts, but they take a form that is appropriate to context.

For instance, when teaching organic chemistry we use physical molecular models that students can manipulate to understand things like enantiomers and their nomenclature. It acts as an aid to spatial perception, an ability which is not very well developped in a general school curriculum. After a while you are weaned of the need for molecular models (teachers generally forbid their use in exams, but if you watch first year exams, students use four pencils in their left hand as a stand in for models ).

For things like algorithms, a physical object adds nothing to understanding, as they are dynamic things. Sometimes, you'll see java applets used as demonstrations. But nothing beats having to code the algorithm yourself to have a deep understanding of it, and that is what most teachers of computer science ask of their students.

So "demos" seem to make sense on a superficial level, but since they do not adapt to context like in proper teaching practice, what they do is hinder abstract thinking. Imagine having to make a little clay model of a Wronskian matrix, or of the Fourier transform . I would not even know where to begin.