tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5588150109003847843.post2933626289359526613..comments2023-09-18T04:45:52.991-07:00Comments on Ask the Scientologist: Scientology: Study TechnologyJust Billhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00700571144527474381noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5588150109003847843.post-43073238557758924722008-05-26T13:19:00.000-07:002008-05-26T13:19:00.000-07:00Merrill,As an aside, since you brought up studying...Merrill,<BR/><BR/>As an aside, since you brought up studying Scientology and included magnanimous quotes from Hubbard about studying Scientology, may I ask:<BR/><BR/>If the primary policy in studying/applying Scientology is "Keeping Scientology Working" and if that policy very, very emphatically says that Hubbard is <I>always right</I> and those who disagree are <I>always wrong</I> and <I><B>must</B> be stopped</I>, how can you pretend that anyone in Scientology would tolerate, for one second, <I>any</I> disagreement or a student finding Hubbard's material "wrong"?<BR/><BR/>You quote Hubbard as if he tolerated Scientologists finding that his tech was wrong. You <I>know</I> that is totally false. You <I>know</I> that Scientology would never tolerate that! Never!<BR/><BR/>Come on!Just Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00700571144527474381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5588150109003847843.post-69992405792459509552008-05-26T11:29:00.000-07:002008-05-26T11:29:00.000-07:00Merrill,Thanks for your input.The link you provide...Merrill,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your input.<BR/><BR/>The link you provide does not support your position, it supports mine more than anything. It <I>does</I>, in an idealistic way, explain Hubbard's "study tech" but it explains that the problem with study is <I>student error</I>, just as I said.<BR/><BR/>In addition, the technology, even on <I>your</I> web site, is all about student <I>duplicating, exactly</I> the material studied. There is nothing about independent thought, creative learning, or what to do if the material is flawed or just plain <I>wrong</I>.<BR/><BR/>You quote from several separate sources, <I>which are <B>not</B> included in the "study tech"</I> to desperately find something from Hubbard that allows for possible disagreement. Sorry, those bits of data are <I>not</I> part study tech. We're discussing Hubbard's <I>study tech</I>. Your inclusion of these quotes is misdirection and false.<BR/><BR/>You <I>say</I> "The purpose of Hubbard's study technology is to enable a student to understand a subject, not to force him/her to agree with it."<BR/><BR/>But that is only your opinion, not borne out by the facts <I>on your own site</I>. Hubbard's "study tech" is, and always has been, an "indoctrination tech".<BR/><BR/>I have no objections to people looking at Hubbard's study tech, look at how it addresses creativity, flawed material, independent thought, questioning authority, thinking outside the box. Look at how it (doesn't) address these vital aspects of study and education.<BR/><BR/>Compare it with other educational technologies. See how the students do after being educated with these different technologies. Look at results, not PR-with-an-agenda.Just Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00700571144527474381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5588150109003847843.post-18557234454891145082008-05-26T10:19:00.000-07:002008-05-26T10:19:00.000-07:00Take a look at http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/...Take a look at http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/SH1_1.HTM. This explains some of the study technology. Also, in Scientology: A New Slant On Life, there is a significant discussion on how to study Scientology. While this goes on for several pages I'll quote a couple of significant paragraphs:<BR/>[The student]should make up his own mind about each thing that is taught - the procedure, techniques, mechanics and theory. He should ask himself these questions: Does this piece of data exist? Is it true? Does it work? Will it produce the best possible results in the shortest time?"<BR/><BR/>"Look at Scientology, study, it, question it and use it and you will have discovered something for yourself. And in so doing, you might well discover a lot more. The techniques and the theories are highly workable, but they are not highly workable just because we say so!"<BR/><BR/>The purpose of Hubbard's study technology is to enable a student to understand a subject, not to force him/her to agree with it. <BR/><BR/>Elsewhere (in a policy dated Feb 9, 1979) Hubbard explains what to do with material that doesn't make sense after attampting to clarify it. He instructs that one should clear any misunderstood words (this ensures the best chance of understanding what was written), try to get clarificaition from the author, and make sure the material hasn't been altered from the original. If it still makes no sense it is false.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5588150109003847843.post-38210640478243402912008-05-19T11:55:00.000-07:002008-05-19T11:55:00.000-07:00Good for your dad! I think "question everything" ...Good for your dad! I think "question everything" is, perhaps, the most fundamental lesson people can learn. From that, real learning can take place.Just Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00700571144527474381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5588150109003847843.post-21456523520141470312008-05-19T11:39:00.000-07:002008-05-19T11:39:00.000-07:00Mindless rich movie stars are a Scientologists wet...Mindless rich movie stars are a Scientologists wet dream. Mindless rich movie star Scientologists who think they know whats best for our children. That's our worst nightmare.<BR/><BR/>Having taken a few Scientology courses, I can honestly say that I could learn the information on my own, for a hell of a lot cheaper. Every class is about preparing you for the next "level" which is always better, and necessary for that matter. Or so they say.<BR/><BR/>I consider myself to be very lucky to have a father, who despite being a ex-Scientologist, taught me to question all organized religion every step of the way. I was encouraged to take courses, but never forced. I was taught to think for myself which inherently made me unsuitable for indoctrination into the Church of Scientology. Thanks dad.<BR/><BR/>sincerely,<BR/><BR/>meJamesons sonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17998463080614442473noreply@blogger.com