Scientology 101.....

[Vajradhara]

Namaste GP,

thank you for the post.

There are plenty of reasons to choose not to do scientology.

other than it being a fascist organization bent upon world domination with a stated policy of denying basic human rights to those below 2.0 on the Tone Scale, what reasons could you think of to not choose $cientology?

On the other hand, most of the reasons commonly posted to forums are garbage IMHO. Its amazing to me how often I end up against my wishes defending scientology because of the crap that gets posted.

you certainly *do* choose to defend $cientology and it has nothing to do with what others post. you choose to defend $cientology for personal reasons much as i choose to critique. we can, of course, always say that our postings are simply responses to "crap" that is being posted but we both know that such a statement belies what is happening.

By definitions I think it would be a bad idea for this site to try and title it a cult.

this site has done nothing of the kind. i personally, along with several other European governments, consider it a cult.

it is neither proper nor fair to hold the site responsible for any individuals comments.

The famous quote (or bar bet) is really from George Orwell decades earlier.

no, it is not.

Of course Hubbard is well known for "researching" (borrowing) from other sources so I wouldnt discount the possiblity he might have used it in conversation but I wouldnt give him credit for it.

it was in a conversation amongst a group of science fiction writers that regularly met in New York City though i do agree that the attribution of this quote is oft taken out of context.

Same with Scientology. Most of it can easily be found in almost the exact same wording in various works on psychology, self-help programs, and other religions.

no, it cannot. more to the point, $cientology actively persecutes psychology and psychiatry. have you seen the Museum of Death tour they are running showing how the Holocaust was really caused and brought about by psychologists?

why do you think that Craig Jensen refused to honor his business contract with Merk when they acquired SKB? it was only due to the fact that Merk now made anti-psychotic medicine.

They also tend to like the words "made up by a scifi writer" which is deceptive. Hubbard was in the Guiness book of World Records for both most prolific writer, and most translated writer. He wrote in most genres.. scifi, western, romance, etc and many documentaries (researched). Im not sure if the two titles still hold but I think they do.

your argument is that if someone writes alot then what they write has to be correct? you're going with that are you?

In the 1950s you couldnt do self-help or alternative medicine new wave.

yes you could, at least in the United States. perhaps in some totalitarian governments you could not engage in such activities but you had no such restrictions in the United States.

He tried it as a self-help program, then some of his claims got it pushed into it being called medicine which got him in trouble, then finally ended up as life-style-choice religion. Nowadays its presented quite differently when the same thing is tried by other people.

he presented it as such and even had some MD's help. they all left the organization once they realized what he was on about. he had to withdraw from claiming medical cures or any scientifically verifiable efficacy of his teachings when he brought his first star pupil for public demonstration of the benefits of being Clear. she failed every single test which Hubbard had assured the audience she would be able to complete. no perfect recall and so forth. it was his own hubris which brought this upon him.

The courses are actually excellent.

we've already established that you don't know this to be the case since you only took a very few courses and then left the organization. you have, literally, no idea if the courses in OTI, OTII, OTIII, SOLO NOTS and the rest are "excellent" or not. i would venture to say that you probably have no idea what those courses are dealing with. i could be, of course, absolutely wrong in this assessment.

perhaps you could give an example of some excellent material from the OTIII course?

The costs are reasonable.

reasonable? perhaps such fees are reasonable to you but that does not make the cost of nearly $550,000 to reach OTIII reasonable to others. of course the price of courses can be significantly reduced if one volunteers for things such as the Sea Org and the like. i've seen some totals that were in the mid 300's.

The horror stories are few when compared to others. Most people actually only take a couple of courses without changing their religious status and then quit.

they aren't $cientologists, then. it's like being a Christian for a few months and then quitting. you aren't a Christian when you quit and, quite likely, were not a Christian when you were studying for the few months.

Hmmm does that cover enough? When bringing up items be prepared for comparatives with your own religion (or other well known ones). Except of course for atheists which tend to do best in such discussions.

have you heard of the fallacy called tu quoque?
Logical Fallacy: Tu Quoque

it's one that i often see used when it really has no place in the discussion.

metta,

~v

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Alex P,

thank you for the post.

But they are a cult..... I find it funny how people get this idea that cult is a word for people that are either liars or killers or whatever....

i think this is a linguistic remanent from the Abrahamic traditions for, generally, the term is used in a negative manner in such arenas. i would, however, tend to agree that it's much ado about nothing.

I could go on, any religion is a cult, because a cult is a religious group which practices the same belifes and one another and so on.... Some reason though it has become a popular word to define "evil brainewashers" lol....

i blame text messaging.

i actually think it's just a matter of being imprecise with the language by and large the term "cult" has an implied "destructive" inherent in its vernacular usage which leads one to the ideas on this term that you've previously mentioned.

to some degree this problem can be obviated by a rigorous upholding of the adjective though i can make for a bit of a tedious conversation.. that said, i have a feeling that many people use the term "cult" in a negative way as a means to bolster their own self image. it is not unlike how the term "religion" has taken on a negative connotation.

I think if what a religion.. Sorry Cult.... is practicing is for the better of mankind, self and the world...

therein lies the rub, doesn't it? to know if such a noble aim is the ultimate goal of the teachings it is necessary to see the teachings so that a reasonable being could make a reasonable decision. you can, for instance, read the whole Bible, the whole Torah, the entire Baghavad Gita without cost and see what the ultimate aims of these religions are. you cannot do so with $cientology.

What does it matter... Where the ideas and set values came from?

in most conversations regarding morality and ethics the source of ones morality or ethical views is often considered quite important. why should such not be the case in this discussion? to a certain extent all modern religions are in for a rough ride in that a great many details of the lives of the founders of these traditions was contemporaneously recorded and commented upon. in the case of $cientology we have one founded in the 20th century and there is simply no lack of data regarding LRH, what his life actually was and what he claimed for himself.

Also if you are staff courses are free...

they are free provided you remain on staff, if you leave you get a bill for the full course load.

I have found just through looking there is alot that is either made up or way out of porpotion with what peopel say about scientology and the more I discuss it the stronger I bond to it... lol

are you certain that you are bonding with $cientology? how can you know?

insofar as you personal beliefs are concerned, if you want to believe in the $cientology mythos i have no particular issue. it is the corrupt RTC and the Co$ which must be opposed. many beings, of course, are unable to draw a distinction between their beliefs and the organization to which they adhere and such a view is encouraged within $cientology which makes having rational discussions with some quite difficult. which is, itself, not surprising when the organization considers reasonableness to be a liability.

metta,

~v

 

[gp1628]

other than it being a fascist organization bent upon world domination with a stated policy of denying basic human rights to those below 2.0 on the Tone Scale, what reasons could you think of to not choose $cientology?

heehee. Obviously thats not meant as a real question.

you certainly *do* choose to defend $cientology and it has nothing to do with what others post. you choose to defend $cientology for personal reasons much as i choose to critique. we can, of course, always say that our postings are simply responses to "crap" that is being posted but we both know that such a statement belies what is happening.

I only tend to make statements based on my own experiences. I did say that most of the posts were crap IMHO (that means In My Humble Opinion).

this site has done nothing of the kind. i personally, along with several other European governments, consider it a cult.

What would those be? I only know of France. Germany considers it a business. And China only limits its ability to do conversions. Of course those are also the nations listed on the international sites for tracking religious intolerance for many such acts.

it is neither proper nor fair to hold the site responsible for any individuals comments.

Fine by me. But as an old NetCop I know that its still true. A site does get judged by such things. And they tend to create policies to handle such. Comparative-Religion.com has their Code of Conduct linked at the top of every page of the forums.

no, it is not.

it was in a conversation amongst a group of science fiction writers that regularly met in New York City though i do agree that the attribution of this quote is oft taken out of context.

Doing a neutral search for it tends to find it as a George Orwell quote in some letters he wrote. A fairly famous one. The only sites I find it attributed to Hubbard are anti-scientology sites. And even those tend to conflict as to whether it was in a bar, or at a convention, when that was, who was there, and who overheard it.

no, it cannot.

Sure it can. The Hierarchy of Needs. The Tone Scale. The ARC triangle. Even the concept of engrams.

more to the point, $cientology actively persecutes psychology and psychiatry.

Actually I believe they are ok with psychology. And even psychiatry as far as the standard lay on a couch, talk about your past, discover things that push your buttons, talk them out until they no longer affect you subconciously. After all, thats basically auditing. What they have condemned is psychiatry in areas of modifying behavior without seeking a cure. Lobotomy, electro-shock therapy, hypnosis, uppers, downers, hallucinagens, etc.

why do you think that Craig Jensen refused to honor his business contract with Merk when they acquired SKB? it was only due to the fact that Merk now made anti-psychotic medicine.

Technically that would be anti-psychotic drugs. But probably true.

your argument is that if someone writes alot then what they write has to be correct? you're going with that are you?

Not at all. But surely you admit that saying Scientology was "made up" by a "little known scifi writer" would be wording things abit slanted?

yes you could, at least in the United States. perhaps in some totalitarian governments you could not engage in such activities but you had no such restrictions in the United States.

No not really. Thats why you dont tend to find such things that old from the US. If you wanted to make claims of bettering peoples mental states, or their health, in the 1950s you pretty much had to be medical or religious. Of course NOW they pop up every day. In fact a number of scientology variants have been able to kick up totally seperate from the church idea.

he presented it as such and even had some MD's help. they all left the organization once they realized what he was on about.

They all left?

he had to withdraw from claiming medical cures

OK. Thats kindof what I said.

we've already established that you don't know this to be the case since you only took a very few courses and then left the organization. you have, literally, no idea if the courses in OTI, OTII, OTIII, SOLO NOTS and the rest are "excellent" or not. i would venture to say that you probably have no idea what those courses are dealing with. i could be, of course, absolutely wrong in this assessment.

Wow. Few people bother going that high. Thats basically priest level. Care to compare the pros and cons?

reasonable? perhaps such fees are reasonable to you but that does not make the cost of nearly $550,000 to reach OTIII reasonable to others. of course the price of courses can be significantly reduced if one volunteers for things such as the Sea Org and the like. i've seen some totals that were in the mid 300's.

Wow. Even xenu.net doesnt quote numbers that high. They usually quote 352,000.

they aren't $cientologists, then. it's like being a Christian for a few months and then quitting. you aren't a Christian when you quit and, quite likely, were not a Christian when you were studying for the few months.

OK. Fine with me. Id consider it more like a someone who took something like family counseling from a priest without choosing to change their faith. But sure, same thing.

Its just that I tend to see things tossed around both ways. Some consider anyone taking a scientology course to be a scientologist, and others consider it to be people who change their census statement to say scientologist, and yet others would limit it only to those who have achieved the churches equivalence of inner-sanctum learning.

have you heard of the fallacy called tu quoque?
Logical Fallacy: Tu Quoque
it's one that i often see used when it really has no place in the discussion.

Well I will seek to avoid that. I dont think I ever use it as "two wrongs make a right". Only in fair comparison of one religions actions against others. Not that any of them are right when such things are pointed out, but to forestall lynch-mob shouts with abit of awareness on how far such an action would reach in a country which tends to treat all religions equally.

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste gp,

thank you for the post.

I only tend to make statements based on my own experiences. I did say that most of the posts were crap IMHO (that means In My Humble Opinion).

that is, of course, the basis of all our statements insofar as they comport to reality. my point is that your defense is irrespective of the quality of the posts or lack thereof as is my critique.

What would those be? I only know of France. Germany considers it a business. And China only limits its ability to do conversions. Of course those are also the nations listed on the international sites for tracking religious intolerance for many such acts.

Greece, Italy, Netherlands and there is legislation in Sweden on this issue currently. Ireland just permitted the Co$ to be labeled a cult in last months protests whereas they had previously prevented such slogans from being expressed.

Doing a neutral search for it tends to find it as a George Orwell quote in some letters he wrote. A fairly famous one. The only sites I find it attributed to Hubbard are anti-scientology sites. And even those tend to conflict as to whether it was in a bar, or at a convention, when that was, who was there, and who overheard it.

i can link the audio transcript of the conversation wherein one of the authors present at the club meeting recounts the entire episode.

Sure it can. The Hierarchy of Needs. The Tone Scale. The ARC triangle. Even the concept of engrams.

in which psychology books can i find the ideas of a tone scale or an ARC triangle? engram is a copyrighted term which first appears in the $cientology dictionary and therefore cannot have been first learnt about in another medium.

Actually I believe they are ok with psychology. And even psychiatry as far as the standard lay on a couch, talk about your past, discover things that push your buttons, talk them out until they no longer affect you subconciously. After all, thats basically auditing. What they have condemned is psychiatry in areas of modifying behavior without seeking a cure. Lobotomy, electro-shock therapy, hypnosis, uppers, downers, hallucinagens, etc.

all i can tell you is this statement is completely contradictory to KSW and if you think that i'm incorrect you should get oncomm and check the Source.

Not at all. But surely you admit that saying Scientology was "made up" by a "little known scifi writer" would be wording things abit slanted?

that seems rather beside the point that you were making and which i responded to. that someone is voluminously published does not, in any way, indicate the accuracy of the statements which have been published.

he was a well known pulp science fiction writer as contemporaneously documented by independent sources.

No not really. Thats why you dont tend to find such things that old from the US. If you wanted to make claims of bettering peoples mental states, or their health, in the 1950s you pretty much had to be medical or religious. Of course NOW they pop up every day. In fact a number of scientology variants have been able to kick up totally seperate from the church idea.

what makes you think this is the case? i would encourage you to read about breakfast cereal and the self help industry which was its progenitor.

that said, you are being somewhat vague with the idea of "self help" for indeed, it could be fairly said that a daily exercise regime is self help and that has, of course, been advocated for many decades.

They all left?

yes. all of him. completely left the organization. this was after the New Jersey office was closed by the government and Hubbard moved his operations to Oklahoma.

OK. Thats kindof what I said.

your claim makes it sound as if he were backing off for reasons other than the demonstrable lack of effect of his claimed medical cures.

Wow. Few people bother going that high. Thats basically priest level. Care to compare the pros and cons?

there are no priests in $cientology, in any event, if you've not taken those courses successfully, i.e. passed them with certifications, then you really wouldn't be able to say of those teachings are excellent would you?

you indicated previously when you left the Co$ that you were at a 6 on the Tone Scale. what courses did you run?

Its just that I tend to see things tossed around both ways. Some consider anyone taking a scientology course to be a scientologist, and others consider it to be people who change their census statement to say scientologist, and yet others would limit it only to those who have achieved the churches equivalence of inner-sanctum learning.

i think that if someone identifies themselves as a $cientologist then they are one, if they don't then they aren't. i don't mean in a duplicitous sense, of course.

Well I will seek to avoid that. I dont think I ever use it as "two wrongs make a right". Only in fair comparison of one religions actions against others.

then i think you've missed the point of this fallacy.

metta,

~v

 

[17th Angel]

Namaste Alex P,


i only quote from authentic Source.

what other ways can you parse the quote, Alex P? someway that doesn't make it sound like LRH is advocating an Orwellian society with $cientology in control and there being no rememdy in existence?

Fair enough, I didn't say YOU But I am stating that the most popular quotes to spread of his are the darker seeming ones or the ones with no connection to his religion, I am simply applying a balance to show he also has made some quite amazing quotes also.

As to the book I have no idea, as I haven't read it, I know of its basic outlines.... I will take one word from that quote... Shadow... My dictionary hold 27 different meanings for that word... So I am sure you can make it mean a minimum of 27 things lol....

if you are referring to Zemu/Xenu that is a copyrighted property of $cientology and is part of the OTIII material.

I know of the Xenu... But I mean the website and it's staff... I thought they were apart of anonymous?

i don't care for terms like good guys or bad guys.. those notions are far too dependent upon the aims of such a group being inline with our own for such notions to carry much weight.

Fair enough, but you watched the video? And would you say that is a correct manner to conduct yourself? I think it is a disgusting way to act.

i blame text messaging.

That has made me curious.... Why would you blame text messaging??

therein lies the rub, doesn't it? to know if such a noble aim is the ultimate goal of the teachings it is necessary to see the teachings so that a reasonable being could make a reasonable decision. you can, for instance, read the whole Bible, the whole Torah, the entire Baghavad Gita without cost and see what the ultimate aims of these religions are. you cannot do so with $cientology.

Not in whole.... There are many works they give out for free.. But yes there is alot that you have to pay for... But again, there is much people pay for because they enjoy it and agree with it or whatever, I can't see how that is bad... Alot of litreature these days you have to pay for, I do really see where you are coming from, but I personally don't see it as a problem...

in most conversations regarding morality and ethics the source of ones morality or ethical views is often considered quite important. why should such not be the case in this discussion? to a certain extent all modern religions are in for a rough ride in that a great many details of the lives of the founders of these traditions was contemporaneously recorded and commented upon. in the case of $cientology we have one founded in the 20th century and there is simply no lack of data regarding LRH, what his life actually was and what he claimed for himself.

So instead of watching the religion change and grow, and see the fruits of its works, we should simply reflect back upon only certain areas of L. Ron Hubbards life?

they are free provided you remain on staff, if you leave you get a bill for the full course load.

Where can I find references of this please?

are you certain that you are bonding with $cientology? how can you know?

Because I feel a connection to it. Such as the VM's that is something I would love to do on such a scale, I do my own little bits here and there to help whenever I can but to go to that scale? Gives me goosebumps.....

There isn't such a leash on it's followers I don't believe... I have spoken to many of them now, and I am asking them certain questions such as "do you believe in god?" And I am finding they have their own views and opinions which differ from memeber to member that is good, They exercise their human rights.... (but all religions stand by the human rights!) Well I have seen a lack of a couple of those rights in many religions... "freedom of thought." and "freedom of expression."

Why am I feeling a bond? Because I believe mankind is one... And I fail to see other religions on a scale to Scientology that are out there helping everyone no matter what faith....... And I feel a bond, because it feels right.

insofar as you personal beliefs are concerned, if you want to believe in the $cientology mythos i have no particular issue. it is the corrupt RTC and the Co$ which must be opposed. many beings, of course, are unable to draw a distinction between their beliefs and the organization to which they adhere and such a view is encouraged within $cientology which makes having rational discussions with some quite difficult. which is, itself, not surprising when the organization considers reasonableness to be a liability.

metta,

~v

Share examples please?

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Alex P,

thank you for the post.

Fair enough, I didn't say YOU But I am stating that the most popular quotes to spread of his are the darker seeming ones or the ones with no connection to his religion, I am simply applying a balance to show he also has made some quite amazing quotes also.

everyone has amazing quotes if we would look through all their writings, in my case i only quote Source which is not his science fiction work. many beings also only quote Source for it is the Source which is, itself, the subject of discussion in many cases.

As to the book I have no idea, as I haven't read it, I know of its basic outlines.... I will take one word from that quote... Shadow... My dictionary hold 27 different meanings for that word... So I am sure you can make it mean a minimum of 27 things lol....

i would doubt it as our language has more rules that simply picking one word out of the context of the sentence and then interpolating all manner of permutations for the meaning of the sentence.

I know of the Xenu... But I mean the website and it's staff... I thought they were apart of anonymous?

nope, that is the Old Guard, folks that left $cientology years ago and have been protesting it's abusive policies ever since. there was a serendipity between the Co$'s legal orders regarding the Crui$e video and the Old Guard and the two have somewhat agreed to protest together.

Fair enough, but you watched the video? And would you say that is a correct manner to conduct yourself? I think it is a disgusting way to act.

nope, didn't watch the video. i consider all manner of things disgusting which, strangely, other people do not.. i have the distinct impression that this is a matter of personal taste.

That has made me curious.... Why would you blame text messaging??

because it encourages informal language structure and actively teaches a dumbing down of the language. i don't consider those two things to be positive developments.

Not in whole.... There are many works they give out for free.. But yes there is alot that you have to pay for... But again, there is much people pay for because they enjoy it and agree with it or whatever, I can't see how that is bad... Alot of litreature these days you have to pay for, I do really see where you are coming from, but I personally don't see it as a problem...

then perhaps you aren't really groking what i'm saying. salvation for sale is very different than a diet plan for sale especially when you can't read about the salvation that you are being sold.

So instead of watching the religion change and grow, and see the fruits of its works, we should simply reflect back upon only certain areas of L. Ron Hubbards life?

i'm unclear how this is a response to the point that i made which you are responding to. i indicated that in discussions of morality and ethics the subject of the motivation for those morals and ethics is often important and is a valid subject for discussion.

the only areas of LRH's life which are relevant are the ones which he made relevant by his statements. we could, of course, simply ignore any of this and strictly examine if $cientology was able to deliver on it's claims for its founder. demonstrably it did not. if the creator of the religion can't actualize the things which the religion promises what do you think the chances are that anyone else will?

Where can I find references of this please?

i can send you some bills.

you can talk to Gerry Armstrong the Salaman Rushdie of $cientology. he was Hubbards personal biographer before LRH was killed and the Sea Org took control of RTC.

you can talk to anyone that has made it to the grade of Auditor Class 4 and left the Co$ for they, too, have bills for the services which were provided... on the scale of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Because I feel a connection to it. Such as the VM's that is something I would love to do on such a scale, I do my own little bits here and there to help whenever I can but to go to that scale? Gives me goosebumps.....

why do you need such a group to become an active volunteer? does your country prohibit individuals from engaging in such actions in a disaster area, for instance? some countries will only permit organizations like charities and such to go into those areas and it may be the case where you live.

VM's, of course, do what many others do in such situations, offer services to vulnerable people who are not in a position to refuse help. i, personally, find such actions deplorable.

There isn't such a leash on it's followers I don't believe... I have spoken to many of them now, and I am asking them certain questions such as "do you believe in god?" And I am finding they have their own views and opinions which differ from memeber to member that is good, They exercise their human rights.... (but all religions stand by the human rights!) Well I have seen a lack of a couple of those rights in many religions... "freedom of thought." and "freedom of expression."

$cientology does *NOT* support human rights for all humans. in fact, it is explicitly stated that humans below 2.0 on the Tone Scale should be deprived of human rights and cleared from the planet, we should be "exteriorized". sorry mate but as soon as some group starts advocating such behavior you can rest assured that i'll be in opposition to them.

perhaps i'm making it up?

"In any event, any person from 2.0 down on the Tone Scale should not have, in any thinking society, any civil rights of any kind, because by abusing those rights he brings into being arduous and strenuous laws which are oppressive to those who need no such restraints." - L. Ron Hubbard, SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL, 1989 Ed., p. 145 [The "Tone Scale" is Scientology's measure of mental and spiritual health.]

Why am I feeling a bond? Because I believe mankind is one... And I fail to see other religions on a scale to Scientology that are out there helping everyone no matter what faith....... And I feel a bond, because it feels right.

you believe that mankind is one... one what? are you suggesting that if i eat an orange that you'd feel full? are you suggesting that humans all have common traits like eyes and spleens and things like that?

how large do you think $cientology is?

Share examples please?

of which? $cientologists being unreasonable? $cientology teaching that 'reasonable' is a negative trait?

metta,

~v

 

[Snoopy]

Alex, I can't keep up; are you a scientologist now? Are you going through the alphabet? After you've been a zennist will you begin again as an agnostic?

s.

 

[17th Angel]

Namaste Alex P,

thank you for the post.



everyone has amazing quotes if we would look through all their writings, in my case i only quote Source which is not his science fiction work. many beings also only quote Source for it is the Source which is, itself, the subject of discussion in many cases.



i would doubt it as our language has more rules that simply picking one word out of the context of the sentence and then interpolating all manner of permutations for the meaning of the sentence.



nope, that is the Old Guard, folks that left $cientology years ago and have been protesting it's abusive policies ever since. there was a serendipity between the Co$'s legal orders regarding the Crui$e video and the Old Guard and the two have somewhat agreed to protest together.



nope, didn't watch the video. i consider all manner of things disgusting which, strangely, other people do not.. i have the distinct impression that this is a matter of personal taste.



because it encourages informal language structure and actively teaches a dumbing down of the language. i don't consider those two things to be positive developments.



then perhaps you aren't really groking what i'm saying. salvation for sale is very different than a diet plan for sale especially when you can't read about the salvation that you are being sold.



i'm unclear how this is a response to the point that i made which you are responding to. i indicated that in discussions of morality and ethics the subject of the motivation for those morals and ethics is often important and is a valid subject for discussion.

the only areas of LRH's life which are relevant are the ones which he made relevant by his statements. we could, of course, simply ignore any of this and strictly examine if $cientology was able to deliver on it's claims for its founder. demonstrably it did not. if the creator of the religion can't actualize the things which the religion promises what do you think the chances are that anyone else will?



i can send you some bills.

you can talk to Gerry Armstrong the Salaman Rushdie of $cientology. he was Hubbards personal biographer before LRH was killed and the Sea Org took control of RTC.

you can talk to anyone that has made it to the grade of Auditor Class 4 and left the Co$ for they, too, have bills for the services which were provided... on the scale of hundreds of thousands of dollars.



why do you need such a group to become an active volunteer? does your country prohibit individuals from engaging in such actions in a disaster area, for instance? some countries will only permit organizations like charities and such to go into those areas and it may be the case where you live.

VM's, of course, do what many others do in such situations, offer services to vulnerable people who are not in a position to refuse help. i, personally, find such actions deplorable.



$cientology does *NOT* support human rights for all humans. in fact, it is explicitly stated that humans below 2.0 on the Tone Scale should be deprived of human rights and cleared from the planet, we should be "exteriorized". sorry mate but as soon as some group starts advocating such behavior you can rest assured that i'll be in opposition to them.

perhaps i'm making it up?

"In any event, any person from 2.0 down on the Tone Scale should not have, in any thinking society, any civil rights of any kind, because by abusing those rights he brings into being arduous and strenuous laws which are oppressive to those who need no such restraints." - L. Ron Hubbard, SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL, 1989 Ed., p. 145 [The "Tone Scale" is Scientology's measure of mental and spiritual health.]



you believe that mankind is one... one what? are you suggesting that if i eat an orange that you'd feel full? are you suggesting that humans all have common traits like eyes and spleens and things like that?

how large do you think $cientology is?



of which? $cientologists being unreasonable? $cientology teaching that 'reasonable' is a negative trait?

metta,

~v

I will ask the Scientologists about some of this as the "2.0" scale thing I hadn't heard of... as for my reply it is late sunday afternoon and I can't be arsed right now lol... I'll do it monday, thought I'd just post and let you know I am not ignoring ya.

Alex, I can't keep up; are you a scientologist now? Are you going through the alphabet? After you've been a zennist will you begin again as an agnostic?

s.

No I am not. But I am looking into it and gathering information, is that ok with you?

 

[Snoopy]

No I am not. But I am looking into it and gathering information, is that ok with you?

Of course.

Scientology... lol.

s.

 

[gp1628]

that is, of course, the basis of all our statements insofar as they comport to reality. my point is that your defense is irrespective of the quality of the posts or lack thereof as is my critique.

Compared to what? People attend colleges and say "the courses are excellent" without taking ALL of the courses offered. So I say the courses are great and you would put it down if I didnt become a professor?

Greece, Italy, Netherlands and there is legislation in Sweden on this issue currently. Ireland just permitted the Co$ to be labeled a cult in last months protests whereas they had previously prevented such slogans from being expressed.

Do you have a link on this? Doesnt Xenu.net maintain a status page listing the different countries official standing on Scientology? I couldnt find it. Im not sure of Italy.

Of course even then we would need to play the "compared to what" game. CoS seems to be in 171 countries now? I wonder how other religions would stack up. LDS is listed the same in many of those countries. And wouldnt Cathlocism have as many countries banning it?

i can link the audio transcript of the conversation wherein one of the authors present at the club meeting recounts the entire episode.

Please do.

In which psychology books can i find the ideas of a tone scale or an ARC triangle? engram is a copyrighted term which first appears in the $cientology dictionary and therefore cannot have been first learnt about in another medium.

I didnt say they all could be found in psychology. I mentioned psychology, and religions, and self-help programs. I also said engram was basically the same. That involves abit of understanding of the two subjects to make that comparison but it gets made often enough. Usually by anti-scientology sites such as Xenu.net

that seems rather beside the point that you were making and which i responded to. that someone is voluminously published does not, in any way, indicate the accuracy of the statements which have been published.

I think you misunderstood the point I was making. I was only filling in data to avoid out of context responses. I was definetly making no claim on Hubbards behalf. Im sorry if you took it that way.

he was a well known pulp science fiction writer as contemporaneously documented by independent sources.

True enough.

that said, you are being somewhat vague with the idea of "self help" for indeed, it could be fairly said that a daily exercise regime is self help and that has, of course, been advocated for many decades.

Heehee. I grant you that. I wouldnt call it a "self-help program" as I meant it but its a true enough statement.

What I meant was a program marketed to the public. The fairly recent outbreak in the west of things such as yoga, EST, acupuncture, power of positive thinking, pilates, herbal stores, etc etc are benefiting from the change in attitude about allowing self-help and alternative medicine to make claims. If Scientology were "born" today I rather doubt it would go the "church" route at all. In fact, a number of its splinters have specifically chosen not to.

yes. all of him. completely left the organization. this was after the New Jersey office was closed by the government and Hubbard moved his operations to Oklahoma.

Thats what I thought. All of them becomes all of him. The fact that other doctors stayed, and that doctors are still members would be beside the point.

your claim makes it sound as if he were backing off for reasons other than the demonstrable lack of effect of his claimed medical cures.

Not at all.

there are no priests in $cientology, in any event, if you've not taken those courses successfully, i.e. passed them with certifications, then you really wouldn't be able to say of those teachings are excellent would you?

Again, compared to what? I can say the catholic church is wonderful, they offer great services, all without becoming vatican level and privy to the innermost secrets of that faith? All I can offer is my opinion on my experiences and what I have seen. People can easily find accounts of people who have been thru the higher levels doing the same if they wish (both pro and con of course)

you indicated previously when you left the Co$ that you were at a 6 on the Tone Scale. what courses did you run?

The usual ones. Most people tend to do the ones for improved communications, and better studying, abit of detox altho I didnt hold out. I also semi-staffed abit for the communications course. Abit more than just an average member, but less than a full-fledged dedicated joiner. A couple of years total hanging around centers. During that time I met many scientologists, saw people kicked out, heard more tham my fair share of truths both for and against scientology.

i think that if someone identifies themselves as a $cientologist then they are one, if they don't then they aren't. i don't mean in a duplicitous sense, of course.

Thats nice of you. Im usually quite clear in identifying myself as an ex-scientoloist. In general I found the scientology part enlightening, but the church part very lacking.

then i think you've missed the point of this fallacy.

Not at all. Im not seeking to declare that two wrongs make a right. Well maybe water it down abit. But Im more interested in gaining acknowledgment that two wrongs are still two wrongs.

Keep in mind that we are discussing some "cut them off at the pass" statements that I made. Not specifically aimed at anything you said. I was simply trying to warn those who would "open my eyes" to the horrors of the Church of Scientology that they might want to do abit of googling and comparative thinking on their own religion along the same subject. Along the lines of warning an attacker that I come armed.

 

[17th Angel]

I was tired yesterday and didn't fully take on posts.....

Snoopy, how many religions have I studied? And how many have I been -apart- of?

 

[17th Angel]

everyone has amazing quotes if we would look through all their writings, in my case i only quote Source which is not his science fiction work. many beings also only quote Source for it is the Source which is, itself, the subject of discussion in many cases.

You mean like everyone also has bad quotes?

http://www.comparative-religion.com/forum/77344-post135.html

i would doubt it as our language has more rules that simply picking one word out of the context of the sentence and then interpolating all manner of permutations for the meaning of the sentence.

Ok phrase then?

i can send you some bills.

For me personally to pay? I have seen from sites that claim you are charged in the thousands to take just one course... I have now met some Scientologists in the flesh... Asked questions, they allowed me to freely look through their stuff... The three tests I got to look at cost £25.00 from their office, or £15.00 in your own home... I feel as if there is like a test per book it can't really peak into the thousands... They said that no test costs that much. ;/

I have started listening to Dianetics and that is... Different lol. I think I may need to listen to the audio book a fair few times.

LMFAO!!! Snoopy...

Sorry I didn't see your reply!

Zen... lol...

All I am saying spoop a loop... Is Sure I've looked into Islam, Sikhism, Buddhism, Shinto, Christianity, Judaism and so on... But i have actually only ever been apart of ONE religion and that was the Jehovah Witnesses for two years or so.... I have never been to any other religions place of worship and been "signed in" or gone to help them and so on... Just got very into my studies of them, but have found them all not to be for me There are some bits here and there yah sure that are ok... But... Meh... So yeah just to help you catch up, I am looking into Scientology. However I do like the Voulnteer ministers... And as there is a unit of them nearby I am looking to help them.. Not sure if you can do it without being a Scientologist but will see. Just to make it clear that I haven't been in every religion known to man....

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste GP,

thank you for the post.

Compared to what? People attend colleges and say "the courses are excellent" without taking ALL of the courses offered. So I say the courses are great and you would put it down if I didnt become a professor?

i said that you responded *not* because you thought that what was being posted was crap but because you choose to respond. i posted not because what was being posted was crap but because i choose to respond.

this response that you've given is in relation to my asking you how you would know if the teachings of $cientology were excellent if you've not taken them all.

your response is nonesensical in several areas a) you can read all of a students course work materials prior to completeing the course work that the professor assigns, i.e. you can read the text from cover to cover. you cannot read $cientology teachings cover to cover even if they were available, which they are not. b) proclaiming that the courses one has taken in a particular subject is not a very good way to determine if all the courses at a university are excellent or not, it is, in fact, the same situation that you are in.

Do you have a link on this? Doesnt Xenu.net maintain a status page listing the different countries official standing on Scientology? I couldnt find it. Im not sure of Italy.

unfortunately i don't have a link on it as it was complied from various government sources and media. i'm not sure what Xenu.net has on its site as i don't often find much occasion to visit there.

Of course even then we would need to play the "compared to what" game. CoS seems to be in 171 countries now? I wonder how other religions would stack up. LDS is listed the same in many of those countries. And wouldnt Cathlocism have as many countries banning it?

since that wasn't part of what i said there is no need to compare it to anything else. this is an example of the tu quoque fallacy which i mentioned previously. we aren't talking about any other ideology other than $cientology.

Please do.

having a rough time finding the audio file, in any event it's the audio transcript of this:

Bare Faced Messiah p.148. Reference given to LA Times, 27 Aug 78. Supposed to have happened in spring 1949.

"Science fiction editor and author Sam Moscowitz tells of the occasion when Hubbard spoke before the Eastern Science Fiction Association in Newark, New Jersey in 1947: `Hubbard spoke ... I don't recall his exact words; but in effect, he told us that writing science fiction for about a penny a word was no way to make a living. If you really want to make a million, he said, the quickest way is to start your own religion.'"


​

I didnt say they all could be found in psychology. I mentioned psychology, and religions, and self-help programs. I also said engram was basically the same.

fair enough, though note i didn't ask about all. can you give me *any* psychology book, religious text or self help program which describes the ARC and/or and ARC Break, for instance?

engram is a copyrighted word which existed, until quite recently, only in official Co$ material. my current paper dictionaries do not contain this term though they are published circa 1998.

Thats what I thought. All of them becomes all of him. The fact that other doctors stayed, and that doctors are still members would be beside the point.

it doesn't seem like what you thought at all.

there was only one medical doctor and he left, ipso facto, all the medical doctors left. there are no doctors that are still members for, indeed, the old Dianetics Institute was swept away to be replaced by the edifice known as the Co$.

Again, compared to what?

we aren't comparing anything to anything, we are talking about $cientology and only $cientology in this particular thread. i realize that you'd like to bring other topics into this discussion so perhaps a new thread related to those topics would be in order?

The usual ones.

i'm sorry, that is totally a non-answer and you well know it. there are multiple courses for the things which you've listed though it seems you are suggesting that you were an auditor. what Grade did you obtain in your auditing? how far did you progress up the Bridge? did you make it to Clear?

Thats nice of you. Im usually quite clear in identifying myself as an ex-scientoloist. In general I found the scientology part enlightening, but the church part very lacking.

it seems more practical than nice but i take that approach for every religious adherent.

Not at all. Im not seeking to declare that two wrongs make a right. Well maybe water it down abit. But Im more interested in gaining acknowledgment that two wrongs are still two wrongs.

that was never the question to begin with so what is the purpose in asking it? there is only one, which you alluded to "to water it down a bit". there is no watering down, a wrong is a wrong is a wrong irrespective if anyone or any organization has done the same thing. i would suggest that if you'd like to discuss those organizations and their actions that you start a thread for it.

Keep in mind that we are discussing some "cut them off at the pass" statements that I made. Not specifically aimed at anything you said. I was simply trying to warn those who would "open my eyes" to the horrors of the Church of Scientology that they might want to do abit of googling and comparative thinking on their own religion along the same subject. Along the lines of warning an attacker that I come armed.

i didn't take your comments personally though they messed enough with mine that a conversation ensued.

i'm well aware that you are armed. i have confidence that my armament is far superior.

metta,

~v

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Alex P,

thank you for the post.

You mean like everyone also has bad quotes?

no, i mean that everyone that has ever written anything down is apt to have a "good quote" as such things as "good quotes" are subjective.

I have seen from sites that claim you are charged in the thousands to take just one course... I have now met some Scientologists in the flesh... Asked questions, they allowed me to freely look through their stuff... The three tests I got to look at cost £25.00 from their office, or £15.00 in your own home... I feel as if there is like a test per book it can't really peak into the thousands... They said that no test costs that much.

you are asking the wrong questions. the tests, themselves, are fairly inexpensive and even your first auditing session is relatively cheap at $1/hr. the price for auditing sessions, however, quickly escalates to the $25-$30/hr range, which is irrespective of the testing. additionally, you can be compelled to re-take auditing sessions at later times if your Superior deems it necessary for overts and witholds, for instance.

the cost, therefore, isn't in the tests it's in the auditors time.

i'm afraid that they are simply being duplicitous with you Alex P. my list is somewhat outdated as it was published in 1997 and it is the FLAG price list, i.e. the official one which is used through out the Co$:

========== ========== ========= =====
Processing Intensives Cost per Total
Step Required Intensive Cost
or Course (IAS)
========== ========== ========= =====
Life Repair 2 x 12.5 hr $5,600 $11,200
Purification RD ----------- $2,560 $2,560
TRs & Objectives 2 x 12.5 hr $5,600 $11,200
Scn Drug Rundown 2 x 12.5 hr $5,600 $11,200
ARC Straightwire 2 x 12.5 hr $5,600 $11,200
Grade 0 3 x 12.5 hr $5,600 $16,800
Grade 1 2 x 12.5 hr $5,600 $11,200
Grade 2 2 x 12.5 hr $5,600 $11,200
Grade 3 2 x 12.5 hr $5,600 $11,200
Grade 4 2 x 12.5 hr $5,600 $11,200
New Era Dianetics 3 x 12.5 hr $5,600 $16,800
Clear Certainty RD 1 x 5 hr $2,800 $2,800

SUB-TOTAL TO CLEAR $128,560

*Solo Course Part 1 ----------- $3,200 $3,200
*OT Preparations 2 x 12.5 hr $3,300 $6,600
*Solo Course Part 2 ----------- $1,900 $1,900
*OT Eligibility 2 x 12.5 hr $3,300 $6,600
*OT I ----------- $2,000 $2,000
*OT II ----------- $3,800 $3,800
*OT III ----------- $6,500 $6,500
OT IV ?2 x 12.5 hr $6,500 $13,000
OT V 4 x 12.5 hr $7,400 $29,600
OT VI set-ups 2 x 12.5 hr $9,250 $18,500
OT VI ----------- $12,800 $12,800
Pledge Intensive 1 x 12.5 hr $9,250 $9,250
OT VII ----------- $3,500 $3,500
OT VII C/Sing
(per year) over 2 years $3,200 $6,400
OT VIII ----------- $10,000 $10,000
OT VIII auditing ?2 x 12.5 hr $7,400 $14,800

TOTAL BILL FROM RAW MEAT TO OT VIII $277,010
========

of course you may have to repeat any of these courses, at full cost and you could lose the discount which is being applied.

(i've got this as a chart but i can't get it formatted properly here)

metta,

~v

 

[17th Angel]

You are an Ex-Scientologist?

Oh here is what I have got so far for the 2.0 issue... (still researching bare with me:S)

"I heard this quote being used to insinuate that Scientology tries to separate out destructive people. That is not true. Most of "Science of Survival" is about how to get people "up the tone scale", meaning freeing them spiritually, so that they do not feel compelled to be destructive. This book is a handbook for an auditor (it says so in the beginning) for use in session (which is where the auditor helps a person). It is not an organizational book nor anything else but a handbook for an auditor. Aside from that, nothing L. Ron Hubbard wrote is meant to be interpreted in a way to violate laws. That's a core rule in Scientology and a firm one too. As a Scientologist you can get in a lot of trouble internally - up to the point where they throw you out as has happened to many current "critics of Scientology" - if you try to "bend" or factually break the law.

But here is what is actually happening, in real life: People who are a danger for themselves or others usually get involuntarily committed and stripped off their civil rights and even their human rights (pls note the difference between those two). Scientologists are usually opposed against involuntary commitment because it is used by political psychiatry as a means of oppression, still now. Many Scientologists I know have been rallying against these human rights abuses and have gotten people out of this confinement psychiatry calls "help".

Hope I could un-confuse you."

 

[gp1628]

i said that you responded *not* because you thought that what was being posted was crap but because you choose to respond. i posted not because what was being posted was crap but because i choose to respond.

As a diplomacist I so hate debates with logicists.

this response that you've given is in relation to my asking you how you would know if the teachings of $cientology were excellent if you've not taken them all.

The courses I took were excellent. The scientologists I have met seem to reflect that their courses were also excellent. So I am taking for granted that the courses are excellent. Havent the scientologists you met seem happy, focused, clear minded, and capable?

your response is nonesensical in several areas a) you can read all of a students course work materials prior to completeing the course work that the professor assigns, i.e. you can read the text from cover to cover. you cannot read $cientology teachings cover to cover even if they were available, which they are not.

The material for most of the courses that most people take are available in the towns public libraries. The courses you would probably zero in on would compare to PhD level at a college so Im not sure if the same statement can be made. Or in a religion such as catholocism Im guessing it would compare to vatican levels.

b) proclaiming that the courses one has taken in a particular subject is not a very good way to determine if all the courses at a university are excellent or not, it is, in fact, the same situation that you are in.

Heehee. True enough.
But of course (get ready for another fallacie) most people tend to operate that way anyway. They will declare that they feel a school or religion or whatever is excellent without having tried every part of it. Most people do not operate by logic-tables. Im taking for granted that there is no school or experience that you would make such a statement about now?

The problem with this form of debate is that everything can be declared a fallacie. Even if I had taken all of the courses and declared them excellent it would be Argument from Authority. A fallacie isnt a fallacie unless its used as a fallacie. Declaring it one does not remove it from the discussion.

unfortunately i don't have a link on it as it was complied from various government sources and media. i'm not sure what Xenu.net has on its site as i don't often find much occasion to visit there.

Of course those would be fine also if they are fairly recent. Maybe the CIA factbook has a page. I just know that Xenu.net is very prompt and up-to-date on any detrimental news concerning scientology. It helps to weed out the ups and downs of changes in status.

since that wasn't part of what i said there is no need to compare it to anything else. this is an example of the tu quoque fallacy which i mentioned previously. we aren't talking about any other ideology other than $cientology.

Hmmm would that be a Reduction Fallacie on your part? I did not join your conversation. You joined mine. I understand why you would prefer to limit any mention of xxxxxxxx only to such things as they pertain to Scientology. But that is not the conversation I was having.

having a rough time finding the audio file, in any event it's the audio transcript of this:

fair enough, though note i didn't ask about all. can you give me *any* psychology book, religious text or self help program which describes the ARC and/or and ARC Break, for instance?

Do you feel there are no other sources for the idea that increasing shared expereinces will help raise affinity and therefore communication? You feel that Hubbard made all that up? If so then you give him far more credit than Im willing to give.

engram is a copyrighted word which existed, until quite recently, only in official Co$ material. my current paper dictionaries do not contain this term though they are published circa 1998.

Ok fine. Then what is the psychiatrist word for a memory which is charged and can affect you when something pings it?

there was only one medical doctor and he left, ipso facto, all the medical doctors left.

Would that be fallacy of composition? By "only one medical doctor" Im assuming you mean that there was only one who involved himself in the claims being made?

there are no doctors that are still members for, indeed, the old Dianetics Institute was swept away to be replaced by the edifice known as the Co$.

I guess I can give you that as a win. Altho I dont think that anyone cares too much if doctors who were dianeticists later became scientologists dont technically count as "still" being members.

we aren't comparing anything to anything, we are talking about $cientology and only $cientology in this particular thread. i realize that you'd like to bring other topics into this discussion so perhaps a new thread related to those topics would be in order?

Unless you are a moderator here I will take that to be a desire more than a fact. Or if the original poster wishes to clarify. It seems rather a pre-made argument to demand that people react to how "horrible" something is in the religion of Scientology and disallow any reference to other religions. Or how fraudulent something is in the teachings of Scientology without mentioning the same in other teachings. I guess it would depend on the point you wanted to make, but since you arent the one making the point then that seems moot.

i'm sorry, that is totally a non-answer and you well know it.

Not at all. Xenu.net and other anti-scientology sites make it quite clear that the large majority of people only take the first couple of cheaper courses and then leave. I believe the quote was 62%. With corresponding lesser percentages as you go up thru the courses. Definetly a higher loss than most colleges.

there are multiple courses for the things which you've listed though it seems you are suggesting that you were an auditor. what Grade did you obtain in your auditing? how far did you progress up the Bridge? did you make it to Clear?

Auditor? Wow, no. Not at all. In the 70's anyone who had taken a course could assist in the teaching of the course. Im not sure if its true now. The only things I did were some across-the-chair items for the communications and study courses. But I do have fond memories of bull-baiting staff going thru refresher courses who felt that I had a particular gift for finding buttons involving the methods people used to defend their personal space.

it seems more practical than nice but i take that approach for every religious adherent.

Ahhhhh I see. So you are a devout atheist? That makes some things clear. You have no interest in Scientology as it compares to other religions. Just in deprogramming scientology itself.

that was never the question to begin with so what is the purpose in asking it? there is only one, which you alluded to "to water it down a bit". there is no watering down, a wrong is a wrong is a wrong irrespective if anyone or any organization has done the same thing. i would suggest that if you'd like to discuss those organizations and their actions that you start a thread for it.

Then what was the question? Someone posted that they wish to discuss Scientology in the InterFaith forums on a site called Comparative-Religion.com and you feel that comparisons are inappropriate?

i'm well aware that you are armed. i have confidence that my armament is far superior.

An atheists armor in a battle such as this is makes them downright ethereal
They win all arguments.

 

[gp1628]

TOTAL BILL FROM RAW MEAT TO OT VIII $277,010

I suppose that comparisons with things outside of scientology are out of the question?

 

[17th Angel]

Scientology has no objection to it's followers smoking? lol Sweet.

 

[17th Angel]

"Purification Rundown"

Who can tell me what the formula is and what dose's are there within this?.... I've heard it is heavy in Niacin??.. lol How heavy?

 

[17th Angel]

Who else has studied Dianetics? Is it just me, or are there many unnesessary(sp?) -crude- examples?