Same with me. Hubbard ripped off so many others without crediting their work I really have no idea as to what of his ideas were original.I no longer know what was original and what was not (and no longer care) <snip>
When looking at any individual from a historical perspective I think it's important to look at the positive things as well as the negative. Otherwise the picture one paints will be distorted due to ones bias. If one looks only for the negative aspects then that's all you'll find. But to truly understand someone you've got to look at both.I look at the thread, "Cult indoctrinated Taryn Rinder Teutsch to attack Mike Rinder full time", and I wonder why it is important to find some original good thing that hubbard came up with when he left behind a body of teachings that can turn a man's daughter into what they turned Taryn and so many others into.
People learn lessons from living their lives. Why should hubbard get any credit for anyone's lessons but his own?
this picture reminds me of Hubbards KSW rhetorical policy letter we all had to read and word clear and clay demo, many times. Somebody shoot me for doing that, LOL Talk about brainwashing! Number of times over equals certainty = brainwashing, laughing, yep
Aren't Service Facs just a manifestaion of "Confirmation Bias"? (Nothing original.)
(BTW, did the Xenu story start by Nibs doing auditing while under the influence of LSD?
Please correct me if I am wrong about believing this claim.)
Well... you know that there are no wrong indications when it comes from Source. Just everyone else is out-ethics, has misunderstoods, needs more clay.It is, in actuality, unknown as to what of "the tech" Hubbard himself actually, originally came up with.
Factual evidence and events demonstrates that he plagiarized mercilessly . . . .
But, there is one bright idea published by him that could have been his own observation . . . and that was the "Tech Breakthrough of 1973" . . . the subject relating to the phenomena that "wrong indications (and wrong whats, whys, etc.) cause psychosis."
The bad news being that, while it was gazetted as the breakthrough of breakthroughs . . . the tech point was then ruthlessly neglected and not at all used to help folks but instead actually run on folks destructively . . .
Just have a look at the cult's constant MO of the practice of heaping invalidation and evaluation with wrong indications and false statements as to what is onto folks. And, once they have turned individuals into being an "enemy" (even if only in their eyes in the beginning, which is also in the nature of a wrong indication at the time) then, all the lies they heap on the person is just more of the destructive application of what should be a helpful tech point.
It is, in actuality, unknown as to what of "the tech" Hubbard himself actually, originally came up with.
Factual evidence and events demonstrates that he plagiarized mercilessly . . . .
But, there is one bright idea published by him that could have been his own observation . . . and that was the "Tech Breakthrough of 1973" . . . the subject relating to the phenomena that "wrong indications (and wrong whats, whys, etc.) cause psychosis."
The bad news being that, while it was gazetted as the breakthrough of breakthroughs . . . the tech point was then ruthlessly neglected and not at all used to help folks but instead actually run on folks destructively . . .
Just have a look at the cult's constant MO of the practice of heaping invalidation and evaluation with wrong indications and false statements as to what is onto folks. And, once they have turned individuals into being an "enemy" (even if only in their eyes in the beginning, which is also in the nature of a wrong indication at the time) then, all the lies they heap on the person is just more of the destructive application of what should be a helpful tech point.
And then some of us aren't "normal" but have "a taste for the infinite" in DeRopp's words and pursue esoteric and transcendent realities through such things as gnostic mystic christianity and or a Church of American Science study of the work of L. Ron Hubbard and his colleagues etcetera...What utter nonsense! A normal (non cultic) reasonably well balanced and sane person doesn't become psychotic due to "wrong indications and evaluation" Roger. Normal people are mentally stronger than that and usually have had to learn how to cope without having a "therapist/auditor" on hand to babysit them through life ... true character is formed that way and always has been.
People in the real world don't live in an imaginary protective bubble surrounded by others who also believe in hubbards theories, as scientologists do.
I agree with you that scientologists (including your lot) are very susceptible to introversion and various mental problems perhaps including psychosis ... possibly because they are always on the lookout for them (both in themselves and others) either when in session ... or when going about their lives in general.
Life as a scientologist is one big "issue".
Hubbard was just running a business and that business was based on "fixing the mental and spiritual issues of others in exchange for large amounts of money" ... whether they had those issues or not (and whether he plagiarised the tek or not).
Lol.
Most normal people seem to accept that life isn't perfect and they get on with it, working things out as they go. They are not trying to "clear themselves" of anything or eradicate hubbards spiritual entities or invisible friends ... that could certainly send someone into psychosis and has done in the past (fact).
Wow, that's amazing! Would you please describe the cloths I am wearing (at the time you read this) as well as my surroundings?L. Ron Hubbard personally came up with Auditing a distinct and unique form of counseling which can be used to undo EII (emotionally induced illness) psychosomatic illness, improve response time and otherwise improve and enhance awareness, and no other spiritual teacher has ever devised a system which has made exteriorization so readily accessible tp so many.