Katy, I take it that you are a Christian as you have quoted the New Testament scriptures concerning being deceived. I am a Christian, and as such appreciate your thoughts on the spiritual aspects of being demonized as that adds to the physical proof that these researchers have demonstrated. God Bless.

It’s demonic. One tool of Satan is to control your mind. If he can control your mind then he can control your actions. I see a massive display of this in Scientology. There is a reason why the scriptures say to put on the full armor of God… the helmet being a very important piece of the armor, to protect your head from all the deceptions in the world (Ephesians 6:10-18). And talking of control…. this method is no different from a spouse that controls and abuses their partner… it’s an effort to destroy the other person and control everything they do… and the victim always struggles to leave!

Individuals like David Miscavidge, and even the pope (though I’m sure many will curse at me for that one) are just two examples of leaders that are actually “blind leaders of the blind” and “both will fall in a ditch”. Those doing the false teaching/indoctrinating are equally deceived, going along with this lie as if it’s truth.

Back to the topic… It’s a sad reality that when reaching out to a person, to expose a false teaching, that they will always gets defensive and see it as a personal attack. Even the newest of Catholics will be quick to defend catholicism, even when lacking the knowledge of the church teachings… because that religion has become a part of their identity. But I think the best method is to focus on exposing the false teachings.

There are people out there whose job is to “deactivate/deprogram” people stuck in these cults. They’re trained and successful in it. I’m not sure of their title?? But maybe it would be an idea to reach out to one of them to help?

Dawn, those caught in a scam (false subject) who can only view it through the false lens of the subject will remain trapped. THAT, if you look at all their comments are the common denominator to the few Ron Bots that visit this blog.

Marildi – what makes you think “ser facs” are anything more than some more made up stuff to keep us in line?

Hubbard didn’t like anyone challenging him, so “ser facs” became another “useful” tool to keep people from digging their heels in about anything.

The real task for an x cult member is the rehabilitaion of critical thinking.

1) practice stillness. This puts our control over cognitive faculties.
2) self enquirer. Looking within at self and being constructively self critical
3) self forgiveness

And the granddaddy of them all:

Discriminating between the real and the unreal
Discriminating between lies and truth
Uprooting learned, study teched behavior, that has become an habitual thought pattern and now part of our subconscious.

Learning the practice of meditation has helped me to unravel Ron’s false influence.

Brilliant Bruce!!

“Some therapists now don’t have patients look at negative emotions and behavior over and over because they feel looking at it strengthens it. ”

Caught my eye. A standard question in Dianetics is: “Is the incident erasing, or going more solid?” If it is going more solid, then ask for an earlier similar incident until the bottom of the chain is hit and the entire chain erases. Intuitively, it’s fairly obvious that the first trauma will be the one the individual remembers as the determining cause and effect, perhaps analogous to “first impressions” formed when meeting someone. In other instances, negative emotions will not resolve until one knows the basis for them, the structure of them, and Scientology processes address that.

Very interesting post. A book I’m part way into is “Formal Logic: A Philosophical Approach” by Paul Hoyningen-Huene. And Aristotle. Of course, I am an independent Scientologists, so obviously totally brainwashed into the pure belief that logic is valid in discerning causalities.

Here’s a very detailed abstract (scholarly paper) on fmri imaging used to study the physiological reactions to counterevidence. It has an interpretation of results that asserts the brain activity in the amygdala regarding counterevidence for deeply held beliefs may be quite similar to that activated by actual physical threats.

In other words the emotional reaction to evidence we are wrong is possibly as strong as if one was being attacked and in mortal danger. This hypothesis is supported by research on confirmation bias, the consistency principle as described by Robert Cialdini, and cognitive dissonance theory as described by Leon Festinger.

http://www.nature.com/articles/srep39589

??