Recently, I've just been watching. Scientology watching has become one of my entertainments. There's David Miscavige and the Church of Scientology, there's all the secrets, lies, crimes, abuses and fraud getting almost daily exposure and then there is the "Independent Scientology movement".
I find the Independent Scientologists to be the most fascinating. Here we have a perfect test of Scientology's workability unfolding right before our eyes. How can Scientology exist outside of the tightly controlled environment of the cult?
Enough time has passed for us to be able to see what Scientology is going to be like in a free and open environment.
Inside the Church of Scientology, the environment is very, very tightly controlled -- exactly as L. Ron Hubbard designed it to be. Anything negative about Hubbard or Scientology is condemned as "entheta" and is off limits. As a "good Scientologist", one cannot and will not talk to people who speak entheta. One cannot read entheta articles or listen to any entheta. That is thought control and is one of the cult's mechanisms for keeping the True Believers from straying from the approved path.
But now we have the Independent Scientology movement. They have much, much less control. If you talk to the "wrong people" according to one Scientology practitioner -- who then refuses to audit you (because you are a "bad person") -- why you can just go elsewhere.
The leaders of the Independent movement do not have enough control to stop a Scientologist from talking to anyone or reading anything.
And now we can see what happens to Scientology when the cultic thought control has been removed and when the standard threats have no weight. Can Scientology survive in a free environment?
Well, what is happening?
If you've perused the various Independent Scientology blogs, you will see Scientologists desperately attempting to enforce the old thought control. Any disagreement or entheta posted on one of their blogs gets shouted down or simply blocked. Many posts and comments on ESMB and Censored by Marty attest to the censoring that goes on at that blog.
The people running the blogs try to keep the movement clean of such entheta but, as I said earlier, they simply don't have the power to enforce it.
Scientologists outside of the church can read and can talk without fear of any meaningful punishment. Any normal person will absolutely hate and rebel against the kind of totalitarian thought-control as practiced by Scientology. You can't stop people from wanting to know more, to know the truth. And so people will look.
The more the leading voices of the Independent Scientology movement try to suppress other voices and dissenting opinions, the more people will resist. And rebel. And look.
That is happening more and more.
What has happened as a result of all this? How is the Independent Scientology movement doing without the ability to control believer's thoughts, communication and actions?
As near as I can tell, back in very early 2010, Marty Rathbun and Steve Hall had this "bright idea". They called it the "Indie 500". The idea was to get 500 Independent Scientologists to "come out" and declare their independence from the Church of Scientology. The website's definition of exactly who was an "Independent Scientologist" was extremely broad: "Anyone who uses any part of Scientology Tech, even if other parts are not true for you."
Now, over two years later, the list stands at a little over 300. It is obvious to me that someone created the original few hundred entries without getting approval from the people they were listing: In reading through the list, I see a number who do not now consider themselves "Scientologists" in any way. In addition, I know of more who's names appeared on the list and asked them to be removed.
After two years, even with those false entries, the Independent Scientology movement can't find 500 people who use "any part of Scientology Tech" who want to be associated with the movement. Why? Certainly many, many more than 500 people have left the Church of Scientology.
The reason that Scientology outside of the totalitarian control of the Church of Scientology cannot and will never thrive is because Scientology cannot coexist with open communication. Scientology cannot coexist with full access to all the information. Scientology cannot exist without its cultic thought-control.
My only question is: Can any part of Scientology exist in an open and free environment? I certainly don't know, only time will tell.
What do you think? If you are out of the church, what is your experience with the Independent Movement?
-
Showing posts with label Thought Control. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Thought Control. Show all posts
Sunday, April 1, 2012
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Hiding Scientology
While watching the comments of Marty's group, which has declared itself the "Independent Scientology Group", I have been waiting for them to, well, implement Scientology.
I think it's great they are auditing each other and do Scientology training. Really. If someone wants Scientology auditing or training, and someone else provides that, well that's the way it should be. If no one is harmed, it's nobody's business but theirs.
But what about the other Scientology technologies? You know, the abusive stuff -- all those "enemy" lists, "Suppressive Person" declares, disconnection orders, "PTS" declares, punishments, lower conditions and all that stuff.
After all, these are key parts of L. Ron Hubbard's technology, Hubbard said so.
Is Hubbard's all-important Ethics Tech not being applied by this group? Did they realize these were primary policies for abuse? Are they altering Scientology to make it "kinder and gentler"?
Ah, not so much. Nothing of Hubbard's can be neglected or modified, that's the rules.
However, they do realize it would look bad if they started declaring people suppressive or PTS, so, like Hubbard banning the words "fair game" while at the same time urging its use, so this "Independent Scientology Group" simply doesn't use those words.
The people they have determined to be "suppressives"? Apparently, they use the label "haters". Suppressive groups are, therefore, called "hater sites" or "hater blogs".
Gee, isn't this the same code word, and the exact same meaning that the Church of Scientology uses for "suppressives" when they try to hide Scientology's abuse from "wogs" (non-Scientologists)? Why, yes it is!
If you've been labelled a "hater" by this group, congratulations! Apparently, you've been declared a suppressive. No "Independent Scientology Group" member may talk with you. They are supposed to disconnect from you.
And how about declaring people "PTS" (Potential Trouble Source -- someone "connected to a suppressive")? Are they implementing that bit of "tech"?
Yes, indeed. Look at how, and at whom, they direct the word "natterer". It's a code word for "has overts" (has done "bad" things), and for "PTS".
So you have "natterers" and "natter boards" to indicate those who might still be Scientologists, but who are not considered "pure". You see, these "natterers" have been corrupted by the "haters" to say bad things about Hubbard and/or Scientology.
Good Scientologists will not associate or communicate to these PTS people or groups, but there is still hope that, if the "natterers" disconnect from the "haters", they might still be recovered to "pure" Scientology.
And so it starts: the suppression of divergent thinking; the suppression of any "negative" information; the suppression of any disagreement, discussion, debate, questions or doubts. These are key policies for creating and enforcing cult-thought-control. No group attempting to implement all of Scientology would ever neglect these vital thought control policies.
But they hide it because, in Scientology, if something you do is considered unacceptable by society, you just change its name and continue doing it. (Apparently, they think "wogs" are too stupid to figure that out.)
Now don't get me wrong. Scientologists do have the right to say what they want, make "enemies" lists and declare people "haters" and "natterers". That is covered under freedom of religion and freedom of speech.
But I sincerely doubt that many Scientologists, escaping from the abuses and cult-thought-control of the Church of Scientology, are looking for someone else to control them.
This group is selling a straitjacket for the mind -- but freedom to think, freedom to look and freedom to disagree is just too precious for any intelligent person to buy that "tech".
-
I think it's great they are auditing each other and do Scientology training. Really. If someone wants Scientology auditing or training, and someone else provides that, well that's the way it should be. If no one is harmed, it's nobody's business but theirs.
But what about the other Scientology technologies? You know, the abusive stuff -- all those "enemy" lists, "Suppressive Person" declares, disconnection orders, "PTS" declares, punishments, lower conditions and all that stuff.
After all, these are key parts of L. Ron Hubbard's technology, Hubbard said so.
Is Hubbard's all-important Ethics Tech not being applied by this group? Did they realize these were primary policies for abuse? Are they altering Scientology to make it "kinder and gentler"?
Ah, not so much. Nothing of Hubbard's can be neglected or modified, that's the rules.
However, they do realize it would look bad if they started declaring people suppressive or PTS, so, like Hubbard banning the words "fair game" while at the same time urging its use, so this "Independent Scientology Group" simply doesn't use those words.
The people they have determined to be "suppressives"? Apparently, they use the label "haters". Suppressive groups are, therefore, called "hater sites" or "hater blogs".
Gee, isn't this the same code word, and the exact same meaning that the Church of Scientology uses for "suppressives" when they try to hide Scientology's abuse from "wogs" (non-Scientologists)? Why, yes it is!
If you've been labelled a "hater" by this group, congratulations! Apparently, you've been declared a suppressive. No "Independent Scientology Group" member may talk with you. They are supposed to disconnect from you.
And how about declaring people "PTS" (Potential Trouble Source -- someone "connected to a suppressive")? Are they implementing that bit of "tech"?
Yes, indeed. Look at how, and at whom, they direct the word "natterer". It's a code word for "has overts" (has done "bad" things), and for "PTS".
So you have "natterers" and "natter boards" to indicate those who might still be Scientologists, but who are not considered "pure". You see, these "natterers" have been corrupted by the "haters" to say bad things about Hubbard and/or Scientology.
Good Scientologists will not associate or communicate to these PTS people or groups, but there is still hope that, if the "natterers" disconnect from the "haters", they might still be recovered to "pure" Scientology.
And so it starts: the suppression of divergent thinking; the suppression of any "negative" information; the suppression of any disagreement, discussion, debate, questions or doubts. These are key policies for creating and enforcing cult-thought-control. No group attempting to implement all of Scientology would ever neglect these vital thought control policies.
But they hide it because, in Scientology, if something you do is considered unacceptable by society, you just change its name and continue doing it. (Apparently, they think "wogs" are too stupid to figure that out.)
Now don't get me wrong. Scientologists do have the right to say what they want, make "enemies" lists and declare people "haters" and "natterers". That is covered under freedom of religion and freedom of speech.
But I sincerely doubt that many Scientologists, escaping from the abuses and cult-thought-control of the Church of Scientology, are looking for someone else to control them.
This group is selling a straitjacket for the mind -- but freedom to think, freedom to look and freedom to disagree is just too precious for any intelligent person to buy that "tech".
-
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Scientology Logic
In a recent comment, a Scientology True Believer was absolutely convinced that when I criticized L. Ron Hubbard, it was exactly the same as saying I wished for the total destruction of the belief system of Scientology. No amount of logical discussion could alter that bizarre thought process.
Anyone following along in the discussion thread would have thought the Scientologist to be very, very stupid. There was no way the actual words written could mean what he interpreted them to mean.
But to the Scientologist, it was completely logical.
Let us explore, once again, a bit more into the strange world of Scientology.
For those who have never talked to a Scientologist, Scientology logic looks, to an outsider, like this:
Logic is not taught in Scientology, obviously. In fact, logic is frowned upon. They have a drill, called the "Obnosis Drill" which drills a Scientologist to not draw logical conclusions. (Ironically, "obnosis" is a bafflegab word created by Hubbard to mean "observing the obvious"). For example, the course supervisor brings in a person for the students to do the drill on. The drill would go like this:
And that is just one of a number of Scientology techniques that turns off logic.
Another technique is the constant repetition and enforcement that you may never question anything Hubbard says. What you see, if it contradicts what Hubbard said, is wrong. You must work at it until you can work out that what you saw actually validated what Hubbard said.
The final trick is the installation of certain "truths" that may never be questioned. Some of these are:
Now you can see why, when I dared to criticize Hubbard, I was (to the Scientologist) actually saying that all of Scientology should be destroyed. That's Scientology Logic!
And, until a Scientologist recovers their ability to think logically, to perceive what is really there and think about and draw obvious conclusions from what they actually see, they will continue to make the most bizarre statements and erroneous "leaps of logic".
But now you know why you can't reason with a True Believer. Their "logic" is pure Scientology Logic.
-
Anyone following along in the discussion thread would have thought the Scientologist to be very, very stupid. There was no way the actual words written could mean what he interpreted them to mean.
But to the Scientologist, it was completely logical.
Let us explore, once again, a bit more into the strange world of Scientology.
For those who have never talked to a Scientologist, Scientology logic looks, to an outsider, like this:
- If A
- And if B
- Then: Tuesday!
Does Scientology work?
- L. Ron Hubbard proclaimed that his technology would and does produce a "Clear", who would have perfect memory, be able to do lightening fast calculations, be free of most diseases and mental upsets.
- On inspection, in the entire history of Dianetics and Scientology, with tens of thousands of people applying Hubbard's technology, not one person has attained this mythical state of Clear.
- Therefore, Scientology works!
Logic is not taught in Scientology, obviously. In fact, logic is frowned upon. They have a drill, called the "Obnosis Drill" which drills a Scientologist to not draw logical conclusions. (Ironically, "obnosis" is a bafflegab word created by Hubbard to mean "observing the obvious"). For example, the course supervisor brings in a person for the students to do the drill on. The drill would go like this:
Supervisor: What do you see?Do you see? Students are drilled not to think, not to draw obvious conclusions, not to assume the self-evident fact that there is an old man there. As ridiculous as you may think my example is, it is essentially a verbatim quote from a real course room drill I witnessed.
Student: I see an old man.
Supervisor: Flunk! Do you see "old"? Do you see "man"? What do you see?
Student: I see a person with wrinkles and short grey hair.
Supervisor: Where do you see wrinkles and grey hair?
Student: I see a person with wrinkles on this side of its face and on the one hand I can see, and grey hair on this side of its head.
And that is just one of a number of Scientology techniques that turns off logic.
Another technique is the constant repetition and enforcement that you may never question anything Hubbard says. What you see, if it contradicts what Hubbard said, is wrong. You must work at it until you can work out that what you saw actually validated what Hubbard said.
The final trick is the installation of certain "truths" that may never be questioned. Some of these are:
- L. Ron Hubbard is always right.
- Scientology always works.
- Evil forces are fighting Scientology.
- Anyone who disagrees with this is Evil.
- ... and so on.
Does Scientology work?
- L. Ron Hubbard proclaimed that his technology would and does produce a "Clear", who would have perfect memory, be able to do lightening fast calculations, be free of most diseases and mental upsets.
- L. Ron Hubbard is always right.
- On inspection, in the entire history of Dianetics and Scientology, with tens of thousands of people applying Hubbard's technology, not one person has attained this mythical state of Clear.
- That statement must be a lie because it contradicts what Ron said, and Ron is always right.
- There must be Clears somewhere, even if I've never seen any, because Hubbard said that Scientology does produce Clears.
- L. Ron Hubbard said Scientology always works.
- Therefore, Scientology works!
Now you can see why, when I dared to criticize Hubbard, I was (to the Scientologist) actually saying that all of Scientology should be destroyed. That's Scientology Logic!
And, until a Scientologist recovers their ability to think logically, to perceive what is really there and think about and draw obvious conclusions from what they actually see, they will continue to make the most bizarre statements and erroneous "leaps of logic".
But now you know why you can't reason with a True Believer. Their "logic" is pure Scientology Logic.
-
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Using Scientology to Solve Scientology's Problems
In several recent discussions, I've seen the seemingly odd suggestion from Scientologists, that Scientologists should apply the Doubt Formula as regards the Church of Scientology.
And you have to be asking, WTF? Why would a Scientologist suggest that other Scientologists apply the Doubt Formula? Wouldn't that result in the Scientologist leaving?
And this leads to related questions on the basic idea of using Scientology "solutions" to solve problems with the Church of Scientology.
Things like writing reports about problems and sending them "up lines" to Scientology management.
Things like seeing the Ethics Officer, or applying conditions.
Each of these Scientology "solutions" is perfectly acceptable to the Church of Scientology and its representatives (and trolls).
The answer as to why these are acceptable should be obvious, but if I left it at that, I'd leave this article a bit short.
The church thinks these are acceptable "solutions" because they are part of the mechanisms that keep Scientologists in line and well-behaved. They are not actual solutions.
It doesn't take long to figure that out, but this fact is mostly hidden from Scientologists.
Let's take a look at a few of these "solutions".
Report any problems "up lines" to management!
And...
What? This informs management and David Miscavige that the reporting party is a troublemaker. No, really. If the problems of Scientology are systemic, and they are, it is obvious that the source of the problems is at the top. Otherwise the problems would be localized -- and eventually handled.
Woe betide the person who reports something about how Miscavige's training now violates Hubbard's policies -- they will get declared. Woe betide the person who reports that the emphasis on money-money-money is ruining the church. You really don't want to do that.
At best, someone will acknowledge they "received your report". And that is it. Guess what? There is no one "up lines" posted to handle such reports! That post is empty. The only person posted is someone to do the "acknowledgements", part-time. The International Base used to have over 1000 staff. Now there are around 300, with quite a few of those "off post, doing conditions".
Will the problem get resolved? Magic 8 Ball says: "Don't hold your breath".
Talk to the Ethics Officer about it.
The Scientology Ethics Officer is the person in charge of handling the local troublemakers to get them back into the fold.
What do you think will happen? The person "with the problem" will be "handled". That's the deal. The squeaky wheel gets, um, "handled".
Most likely the Scientologist will be assigned a lower condition, and supervised to ensure that they comply and, ultimately, stop complaining and start doing good Scientology things, like giving more money.
The "condition formulas" are designed to force the person back into agreement and compliance with Scientology. The "problem" the formulas are designed to handle is wayward Scientologists. More on this below.
But will the Ethics Officer solve the original problem? Nope. Not her job. Per Hubbard policy, reports get filed. Yep, that's it, filed.
The Ethics Officer's job is to handle the complainer, the troublemaker, so that the environment becomes "peaceful" again.
Talk to the Chaplain.
This is an especially delightful "solution". The post of Chaplain in a Church of Scientology is never posted. Isn't that the funniest thing? The one post in every Church of Scientology in the world that you can guarantee is never posted is Chaplain!
However, someone will "hold it from above" so the Scientologist can find someone to talk to.
And the power of the Chaplain to do anything? Zero. Another delightful irony, the post is one of the lowest in the entire organization. No power. So what is going to happen? Yes, nothing.
Apply the Doubt Formula.
We get back to this one. The Church of Scientology actually wants people who are wavering or have questions to apply this formula. Scientology trolls have said it should be done. They are all very, very certain that this "formula" will bring the wavering Scientologist back into obedience.
Why are they so sure?
Because the whole thing is designed to work that way. Let me explain. Yes, I've done this before, but, since I got such nice arguments from trolls, I figured it deserved more attention.
To recap, the Doubt Formula looks like this. L. Ron Hubbard wrote, in part:
Now, combine this with several pieces of very important information.
One is that the real, complete and raw statistics of the Church of Scientology are completely hidden and will not be shown to anyone. Ever.
Another is that the real activities, intentions and objective of the Church of Scientology are hidden and, again, will not be available to a Scientologist.
A third factor is that Scientologists, especially those applying this Doubt Formula, are forbidden to access any source of information that is at all negative about Scientology. Their only source is, and must always be, the Church of Scientology.
The last factor is that, in many, many writings and lectures, Hubbard says that the Church of Scientology is the only group working for good in the entire universe! And that they are opposed by a vast, evil, conspiracy!
Now, Scientologist, go and apply your Doubt Formula, OK?
Get it?
It's completely booby-trapped. If the Scientologist is still "following all the rules", they cannot apply the formula. If they are still "following all the rules" they must come to the conclusion that all doubts are evil, all opposition to the church is evil. And they must come to the conclusion that they have been evil to have had any doubts.
And, ta dah! They are back in the fold.
It's designed that way. This is not accidental, it is deliberate. And, yes, this is thought control
The real solution.
The basic concept here, which is so very important, is: If the problem is with Scientology, then using those "solutions" is pretty much guaranteed to be part of the problem.
You need to step outside the problem to see the truth, and see the solution.
And it is simple.
I trust people. I trust that people will recognize truth when they see it -- if they are willing to see it. And I trust that people, when they have the truth, will do the right thing, whatever that is.
All you need to solve the problem is enough data. Step outside your preconceptions, step outside the control of those who are causing the problem, and look for the information you are missing.
And the information is abundant. I suggest they check out Recovering from Scientology -- the sub-section titled Get more information has links to a lot of great sources for more information.
Scientologists don't need the "Doubt Formula" or Ethics Officers or Chaplains. To solve their problems in Scientology, they just need the truth.
-
And you have to be asking, WTF? Why would a Scientologist suggest that other Scientologists apply the Doubt Formula? Wouldn't that result in the Scientologist leaving?
And this leads to related questions on the basic idea of using Scientology "solutions" to solve problems with the Church of Scientology.
Things like writing reports about problems and sending them "up lines" to Scientology management.
Things like seeing the Ethics Officer, or applying conditions.
Each of these Scientology "solutions" is perfectly acceptable to the Church of Scientology and its representatives (and trolls).
The answer as to why these are acceptable should be obvious, but if I left it at that, I'd leave this article a bit short.
The church thinks these are acceptable "solutions" because they are part of the mechanisms that keep Scientologists in line and well-behaved. They are not actual solutions.
It doesn't take long to figure that out, but this fact is mostly hidden from Scientologists.
Let's take a look at a few of these "solutions".
Report any problems "up lines" to management!
And...
What? This informs management and David Miscavige that the reporting party is a troublemaker. No, really. If the problems of Scientology are systemic, and they are, it is obvious that the source of the problems is at the top. Otherwise the problems would be localized -- and eventually handled.
Woe betide the person who reports something about how Miscavige's training now violates Hubbard's policies -- they will get declared. Woe betide the person who reports that the emphasis on money-money-money is ruining the church. You really don't want to do that.
At best, someone will acknowledge they "received your report". And that is it. Guess what? There is no one "up lines" posted to handle such reports! That post is empty. The only person posted is someone to do the "acknowledgements", part-time. The International Base used to have over 1000 staff. Now there are around 300, with quite a few of those "off post, doing conditions".
Will the problem get resolved? Magic 8 Ball says: "Don't hold your breath".
Talk to the Ethics Officer about it.
The Scientology Ethics Officer is the person in charge of handling the local troublemakers to get them back into the fold.
What do you think will happen? The person "with the problem" will be "handled". That's the deal. The squeaky wheel gets, um, "handled".
Most likely the Scientologist will be assigned a lower condition, and supervised to ensure that they comply and, ultimately, stop complaining and start doing good Scientology things, like giving more money.
The "condition formulas" are designed to force the person back into agreement and compliance with Scientology. The "problem" the formulas are designed to handle is wayward Scientologists. More on this below.
But will the Ethics Officer solve the original problem? Nope. Not her job. Per Hubbard policy, reports get filed. Yep, that's it, filed.
The Ethics Officer's job is to handle the complainer, the troublemaker, so that the environment becomes "peaceful" again.
Talk to the Chaplain.
This is an especially delightful "solution". The post of Chaplain in a Church of Scientology is never posted. Isn't that the funniest thing? The one post in every Church of Scientology in the world that you can guarantee is never posted is Chaplain!
However, someone will "hold it from above" so the Scientologist can find someone to talk to.
And the power of the Chaplain to do anything? Zero. Another delightful irony, the post is one of the lowest in the entire organization. No power. So what is going to happen? Yes, nothing.
Apply the Doubt Formula.
We get back to this one. The Church of Scientology actually wants people who are wavering or have questions to apply this formula. Scientology trolls have said it should be done. They are all very, very certain that this "formula" will bring the wavering Scientologist back into obedience.
Why are they so sure?
Because the whole thing is designed to work that way. Let me explain. Yes, I've done this before, but, since I got such nice arguments from trolls, I figured it deserved more attention.
To recap, the Doubt Formula looks like this. L. Ron Hubbard wrote, in part:
When one cannot make up one's mind as to an individual, a group, organization or project, a condition of Doubt exists.
Doubt Formula:
Then,
- Inform oneself honestly of the actual intentions and activities of that group, project or organization, brushing aside all prejudice and rumor.
- Examine the statistics of the individual, group, project or organization.
(The missing parts say you have to choose, and uses a bunch of Scientologese to say it.)
- Evaluate oneself or one’s own group, project or organization as to intentions and objectives.
- Evaluate one's own or one's group, project or organization's statistics.
Now, combine this with several pieces of very important information.
One is that the real, complete and raw statistics of the Church of Scientology are completely hidden and will not be shown to anyone. Ever.
Another is that the real activities, intentions and objective of the Church of Scientology are hidden and, again, will not be available to a Scientologist.
A third factor is that Scientologists, especially those applying this Doubt Formula, are forbidden to access any source of information that is at all negative about Scientology. Their only source is, and must always be, the Church of Scientology.
The last factor is that, in many, many writings and lectures, Hubbard says that the Church of Scientology is the only group working for good in the entire universe! And that they are opposed by a vast, evil, conspiracy!
Now, Scientologist, go and apply your Doubt Formula, OK?
Get it?
It's completely booby-trapped. If the Scientologist is still "following all the rules", they cannot apply the formula. If they are still "following all the rules" they must come to the conclusion that all doubts are evil, all opposition to the church is evil. And they must come to the conclusion that they have been evil to have had any doubts.
And, ta dah! They are back in the fold.
It's designed that way. This is not accidental, it is deliberate. And, yes, this is thought control
The real solution.
The basic concept here, which is so very important, is: If the problem is with Scientology, then using those "solutions" is pretty much guaranteed to be part of the problem.
You need to step outside the problem to see the truth, and see the solution.
And it is simple.
I trust people. I trust that people will recognize truth when they see it -- if they are willing to see it. And I trust that people, when they have the truth, will do the right thing, whatever that is.
All you need to solve the problem is enough data. Step outside your preconceptions, step outside the control of those who are causing the problem, and look for the information you are missing.
And the information is abundant. I suggest they check out Recovering from Scientology -- the sub-section titled Get more information has links to a lot of great sources for more information.
Scientologists don't need the "Doubt Formula" or Ethics Officers or Chaplains. To solve their problems in Scientology, they just need the truth.
-
Friday, January 30, 2009
Scientology Thought Control - Part 3
We covered, in Scientology Thought Control - Part 1, how simple definitions can change the way that people think. In that example, the Hubbardisms entheta and theta cause Scientologists to reject "negative" information ("entheta") about the church even when true, and accept "positive" information ("theta") about the church even if false.
However, I don't want to give the impression that these are the only words and the only concept that inculcates the thought control ability in Scientologists. There are many, many Scientology words, phrases and concepts that work in that direction.
One of the most pervasive and powerful concepts for thought control is Hubbard's ideas about the "Overt-Motivator Sequence". This is, really, Hubbard's reworking of the idea of karma. The short version is: One first does something bad (an "overt") and subsequently, one "pulls in" (causes something to happen to oneself) something bad (a "motivator") as an after-the-fact excuse for the previous overt.
Get it? If anything bad happens to you, it's because you "pulled it in" -- because of your overts!
Understand that, in Scientology, this is an absolute. Anything bad that happens to you is your fault!
The engine falls off a jetliner and lands on you, it's totally your fault. How can that be? Well, it's probably because sometime, in some past life, you dropped a jet engine on someone else -- or something.
See? It's all your fault.
And one of the manifestations of having an overt is that you start complaining about what was done to you. The Scientological response to someone complaining about what was done to them is, "What did you do?"
This is one very important component in Scientology thought control.
And here is a key point: Anything the Church of Scientology does to you is your fault! And you can never complain.
If the church, or Miscavige, does something harmful to you -- you "pulled it in".
Woe betide you if you dare complain or even hint that it's not right. Oh boy! If you did that, you'd be in serious trouble! "What did you do? It's your overts! It's all the bad things you've done!"
So Scientologists never complain. Further, to stay out of trouble, they will actually lie and say "I'm happy, everything is fine!"
Scientology thought control: It's all your fault, you are the criminal, so shut up and "be happy!"
So, for Scientologists, here is a little thought exercise: Why don't you apply the same criteria to Miscavige and the Church of Scientology that they impose on you.
I'm not saying this whole "Overt-Motivator" theory is absolutely correct, but if you believe it, then apply it to Miscavige and Scientology as well. What did they do?
Then find the answers. You will learn a lot.
-
However, I don't want to give the impression that these are the only words and the only concept that inculcates the thought control ability in Scientologists. There are many, many Scientology words, phrases and concepts that work in that direction.
One of the most pervasive and powerful concepts for thought control is Hubbard's ideas about the "Overt-Motivator Sequence". This is, really, Hubbard's reworking of the idea of karma. The short version is: One first does something bad (an "overt") and subsequently, one "pulls in" (causes something to happen to oneself) something bad (a "motivator") as an after-the-fact excuse for the previous overt.
Get it? If anything bad happens to you, it's because you "pulled it in" -- because of your overts!
Understand that, in Scientology, this is an absolute. Anything bad that happens to you is your fault!
The engine falls off a jetliner and lands on you, it's totally your fault. How can that be? Well, it's probably because sometime, in some past life, you dropped a jet engine on someone else -- or something.
See? It's all your fault.
And one of the manifestations of having an overt is that you start complaining about what was done to you. The Scientological response to someone complaining about what was done to them is, "What did you do?"
This is one very important component in Scientology thought control.
Now, it must be noted here that this concept does not include David Miscavige or the Church of Scientology, nor did it ever include L. Ron Hubbard. If anything bad happens to Miscavige or Scientology, it is because they only do good -- and Evil People are attacking them. When Miscavige complains about all that has been done to him, it's because he is the only good person around. No overts there!So, to get back to the rest of us, this means that you can never complain. If you're in deep debt from paying Scientology so much money -- it's completely your fault. If you didn't get the expected gains from Scientology -- it's your fault. If you ran your business strictly according to Hubbard and it failed -- it's totally your fault.
And here is a key point: Anything the Church of Scientology does to you is your fault! And you can never complain.
If the church, or Miscavige, does something harmful to you -- you "pulled it in".
Woe betide you if you dare complain or even hint that it's not right. Oh boy! If you did that, you'd be in serious trouble! "What did you do? It's your overts! It's all the bad things you've done!"
So Scientologists never complain. Further, to stay out of trouble, they will actually lie and say "I'm happy, everything is fine!"
Scientology thought control: It's all your fault, you are the criminal, so shut up and "be happy!"
So, for Scientologists, here is a little thought exercise: Why don't you apply the same criteria to Miscavige and the Church of Scientology that they impose on you.
- Miscavige constantly complains about everyone else, what they've "done to him", what "crimes" they're committing against him, how bad everyone else is. His rants are famous. So ask: What are his crimes?
- The Church of Scientology is collapsing. Governments are investigating and taking Scientology organizations to court. There are protests -- and they are not stopping. Lawsuits are being filed against the church. People are leaving and very few new people are coming in. Bad things are happening to the church all over the world. So ask: What did the church do to "pull it in"?
I'm not saying this whole "Overt-Motivator" theory is absolutely correct, but if you believe it, then apply it to Miscavige and Scientology as well. What did they do?
Then find the answers. You will learn a lot.
-
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Scientology Thought Control - Part 1
First, let me clarify what is meant by "Thought Control". Many people believe that thought control means that a person's thoughts are controlled by some external force -- another person or group -- but that isn't the case. Thought control is that a person learns to control their own thoughts based on certain rules. It is self-imposed control over one's own thoughts.
When you start talking about Scientology's "thought control", many Scientologists get upset, "No one is controlling my thoughts, I'm the one in full control," and that is, actually, true. They are in control, but they are not free.
To become a Scientologist, you must learn to control your thoughts, and your actions, to conform to the rules and requirements of Miscavige's Church of Scientology.
Let me give one example of how this works. There are many, many ways this is done, but this example is one of the earliest learned.
"Entheta"
As is standard in Scientology, this is a made-up word by L. Ron Hubbard. The definition of "entheta" is "enturbulated theta". "Theta" is defined as "life force". "Enturbulate" is defined, by Hubbard as "to agitate or disturb; to upset."
So "entheta" is "agitated or disturbed life force". Or, more simply, "entheta" means upsetting news, information, circumstances, etc.
In Scientology, entheta is bad. Scientologists learn that good news (or "theta") is "good" and bad news (or "entheta") is "bad". Entheta must be rejected by all loyal Scientologists -- especially "entheta" about Scientology, Dianetics, Hubbard or Miscavige. Anything upsetting must be rejected as entheta. Entheta will harm you. Entheta will interfere with your "progress up the 'Bridge to Total Freedom'!" Entheta is bad.
But notice something very, very important. The definition of "entheta" has absolutely nothing to do with what is true or what is false!
The automatic response that Scientologists have learned, that they must reject all entheta, is completely outside of truth and lies. Negative and upsetting information about Scientology, Dianetics, Hubbard and Miscavige must be rejected as entheta even if absolutely true.
And the corollary is also learned and practised by all Scientologists: Good news and information about Scientology, Dianetics, Hubbard and Miscavige must be accepted because it's "theta" even if completely false.
Of course, Scientologists are not allowed to think in terms of what might be true in any negative information or what might be lies in any good news. They may only think in terms of "entheta" and "theta".
And so, Scientologists learn to control their thoughts according to what is "entheta" and what is "theta", and not by what is true and what is false.
If a Scientologist reads or hears something about Scientology, Dianetics, Hubbard or Miscavige that upsets them, they automatically and without thought reject it as "entheta". They no longer allow themselves to think about truth and lies. It is self-imposed thought control.
It's easy once you get the basics down.
-
When you start talking about Scientology's "thought control", many Scientologists get upset, "No one is controlling my thoughts, I'm the one in full control," and that is, actually, true. They are in control, but they are not free.
To become a Scientologist, you must learn to control your thoughts, and your actions, to conform to the rules and requirements of Miscavige's Church of Scientology.
Let me give one example of how this works. There are many, many ways this is done, but this example is one of the earliest learned.
"Entheta"
As is standard in Scientology, this is a made-up word by L. Ron Hubbard. The definition of "entheta" is "enturbulated theta". "Theta" is defined as "life force". "Enturbulate" is defined, by Hubbard as "to agitate or disturb; to upset."
So "entheta" is "agitated or disturbed life force". Or, more simply, "entheta" means upsetting news, information, circumstances, etc.
In Scientology, entheta is bad. Scientologists learn that good news (or "theta") is "good" and bad news (or "entheta") is "bad". Entheta must be rejected by all loyal Scientologists -- especially "entheta" about Scientology, Dianetics, Hubbard or Miscavige. Anything upsetting must be rejected as entheta. Entheta will harm you. Entheta will interfere with your "progress up the 'Bridge to Total Freedom'!" Entheta is bad.
But notice something very, very important. The definition of "entheta" has absolutely nothing to do with what is true or what is false!
The automatic response that Scientologists have learned, that they must reject all entheta, is completely outside of truth and lies. Negative and upsetting information about Scientology, Dianetics, Hubbard and Miscavige must be rejected as entheta even if absolutely true.
And the corollary is also learned and practised by all Scientologists: Good news and information about Scientology, Dianetics, Hubbard and Miscavige must be accepted because it's "theta" even if completely false.
Of course, Scientologists are not allowed to think in terms of what might be true in any negative information or what might be lies in any good news. They may only think in terms of "entheta" and "theta".
And so, Scientologists learn to control their thoughts according to what is "entheta" and what is "theta", and not by what is true and what is false.
If a Scientologist reads or hears something about Scientology, Dianetics, Hubbard or Miscavige that upsets them, they automatically and without thought reject it as "entheta". They no longer allow themselves to think about truth and lies. It is self-imposed thought control.
It's easy once you get the basics down.
-
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
