Because of various problems with Blogger, I've copied everything as of November 26, 2012 over to WordPress. The new location is Ask the Scientologist. I am not deleting this blog and will still accept comments and answer questions here too, but any new articles will appear at the WordPress location. I apologize if this causes any problems.

Sunday, February 7, 2010

The Scientology Conundrum: What Are Lies?

It is quite interesting to me that Scientologists who are now waking up to the fact that David Miscavige has been doing bad things and is a liar, still believe almost everything Miscavige and the Church of Scientology had said in the past.

For instance, while finally seeing that David Miscavige has been corrupting and destroying Scientology, some Scientologists still believe that the criticisms and protests against the church are “unfounded”, “anti-religious” and “a conspiracy”.  They believe that Anonymous is a "terrorist, hate group" in the pay of big drug companies.  They believe that all critics are "suppressive persons".  They believe that the Freezone is filled with squirrels.  They believe these things because David Miscavige said so.

You would think that, seeing with their own eyes some of the blatant and profound falsehoods that Miscavige has been spreading, Scientologists would automatically question everything the Church of Scientology has been claiming. Now, it isn’t necessarily that everything was lies, it is just that the source of all the church’s proclamations, David Miscavige, has been proven to be a destructive, corrupt, habitual liar – so, really, you have to be suspicious of everything Miscavige or the church has said.

You’d think so. But many Scientologists, while rejecting a few, isolated and obviously false statements by Miscavige, still accept, without question, just about everything else.  This really doesn’t make any sense.

Well, the problem is that most Scientologists don’t realize what they are doing.  They have been trained to always completely trust all information coming from the Church of Scientology leaders.  Always.  And they have been trained to always reject all negative information about Scientology coming from any source.  Always.

This has become so automatic that it ends up operating below the conscious awareness for many Scientologists.  They “know” something is true, but they don’t realize their only criteria for “truth” is that the source was the Church of Scientology.  They also “know” that anything at all negative about Scientology “is false”, but they don’t realize their only criteria for that judgement is that the church said it was “false”.  Even when a Scientologist sees and thinks negative things about Scientology, they still reject such negative information from elsewhere as "false".

The simple concept that the Church of Scientology might be lying simply cannot be contemplated by true Scientologists.  It isn’t that they considered it, evaluated it and rejected it; it is that they cannot even consider it.

And most don’t know they have this blind spot.  They actually believe they are being intelligent, logical and observant.  They will get quite upset with the idea that they are not in full command of their thoughts and conclusions.

This makes it difficult for these Scientologists to come to terms with, and effectively handle, what is and has been going on in their church and in the world.  It is quite difficult to reconcile a church that is “always right” and “superior to the rest of the world” with the obvious and consistent failures Miscavige and the Church of Scientology have created.

So what to do?  How does anyone talk to a Scientologist about this stuff?  What does a Scientologist do to inform themselves?  What is true?  What are lies?

Simply listing list all the “facts” from Miscavige and the church that have been proven false, with all their associated links to documents, evidence and other proof simply does not work.  Scientologists, after all, have been trained to automatically reject such information – Scientologists are probably not going to suddenly throw off all that Scientology training in a day.

But they will.  Most Scientologists actually want to know the truth; the problem is that they are only used to accepting “truth” from the church.  It will take awhile for Scientologists to break that habit.

I have one piece of advice for newly-awakened Scientologists.  You do have one piece of information you can be sure of, because it is obvious now: David Miscavige is a liar and has been for decades.  This is what you know.  As for everything else, you can now find out for yourself.


  1. Boy, are there a LOT of previously accepted "facts" to re-evaluate when you leave the church. And it ALL has to be re-evaluated - all of it.

    I found, personally, that it was very much like peeling the proverbial onion; it came off in layers and there were lots of them. I'm probably still peeling. I don't know if I'll ever be done; everything I learn in life past this point is going to put through the filter of my life experience, and my years as a scientologist were a big part of that. So I will always be comparing those experiences with new ones in my life.

    The really big lies,like the one about the church being somehow in charge of my "eternity," were emotional to confront, but very empowering to let go of.

    That's embarrassing to admit at this point, especially because I considered other people, who believed that the priests/churches in their own religions were similarly empowered, were idiots for believing the same thing!

    What can I say? I was stupid. But now at least I understand that kind of stupidity, and I don't waste my time anymore saying "How can people be so stupid?" (Well, not about THAT anyway). I get it. I think that puts me ahead of where I was, not very long ago.

  2. Bill I have an issue here: Have you ever known anybody really succesful as fiel auditor (book one, Level V or whatever) or any FSM having a decent income out of his dissemination efforts? Is that like MLMs where there is wealthy people only wanting to sell this or that product or service?

    1. AsI recall, DM's dad was a big mission-holder, and doing well enough to send his poor student (in my estimation) son to flag & I believe earlier to St Hill.

  3. You raise excellent points here Just Bill. I cant help but wonder - can a heavily indoctrinated scientologist even understand the concept of "truth" in a realistic sense, and separate it from the teachings of "acceptable truths" and "greatest good for greatest number of dynamics".

    Until they do, i fear they'll never separate the wheat from the chaff and realize the cult's propaganda for what it is - the underhanded schemings and manipulation of a corrupt commercial empire that considers itself above the law.

  4. I was just thinking about this and how nobody ever calls COS on any of the lies that are told.

    If everyone that leaves is a liar doesn't that mean that Scientology accepts all liars as long as they were "good" scientologists.

    Also, after reading Marty Rathbun's blog, it seems that everyone who left thinks that the current management are all liars.

    It is definitely difficult to tell the truth from lies when Scientology's founder was so delusional he couldn't distinguish the truth from
    all the lies he told, especially about his own life.

    I've never been in Scientology but I can imagine that it would take a long time after leaving to be able to shake off all the layers of lies to finally be able to see and accept the truth.

  5. Bill,

    Reading this post reminds me of my own upbringing in the Catholic Church. The similarities are pretty obvious: the "fact" that you belong to the greatest and purest institution humanity has to offer, and that providence smiles on it by definition. The obvious falsehoods that become easier to spot the more you look for them, and the more you learn that the Church's teachings SHOULD be questioned as a matter of course.

    The one thing to which I can't speak is whether or not the hierarchy believes its own press. I'm sure Miscavige knows he's jerking people by the chain, and I find it hard to believe the "inner circle" isn't in on the con. The older I get, the more inclined I am to believe the Pope, the Cardinals, and everyone above the level of Monsignor is more interested in political infighting and preservation/advancement of their own power.

    Fortunately, the antidote to both is the medium through which I write these words. It's become so easy to look up the crimes of these organizations on the Internet, through even a cursory search, that anyone on the outside would have to have very grave reservations about joining such an organization. The Catholic Church will probably never die off. But we can certainly rip aside its thin veneer of holiness and criticize it for the hurt it causes. Scientology...I leave it to you to decide whether it will cease to exist as a meaningful entity. Time, numbers, and entropy do not appear to be in its favor.

    Several posts back, I made the mistake of declaring the Church of Scientology should be destroyed. I spoke in haste and passion, and apologize for the remark. I now wonder if laughing at its antics as it digs its own grave might not be more fun, anyway.

  6. Re: Successful field auditor

    Why yes. Many, many years ago, there were some very successful field auditors. But not so much any more. But it isn't like an MLM scheme. For example, if Joe becomes Fred's "FSM" (Field Staff Member - meaning salesman), he gets 10% of everything Fred pays for services. If Fred then becomes Nancy's FSM, Fred gets 10% of Nancy's payments for service -- but Joe doesn't. There is no multi-level thing going on. If some Field Auditor wants to make a lot of money, they really have to work at getting people in and them keeping track of them.

    The reason that doesn't happen so much any more is that David Miscavige saw Field Auditors as competition, so he made it difficult for them to continue operating.

    It it no surprise that the folks who are making money today are those who are regging pure donations to the IAS and such. They make 10% on millions, if they're successful.

  7. @AnonLover

    True believers in Scientology do not think in terms of truth and lies, they think in terms of theta and entheta.

    "Theta" is "good news" and "entheta" is "bad news". If something is theta it is accepted by Scientologists. If something is entheta it is rejected. So, negative information about the Church of Scientology, or Scientology itself, is entheta and is, therefore, rejected without thought.

    The really sad part is that Scientologists have come to believe that entheta=lies and theta=truth. This may be one of the hardest things for Scientologists to unlearn, because this equation is quite unconscious.

    Yes, until they unlearn this, they are fully under the control of the church.


Comments will be moderated. Have patience, I get around to it pretty quick. As a rule of thumb, I won't approve spam, off-topic, trolling or abusive stuff. The rest is usually OK. Yes, you can disagree with me.