Another essay from our old friend Brian Lambert about the writings of L. Ron Hubbard.
Grief
In my past experience with studying Scientology, I noticed some sane human traits being definitionally degraded by some of Ron’s doctrines.
And as these redefinitions became part of my personality, I found one of the casualties to be……………..grief.
It’s hard enough sometimes for us men to cry without Hubbard’s added burden of assigning grief to a low position on the tone scale. What Hubbard did to grief, by putting it in a lower position below hate and hostility was definitional rape.
Hubbard’s redefinition, by assigning gradient number values to words, as he does in the Tone Scale, have powerful consequences in how Scientologists live their lives, how they interact with people and how they express their humanity or lack of it.
The Tone Scale is instructional. It’s application becomes behavioral.
An example of Hubbard’s doctrines becoming behavioral is illustrated in the parlance of the Scientology community: shedding tears is called being “griefy” – a condescending term. That condescension of grief became part of Scientology group think on how to react and deal with the deep feeling of loss and emotional intimacy.
I wrote an essay called Thoughts on the Tone Scale which appeared earlier on this blog.
In this essay I take a look at the perverted numerical relationship between hate and sympathy that the tone scale teaches.
Now I’d like to include the human emotion of grief in that observation:
Hubbard put grief, as well as sympathy, below hate and hostility on the Tone Scale.
What can be the implications of this? – coupled with the “100% Standard Scientology Tech” which states that grief is also part of the reactive mind: a secondary.
Hubbard put grief at .5 on the tone scale. That’s even lower than sympathy! And disturbingly, lower than hate and hostility!
Tears then, for the loss of a loved one, is an aberration in Scientology.
In Scientology grief is handled. In other words – it’s suppressed and erased in auditing.
Hubbard placed grief in his chain of engrams. By so doing Hubbard effectively transformed grief also into an aberration – a mental illness. Just like what he did to the family unit (see my earlier essay The GE is a Family Man).
He changed our perception of the value of family by defining family urges as being the product of a low, stupid, psychotic entity who is incapable of being reasoned with.
He also degraded how we perceive the sadness of loss, and how we deal with others when they are experiencing grief. Maybe that is why it’s so easy for Scientology thugs to break up families. The whole subject of loss and grief was made into a mental illness, an aberration, a weakness.
The devastation of broken families, the heart wrenching tears of disconnection, is perceived by the Scientology power brokers as unhandled aberrations. That no sympathy trait was trained into the Scientologist with Hubbard’s doctrines.
Their tears are something to erase with auditing.
Their tears are defined as having their source from pain and unconscious, not from emotional intimacy and familial love.
A Post Scientology Understanding of Grief
Grief is a measurement of the love and deep connection we have for those we love. Grief is sacred. Animals and liberated beings cry.
Grief is a natural , emotionally appropriate reaction to human loss.
If I did not know you and you died, it would be no big deal to me. But if my friends or family died, I’d be devastated. That devastation, is a precise measure of the sacred human love I have for my own people; those whose lives are sacred to me.
Grief is not below hate on the tone scale. That is definition rape. I can’t emphasize that enough.
Grief does not find its source and resolution from auditing the engram chain, which, cements grief in association, doctrinally and psychologically- always to physical pain and unconsciousness.
That engram association is a degradation of the positive utility of grief.
Grief comes from the heart. Grief comes from the open heart. Grief is painful. Grief is natural. Grief is transformational.
The conscious embracing and direct experience of grief, is one of the vital steps to healing psychologically from that loss. Google it!
Final Thoughts
This is yet another revelation that, in my view, Hubbard was a sociopath. He was angry when he found out his son died.
If you are a father, could you even imagine that state of mind if your beloved son died?
No tears, no sympathy, just anger and rage because that poor sweet boy sullied the public relation of a man who was, in my opinion, devoid of feeling intimately the suffering of others.
In Hubbard’s valuation of words on the Tone Scale, it would be higher toned to start a hostile and angry fight at grandma’s memorial than shed tears for the moving on of a beloved family member.
By defining grief as a mental illness, the Scientologist then has justification, by way of the application of the “tech”, to interpret the sad terrible anguish of enforced disconnection as part of the reactive mind – a mental problem to be hunted down and destroyed in auditing.
That is a crime of philosophy, a crime of psychology and an attack on the humanity and sacredness of the intimate bonds between friends and family during times of loss.
Embracing totally the heart wrenching feeling of losing a loved one is the very road to healing that loss. Google it. Grief IS part of the healing process.
Seeking to erase, deny and denigrate grief is a bad doctrine. And it may very well be a training step to sociopathy: creating people devoid of our feeling nature through the Hubbard-valuation of vital and healthy human emotions.
Grief is something to embrace and be healed by, not erased.
What do you think? I’d love to know. Disagreements welcomed.
Warm Regards,
Brian
Grief hurts. It also heals. Its existence does not come from being crushed to death by a boulder in Imperial Rome in 182 A.D.
The essay on grief certainly triggered Ron apologists. Promoting the goodness of Hubbard after reading this essay on grief is very telling on the depth of brainwashing.
Foolproof and Michael are valuable specimens for clinical observation.
The stuck mind loop of nasty, from Foolproof, is such a great example of what Scientology does to the mind. Foolproof actually thinks he’s doing something of value.
His delusional certainty and nastiness denigrates himself more than anyone else.
Foolproof is an example of the mind on Scientology.
There are some wonderful heartfelt comments after the “attack the critics” and Rah rah for Hubbard comments of the Scientologists.
Really beautiful comments. You just have to wade through the pre schoolers first to get to the good stuff.
If Ron Hubbards parents had protected themselves everyone had gone boom.
You need to look at the (implants) Robot motivators in “The History of Man”. Look at “degrader”, this will help you understand what you are.
Bye Mike
Bye 🙂
But before you go, check out the Piltdown Man in that “cold, blooded factual account” and then google it.
And then you need to read exactly what Hubbard states, not what Mike dubs in or twists to suit his point. Hint: it’s something like “a humanoid LIKE Piltdown Man”. Actually Mike looks a bit like Neanderthal Man.
Wow, I didnt expect even you to try to defend the foolishness in HOM.
But you are at least consistent Fool. You try to pretend Hubbard didn’t buy “the Piltdown” hook, line and sinker and include it in the “cold-blooded factual account of your last 76 trillion years” (which is what all the things described in HOM are described as). No “dub in” or “twists” here. You are the one doing that.
Here is what Hubbard said, exactly.
Wriggle on Fool, you jumped into this with both feet in your mouth.
The Piltdown Man
Man’s first real Manhood is found in the PILTDOWN, a creature not an ape, yet not entirely a Man. It is so named not because it is accurately the real Piltdown Man but because it has some similarity.
The PILTDOWN contains freakish acts of strange “logic,” of demonstrating dangerous on one’s fellows, of eating one’s wife and other somewhat illogical activities. The PILTDOWN teeth were ENORMOUS and he was quite careless as to whom and what he bit and often very much surprised at the resulting damage.
Obsessions about biting, efforts to hide the mouth and early familial troubles can be found in the PILTDOWN. It is a wonderful area in which to locate GE overt acts.
Perhaps we should delve deeper into the mysteries of Hubbard’s science with a discussion of the often overlooked and just as bizarre Scientology 8-80 and its “Black and White” processing.
The Piltdown Man was a concept which turned out to be based on a falsehood apparently, but the idea has some probable basis in fact, as you can see when you look in the mirror – one sees the Neanderthal Man, which is similar (haha!) Perhaps one should Method 9 word clear the following: “it is so named not because it is accurately the real Piltdown Man but because it has some similarity.” The Piltdown Man as a concept was in vogue at the time he mentioned it, but he could have used any similar ideas of early man, which is the real point.
As to this discussion on Piltdown Man, we argued about this a few months back (that there was nothing really to argue about), so I recommend doing a few Self Analysis Lists to sift out such memories from the mounds of entheta and falsehoods that you must wade through every day in the comments section. Another “haha!”
As to the techniques involved (GE etc.) these have been superseded, so again to make some sort of daft point out of it is scraping the bottom of the barrel in order to find something to criticize.
Hahahaha — anyone can read what he says and see he took the Piltdown Man as FACT and worse that he had discovered incidents relating to this fictitious thing in auditing including its eating habits.
As you well know, Hubbard claims the “History of Man” is based on his “research” into the Whole Track using the E-Meter and describing “incidents” preclears had supposedly recounted.
And are you saying that you do NOT think what is written in 8-80 is FACT (whether the processes are still used or not)? That would be a first.
Okay, here goes.
We, as beings are three combined into 1, a Tetrahedron.
1part is the Thetan, 1 part is the body, the 3rd part is what would have prevented the money flow and Scientology from continuing.
We are an artificial intelligence, LRH at the time had nothing to compare it with except machines (ACC1).
He tells us over and over in the PDC’s.
How fast would people have locked him up in the fifties if he told us his discoveries?
We are combined with robots, computers, code, DNA.
We are all slightly different. Fingerprints prove this.
Ask any computer programmer, they will tell you that all programs are slightly different.
100001, 100010, 110011…
How many people would have joined the church?
LRH went around the world and noticed that sounds, different sounds and symbols meant the same.
This is the analytical mind.
Let’s take this on a lower gradient.
Let’s look at an APP on your phone.
Frist thing we have to do to get the app to work is give it an energy charge, turn it on.
This is located in your heart. You need a pacemaker when it fails.
In order to get the app to work next is touch it. Then go to the menu and tell it what to do.
These are the implants in HOM.
To get the app (inside your body) to move around, twirl, boxer, prover, jiggle, degrader weeper etc.
Is this helping anyone remember?
What happens when your phone gets too hot or too cold?
Just put your computer next to a space heater.
Does 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit ring the belfrey.
Then blast it with Service Facsimile One, then you have to get the Thetan to forget he did it. “The forgetter.”
What fun would it be playing a game of chess with yourself if you knew the game plan?
What happens when you drop your phone?
Not good.
What happens when you get knocked out?
Not good.
The Thaten keeps recording and remembers everything, the robot gets all screwed up, just like your phone.
Look at it, how did you learn how to walk, you watched other people, who watched other people, who watched other people.
Facsimiles, 8-8008.
This robot without the Thetan would drive off a cliff if it’s facsimiles (recordings) told it to, the reason it doesn’t is because of us.
When we practice doing something, like work, what happens? We get better.
We can just look at a situation, a problem, a game and just do it, solve it and play.
Keeping this as a PRIME THOUGHT.
Now go look in the mirror and what do you really see.
Please feel free to ask me questions.
Written by,
Michael Klocek
Sorry you felt the need to explain this.
Have you been in touch with the new LRH? I think you would have a lot to talk about.
Yeah, I heard about what he was like in the 70’s and 80’s.
You know him.
I just know what I learned on the basics up through the ACC’s.
Look at our planet, Earth travels around the sun, not too hot, not too cold.
Most populations thrive along this dichotomy.
Most wars were fought along this dichotomy of the 38th parallel.
Mongolia-China, Gettysburg, Turkey (Mesothelioma) Rome, Korea, France-Germany, (Ottoman Epire). The revolutionary war. Most of the battles written in religion.
Most of the fresh water flows through this dichotomy, or rests just above it.
The Earth tilts on it’s axis, Why? Cold/Hot.
Right now you feel that I’m crazy.
What would have happened to LRH and Scientology in the 50’s if this is the storyline.
There is more.
I’m bummed that for Scientologists over 60 years now, most never completed the basics.
Michael Klocek
Thank you for listening.
If there are other people who see this let me know.
LMAO! Brain-washed, psycho cult members can be relied on to make excuses for any lies told by their master.
Well done Logicproof!
Sad to see you go.
You are missing the point.
I’ll be fine without you, no need to worry yourself.
Isn’t it curious these two show up together.
I presume you mean me here? No, don’t worry – there is only 1 Dynamic Duo in operation here – you and Jesuit George as evidenced by those links I posted. Michael is being far too straightforward here swimming in these shark-infested waters.
Brian, what I was trying to say is look at the implants in HOM and compare them to the tone scale.
Degrader is 1.1, boxer is anger, weeper is grief, etc….
We all have these inside us.
That’s the robotic program.
Us as Thetan’s or spirits are or should be in control of them. We are attached to them.
We choose this.
We agreed to it.
Mike Klocek
Just to clear things up I wasn’t calling anyone in specific a “degrader”
We all have this inplant inside of us, it is part of one side of the triangle or the Tetrahedron.
Mike Klocek
So, Michael as it is a suppressive act for a scamologist to even read this blog, how long have you been working for OSA? I just checked with their computers and you DID finish a KSW course at CCI a number of years ago so you wouldn’t be here without orders from HCO or OSA…
No, I didn’t know about a suppressive act and don’t really care, don’t know what OSA or HSA is.
I completed my Basic’s online, all 29 courses in about 7 months and AOLA put under the oversight of CLO Western continental division then I went to route on to the Purification and a suppressive EO excommunicated me. My guess is because I understand too much. The EO went robotic.
Keep asking me questions because I don’t know where to go next.
I’m looking for Scientologists who have the same understanding as I do.
Bye Mike
I’m looking for Scientologists who have the same understanding as I do.
🙂 🙂 🙂
Well Michael, scamologists are basically stupid at this point in time as they cannot use logic. So finding one with your level of understanding shouldn’t a be problem IF you can find one at all. They are a rare and dying breed. Try Foolproof, he posts here and isn’t the brightest bulb in the refrigerator.
Wynski sees OSA and HCO people on every street corner.
Besides Piltdown Man, which was proven to be based on a hoax*, a professor of biology dissected some of the book’s other claims, in a piece on the Underground Bunker:
“Reading the whole book, I’m struck by just how ignorant Hubbard was of the state of science in the early 1950s, how little he said to actually justify his notions as scientific, and how wrong he was about everything. The impression given is of a poorly informed, relatively unread and uneducated individual, who is reflecting weakly understood material gleaned from casual reading of newspapers and popular magazines — he is spectacularly ignorant.”
https://tonyortega.org/2013/08/09/pz-myers-helps-us-plunder-the-riches-of-l-ron-hubbards-book-of-scientology-evolution/
HOM contains many other claims that are scientifically false, and is one of Hubbard’s nuttiest works, probably because of its origins. Is FoolProof going to come out and defend this nonsense, or is it too far beyond the pale for even a dedicated apologist?
“Hubbard’s son, L. Ron Hubbard Jr. (otherwise known as “Nibs,” or Ronald DeWolf) and Hubbard senior’s medical officer, Jim Dincalci, have both stated that the book’s content originated when Hubbard fed his son amphetamines:
[Hubbard] gave his son Nibs some amphetamines, and Nibs started talking, he said, started really going talking fast, from the speed. And he kept talking, he kept talking, and his dad kept giving him speed and all of a sudden he was talking about his history, when he was a clam and all these different situations in early Earth. And out of that came History of Man.[4]”
“A History of Man has attracted a good deal of comment from critical reviewers and analysts of Scientology. As Marco Frenschkowski notes, it is a “very strange book easily ridiculed”.[12] Ex-Scientologist Jon Atack describes it as “among the most bizarre of Hubbard’s works, [which] deserves the cult status that some truly dreadful science fiction movies have achieved”.[2] The Anderson Report of 1965 comments that “To say it is an astonishing document does not adequately convey the peculiar qualities or contents of “The History of Man … For compressed nonsense and fantasy it must surpass anything theretofore written.”[13] Hubbard’s unofficial biographer Russell Miller describes it in similar terms as “one of Hubbard’s most bizarre works and possibly the most absurd book ever written”, which “invited the derision which was inevitably forthcoming.”[14] Bent Corydon, a former Scientologist, criticises A History of Man on Scientological grounds, pointing out that Hubbard’s “imaginings, opinions, or observations” are presented as established facts – in effect, instructing the Scientologist in what he should remember, rather than letting him find out for himself.[15]
Apart from the unusual style of narration, which Miller describes as having “wobbled uncertainly between schoolboy fiction and a pseudo-scientific medical paper”,[14] many of Hubbard’s claims in A History of Man are incompatible with established scientific knowledge.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology:_A_History_of_Man#Critical_views
If FoolProof or anyone else wants to defend the work’s validity, I’m sure they can cherry-pick a few things that are plausible, and possibly even in some way correct (but hardly new) observations about human nature to tout. It reminds me of the the old saying, that even a stopped clock is right twice a day – and that if you have enough monkeys typing long enough, they will produce a few things that might be construed to make some sort of sense. But how can such a stew of drug-addled nonsense really be defended, when it points to how flawed, and lacking in “science” (in spite of specific claims to such), Hubbard’s approach to his “work” was?
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
Yes! Thank you Peacemaker for this comment.
See my comment above, you’re another one with literal understanding hoping that others with literal understanding will agree with you, which is quite easily achievable here.
And further, your “scientists” and “science” accepted this (Piltdown Man) for quite some while. The irony eh?
Wrong again, “Foolproof” – you should have read the reference about Piltdown Man:
“Almost from the outset, Woodward’s reconstruction of the Piltdown fragments was strongly challenged by some researchers. ”
Anyway, real science eventually finds and corrects its mistakes. Hubbard would never even clearly acknowledge the work that he later “superseded” as you put it – shouldn’t things that where outdated and wrong, have been corrected and revised (many other authors revise various types of works) if not even pulled from publication? – much less admit errors. Scientology is mostly dogma, not science, and while there might be a few seemingly useful pieces, much of it is still as much junk as the easily discreditable parts of Hubbard’s early garbage like HOM.
I take it that besides admitting that Hubbard’s “church” has gone astray, you’ve already rejected Hubbard’s hagiography, and have conceded that he lied about his background such as being a supposed “very good friend” of occultist Aleister Crowley. I’d think you’d recognize that it’s time to back away from trying to defend the worst of the theoretical nonsense, like this stuff in HOM, that he was claiming at the same time that he was fabricating his personal history.
And on the subject of accepted science, it’s worth noting that for instance modern science has thoroughly disproved Hubbard’s model of the brain as as a sort of computer with unlimited storage that is completely reprogrammable. fMRI research in particular shows that different parts of the brain not only operate differently but are sized differently in ways that influence behavior, or at least behavioral tendencies. Has any part of the “subject” of Scientology caught up with that, or is it all still wedded to Hubbard’s Piltdown Man-era theories?
“Hubbard’s model of the brain” – well this is new to me! Hubbard actually stated the opposite that the brain theory boys couldn’t explain how all those memories were stored in cells.
As to “lying” about his friendship with Crowley – see above. if you want to interpret that as a lie then that is your problem and misconstruing.
And has “real science” ever, ever done anything about the human mind? What then? I’m all ears – they still think the mind is the brain and electrocute it and drug it daily. You’re talking rubbish.
Well, that seems an impressive list of quotes above! So when we examine the erudite utterings above we have a professor of biology (at first glance not bad), but then Jon Atak, Nils Hubbard, Russell Miller and Bent Corydon the last 4 of which were all hoping to make some sort of a living out of criticizing Scientology, and the first of which (the professor) waffles away without giving any specifics – which professors are prone to do, especially when they don’t have a clue about the human mind anyway. And what do these quotes actually impart? Actually nothing apart from biased opinions.
Probably the real story here is that these dudes reading HOM, get all restimulated and want to forget their past lives – one wonders why eh?
Hi Brian – I’m a few days behind on reading this blog and I hope you read my comment. Again another great essay and agree with your every word. This is especially timely for me because I recently lost a family member and am grieving. I can’t relay enough how delighted I am being out of this cult at this time. Right now I’m not having to deal with the incessant calls from regges, supervisors, auditors, CSes, ethics officers, so called friends, etc. to get me to come in for a session to handle this “loss”, “secondary” or “griefy tone level” in order to get my ass back on course.
In the past, I now realize that I never took enough time out to grieve for my lost family members. No, instead I had to deal with stupid cold callous comments like, “how old was your grad-mother? Oh, well she lived a long life, so?” or “it’s just a body, get over it” or one of my favorites “you know, he/she pulled it in”. Such empathy! Right now it feels good to let myself and family members grieve and giving support and SYMPATHY without the stigma of feeling bad because I’m showing sympathy and understanding to a “griefy” individual (god-forbid).
Your essays and comments always give me food for thought and are greatly appreciated. By the way, last week (I think) I wrote you in one of your comments about how much I loved your interview with Ron Sr. and how I can’t wait for the second one. In case you didn’t see my comment I’m repeating it again.
Thank you so much Mrs.P. I’m touched by your words. I’m touched that you can feel emotional intimacy without the sociopathic influence. God, our humanity was deranged, but now we are free to grow again.
The Ron Miscavige interview was fun. He’s a character. He’s got that east coast vibe like me. I’m glad you enjoyed it. I love writing. Being a happy Scientology critic has given me a new fun art form.
I’m sorry for your loss. Blessing and love to you Mrs.P. Thank you for your appreciation.
And……..there is a second Ron Inteview. It’s the one called “What happened to Likky Mechecknie”.
You should know that a Thetan in control of a body should be able to flow smoothly up and down the Tone Scale. So cry away.
You should know that Ron was a sociopath. The tone scale is fake science. There are some true numerical relationships on the tone scale.
But just like everything from Ron, for every one thing that was true, there are scores of psychological dangers ready to destroy intelligence, conscience, free thinking and sanity.
Hubbard sold poison honey. Tastes good at first and then……..
Twwwwaaappp! goes the mose trap.
Quoting him or referring to his doctrines as if there is some benevolent value in it does not serve you, Michael, in this environment.
Axioms 1-4 and 35.
This is my response.
I can always tell when someone never competed the simple Basics’s.
I’ve talked to Scientologists, that tell me they know soo much, good and bad, “I’ve been a Scientologists for years.” They say.
Then they talk about the dynamics or the Tone Scale.
You have to look around you, what do really see, what do you really know.
Just to fill you in about me.
I completed all 29 courses online in less than 7 months.
Then the Church excommunicated me because I learned too much.
Go figure.
Ask me any questions.
Gotta go to work.
Keep in touch please.
Bye Mike
You are probably safer learning on your own. Thanks for letting me know where you are at Mike.
What should I learn next?
Whatever you are interested in. That’s how free thinkers learn.
Touchy Brian misinterpreting a comment and lashing out yet again. We’re not all out to get you Brian!
As for Michael, asking for advice from Brian what you should learn next is like asking Chairman Mao how you can become an investment banker!
Based on the Axioms and further cognitions, the tone scale doesn’t exist, same goes with the dynamics. These are things that LRH leaves out until OT Vlll and beyond. This should be a cognition on ACC1.
Now should I mention something (disparaging) here about this erudite piece of er, knowledge… Nah! Can’t be bothered.
Motivators can be dangerous.
On a steep gradient, you are responsible for them.
Michael, don’t start on me or write comments on things where you have a superficial knowledge. And I was somewhat defending you, after all it’s not often that Mike gets called a Degrader! Well, as far as I know anyway.
I’ll give you a tip, when one has just learned Scientology, don’t go around directly accusing people like No-Wynski and Brain and Jesuit George of being implanters – it’s probably true you see and they don’t like it – be more subtle – like me! Haha!
I never said Mike Rinder is a degrader or anyone is an implanter and don’t need anyone to defend me.
My point is that the implants are the Tone Scale.
That’s all.
We all have these algorithms.
They are computer programs.
Er, ok, I won’t then, even somewhat defend you, especially after those long screeds you wrote above.
This official Scientology post nicely summarizes LRH’s attitude to grief.
Just force yourself to smile, and then get busy (making money for Ron):
http://realscientologybeliefs.org/get-rid-sadness-sorrow/
There is virtue to this. But we are not taking about constant depression, a psychological dysfunctional problem.
We are taking about natural grief and how it is healing to embrace it while it’s occurring.
We are taking about the power of grief to heal.
If a person is still grief stricken years and years after then therapy is in order. Or talking to a friend.
You are talking about a dysfunction of emotions.
I am taking about appropriate emotions that is a sane response to real time loss of loved ones.
Scientology and Scientologists, in my view, are ignorant of appropriate emotions.
That is because, I’m my view again, your guru was a sociopath who saw emotions as a weaknes.
There is a cowardess in people who are afraid to feel.
It took me many years out of the cult to see these truths I now understand to be essential to happiness.
Some stuck problematic emotions sometimes need therapeutic help.
Some emotions are tools for growth.
Hubbard, and his students, do not know the difference.
But Scientologists can’t know this because Hubbard has declared free thinkers as “open minded” and “reasonable”.
You can be declared if you study other therapies.
Therefore it’s impossible to convey the truth about emotions because it’s a high crime to look into other areas and apply critical thinking to Hubbard and his techniques.
One day you will know. We all did not know. Know we do.
I watch Leah Rimini and Mike Rinder and the Show “Scientology; the aftermath”. For people who don’t know me very well, I was married ( and divorced ) from a Scientologist and my interactions with that Church was devastating for my Family. It led to the ultimate destruction of my Family. Mike Rinder blogs about what he has understood upon leaving Scientology and it is heartwarmingly enlightening for someone who has gone through the experience and run the gauntlet, so to speak. When I went through this, I had to discern ( to myself ) what in the world was going on; The Internet didn’t exist and I had no-one with whom I could discuss the experience. Mike has since understood that the originator of Scn. ( L.Ron Hubbard ) was a Sociopath and he has created a ( so-called ) Religion around Sociopathic tendencies and beliefs. When I watch these episodes, I find myself shouting out responses to Leah and Mike and all the other ex-Scientologists who have been badly damaged by the Religion (sic). One of my powerful understandings of the experience was that ” To know what Love IS, you must know what Love ISN’T.”…to be continued.
Your wonderful essay made me cry.
So, from this I guess I would have to extrapolate that comments made here re Ron Hubbard and to Foolproof brought many of you down tone below grief to hate?
Can you be specific Dan? There are many points of view commenting here.
Can you let us know who is expressing hate and hostility, from your point of view?
Don’t panic Brain, as Dan is normally on “your” side, one can only assume he was somehow being sarcastic. Or maybe not? Or perhaps Dan has had a sudden perceptive insight and realized that you are indeed writing a bunch of crap? Yep, could be that also!
Yes FP, I get it. But I wanted to also acknowledge the fact that willing through moods, thoughts and emotions is a valid method also.
As free beings we can be cause over, and part the seas of thoughts and feelings: soul over body, mind and emotions.
But free beings can also use emotions as information to resolve issues.
I simply wanted to acknowledge that some of these thoughts on overcoming I agree with.
There is soooo much to learn about these things FP. Learning is so inspiring.
There is no end to knowledge. It’s ever expanding with no limits.
Life is wonderful FP don’t you think?
Dan Locke :
“comments made here re Ron Hubbard and to Foolproof brought many of you down tone below grief to hate?”
Dan, I believe that hate is primarily the reaction to betrayed love. I can’t hate someone unless I regarded them VERY highly first, almost to the level of love, if not at it. Most of us who got caught up in Tubby’s meat-grinder were induced to assign to him certain godlike attributes – infallibility among other things, which carried with them high esteem. We who have escaped have had a chance to see how thoroughly we were betrayed. Since then, I’ve backed off on the heat a bit as I realized what a horrible set of conditions Ron had to overcome to get where he did. “Study ‘tech’ “, which I believe he developed to rehabilitate the studies he just couldn’t ‘get’, shows us a ‘student’ who couldn’t recognize an MU as he read, and couldn’t figure out the probable meaning from its context, but kept going on, not understanding anything that followed; a ‘student’ who couldn’t visualize what was described in the texts, but had to see it in 3-D in front of him or suffer the consequences. A ‘student’ who wanted a MAGICKAL method of learning what he’d been too lazy or disinterested to put in the work necessary for HIM to understand the material. Algebra isn’t some arcane study as he thought it to be. It’s a 7th or 8th-grade class that all college-prep students are expected to master comfortably these days. From a couple of sources, I’m led to believe the material was presented in earlier grades in his childhood and his parents’ generation. With his well-educated mother tutoring him one-on-one, he should have aced it, but NOT Ron; He’d just scribble story plots on his Algebra homework papers. in the Catholic grade school a few blocks away from here, that would have earned a set of knuckles rapped by the nuns’ rulers. Around here, a fairly progressive Eastern society, he couldn’t have gotten away with half the pranks he pulled. And FORGET the Naval Academy or any other college having been expelled as he should have been for multiple transgressions. IF his MWH theory were valid, he’d had a great number of them against his schools and the military outfits in which he ‘served’, judging by the natter he heaped on them.
About the only subject I see he mastered was the science and art of lying. He did it as easily and naturally as breathing, and he did it contain continuously, even when the truth would have served his needs better, when the truth was so easily uncovered by anyone interested enough to ask around. (such as his military and scholastic records) His lies were so CONVINCING in those moments he uttered them, tall tales we perhaps secretly hoped were true even as we disbelieved some of them.
Instead of deflecting and waffling, could you answer Dan’s direct question? Or would it be true to say then that Grief is indeed above Hostility on the Tone Scale and were you crying and wailing about me beforehand then?
FFOOLproof, The “Tone Scale ™” was not even a half-baked theory, and doesn’t represent the sane emotional conditions of real people open enough to FEEL actual emotions, not just approximate them in an effort to control others
Am I supposed to debate this half-baked theory of yours? You accuse me of word spaghetti but on what basis are you basing this half-baked theory of yours?
Brian, your write up is completely spot on.
I agree with what Lois said as well as many of the others here. As a Commodore’s Messenger we were trained to have no emotions (like all other Sea Org members as well), when my mother died it was so devastating but instead of being able to grieve we were repeatedly taken in session which didn’t handle a thing for me it just made me resent Hubbard for causing my mothers death and not allowing us to talk about it to anyone. We were all being turned into robots as part of his money making machine and nothing else was to matter in our lives, especially not family and those we loved. Hubbard had no love for his family unless it was making him power or money. Well done on your brilliant analysis of this Brian, it aligns with my thoughts exactly.
For me, grief is therapy when you’re hurt or have a loss. It’s natural. When my mother died, I only got relief 2 months later, the day I could cry for hours. Then, I could move on again in my life. I knew some people, Scientologists and not Scientologists who wanted to play tough guys, no grief, no emotions to finally get cancers or diabetes or else years later.
And then, tell me how you can pretend wanting to save the world if you don’t feel grief, sympathy or anger. If you don’t feel any of those, you don’t give a shit saving the world. You just want to save your ass !
You never cease amaze FP, any time articles and posts about your bum buddy Hubbtard show up and you get all het up and indignant and spout your usual meaningless crap. Why don’t you jump up and down when whenever Demento is treated the same way? He’s the current “leader” of $camology and you are not trying to protect and justify him the way you do El Con. Shameful excuse of a supposed $camologist. Your attempt at a scathing putdown will have the same effect as it always does, “Yawn.” So go right ahead and waste your time.
No, I think most (unbiased) people reading my comments will quietly think “Foolproof has ‘owned’ so-and so again” but most are too timid to state such themselves or have some other personal vengeance agenda of their own and so don’t. I don’t post untruths, you see, like some do. This is why Brian et al respond so vehemently to my postings hoping to blanket and deflect my messages in more verbiage.
You are sadly deluded. I know how the world looks to you. I was there for a long time.
Fool you just amaze me with all your ot abilities. It’s like watching God create. I can almost picture the deity “ron”-(proof). Man ,I strive for your perfection. Now I have to go RIP out my tongue and bleach my mouth. LOL LOVE YOU FOOL RON HUBBARD
“No, I think most (unbiased) people reading my comments will quietly think “Foolproof has ‘owned’ so-and so again” ”
We MIGHT, if you spent a little more time and posted something other than a greatly-tossed word salad.
I don’t so much as agree or disagree with your posts as wonder what you meant to say, most times.
FP
You own nothing. Not even your own little mind.
Well, one thing is sure, I wouldn’t want to own your mind.
Stoolpoop and the shit show continues. Time for daddy Dave to change his diapers.
– ordinary person here- I have no affiliation with Scientology or with anyone on this board…I can unequivocally state that this “foolproof” individual just sounds like a raving madman who makes absolutely no sense at all! He/she comes across as someone who has been psychologically lobotomized by a cult.
Long time lurker, first time commenter. This subject hits home with me.
Sometime in 2007 after a particularly traumatic event in my life, while still technically “in,” I realized I had become a completely different person from the old pre-scientology me. I had become a person I did not like at all. I had had all of the kindness, compassion and humanity stomped out of me by scientology. I had become cold and unfeeling, without sympathy or empathy. It was a shocking and frightening realization which was a turning point for me. I cried for three hours straight, for that loss of my true self to a cruel and heartless group, for the fact that I had allowed that to happen to me. It was the beginning of my transition to UTR, of distancing myself from scientology groups and people, of gradually withdrawing my allegiance and support for anything related to scientology. I am now completely out and enjoying life in a way I had not thought possible for many years.
It is only after much time passing that I have been able to see how this deep indoctrination occurred. Without going into too much detail, I will just say I was punished and “handled” and generally made-wrong for having the in-real-life appropriate emotion for any given situation. This “handling” tended to mold me into a person who reacted only as was proper within the bounds of scientology and other scientologists. I then tended to “handle” other people this same way, passing along this insanity, making it seem normal. In scientology vernacular, it was true contagion of aberration.
P.S. Mike, I sent you a couple of emails, one regarding your blog post of 1/26 which you may find of interest.
On the Mend, thank you for chiming in and telling your story. Your story is exactly describes what I have argued Hubbard’s words do to people: damages people’s innate sense of right and wrong.
I so appreciate your words On the Mend. Thank you for unlurking and commenting.
Thank you, Brian. Hubbard has much to answer for. I hope it all catches up with him some day.
Hubbard was so afraid to feel “softer” emotions, the ones that I believe helped mankind rise to the top of the heap. What he left in play were the ones that contributed to the battles he always was waging. He dared not give into the emotions that allow us to help each other or he’d lose everything. He HAD to win, every time, no matter the costs.
Look at that fucking FREAK. I almost shit myself laughing every time I see that photo of him and think about all the poor suckers trapped in the scientology hoax cult. What a greasy slimy pig he was. Disgusting!
True words of wisdom, Brian.
I see we have another meeting of the Misunderstood Words & Glee club occurring, all venturing forth with their understanding of grief but more its position on the Tone Scale (slight Antagonism). I am afraid (Fear? Not really!)) that you can’t simply re-arrange what beings do and how they react to the environment by re-defining emotions at newer positions according to one’s whims or fads, or (really) how desirous one is to find some invented Achilles Heel or chink to criticize what you think Scientology is. Or your own personal chagrin with the Church of Scientology. Or to write a story as one has been given a platform.
So I shall give you some verbal tech now and explain it all for you (being 1.1. now) (actually of course what follows is not verbal tech – however (boredom now, perhaps even monotony)): the Tone Scale is simply an observation of how beings act or react to situations in life. It is based on years of observation of preclears and people outside of the auditing environment as well. Hubbard didn’t invent the Tone scale – he just observed beings undergoing the natural order of events that ensue. Hubbard didn’t invent the universe nor did he dictate how beings react to events. Nor did he dictate or decree that Grief is below Hostility. It just is that way, despite Brian’s pathetic attempts to re-order such. Ask any auditor or anyone in life if one cares to look and examine this and people moving up and down the tone scale.
What you are mostly all doing here is rather like the Danish/English King Knut trying to hold back the tide by saying it won’t come up to his knees as he sits on the beach. If you want to believe Brian’s drivel or rather his re-defining of the Tone Scale positions by him cleverly (sic) restimulating and juxtaposing your charged events in the Church with his re-definitions and your seeming needs to do so then fine – feel free to do so. But nothing will change that tide from coming in – nor the actual positions on the Tone Scale.
I pity you, FP.
You are blind. Hubbard’s tone scale is irrelevant, except to his manipulation of your thought.
Every word Brian wrote tells me he has walked the path. There is a lot of wisdom there, if you would open your eyes to it.
All Brian has done is relayed some events where some Scientologists, mostly staff, have shown no or little compassion (where they should have done admittedly) and by stoking up this fire then presents his bogus interpretation of the numbering and ordering of the Tone Scale hoping that you won’t see through his claim when all the emotion kicks in. Meanwhile Scientologists are being effective in handling people by auditing them who otherwise might spend their whole lives grieving. To present Scientologists generally as uncaring robots is complete nonsense which I can substantiate from my time in Tech and Qual where people were helped to recover from their grief or whatever and lead their lives again. I don’t need your pity, save it for Brian and all the fools who believe his nonsense.
And one thing that Brian did get right – as he says – grief doesn’t come from being crushed to death by a boulder in Imperial Rome in AD 182 – that’s er, an engram. One now may ask is Brian actually qualified to venture his understanding of Scientology terms here? Perhaps the Flag Word Clearer below can help you out with that Brian?
Thank you for your view Foolproof. It’s always good to get another perspective.
You put me to shame, Brain.
Kindness seems to have a home in your heart.
Kyle is taking a leaf out my book now and naming Brian “Brain” – Freudian slip eh? As to Brain’s “kindness” Kyle, can I suggest you do that little drill of tone scale spotting?
You don’t fool me Brian – haha!
Yes we know. You are Foolproof.
Exactly!
LOL, troll time. You miss so much understanding about human beings and defend a bogus version of regressive therapy. The tone scale might be an observation. However numbering and judging what is good or bad is pure BS.
Oh! And here is you doing exactly that i.e. – “judging what is good or bad”! The irony eh? And is apathy and grief “good” then? Or how about “Enthusiasm” – is that “bad”? And auditing is then “bad” in your eyes, but regressive therapy “good”? The irony continues, but the observation doesn’t…
Good grief!
Foolproved, why do you keep reading this blog when you disagree with everything on it? It’s like you are just itching to find something to jump on and cut someone down with. You use emoticons without any emotion behind them; when you use that ‘Ha’ all the time it has no real laughter behind it. You have no understanding of vulnerability, love, or empathy. You should be very proud of your training, you are a flawless, flubless, Scientologist. Just like Elron. Just like David Miscavige.
Ha! And another “ha!” Who says I disagree with everything on it? If Mike were to regurgitate Debbie Cook’s email I would say “yep, pretty good” and not offer one counter-word. And you simply fail to see that it is not me that has written an article which is “finding something to jump on and cut someone down with” – this whole article is designed to do just that. But when the article is nonsense then I will say so (and Mike is quite happy for me to do so as many other commenters can then get emotionally charged about my observations and this keeps the ball of chagrin rolling). Brian is also happy as he has achieved his goal of someone noticing him for once in his life. But nonsense is nonsense, however “emotional” you want to dress it up! Haha!
And how nice of you to say that I have no understanding of vulnerability, love or empathy! Yet Brian is doing his darnedest to attack the only technology there is that can bring people up from a lifetime of grief by a few relatively simple sessions. It seems then that your and Brian’s solution to this is just to leave them in that state forever.
Fool (Not a typo) – the more you talk, the more you betray your utter Stupidity* – Where is *That on the Tone scale? Ha!
When you talk about Scientology as though it has the qualities of real technology its like trying to send someone to the moon with a rocket designed by evangelical Christians to resemble the Ark of the Covenant. Technology is rooted in science, not ‘scripture’. There are many people here sharing the damage they experienced in suppressing grief as members of scientology, and the healing that came after they exited and allowed themselves to go through the grieving process. If Hubbard ‘researched’ humanity so thoroughly, why did he not recognize the fundamental nature of healing that people report through grieving? There are whole books documenting the grief process. Show me his research notes, his experiments that he based his conclusions on. No science based on facts is proven by a field of one man. Without numbers it is not science. I’ve been a physicist for 30 years, and I would be laughed out of the laboratory of I wrote so many books on just conjecture and expected to be taken seriously. Scientology gets tax breaks because it is a religion, not a science.
Well, what do you know? Another Lab Rat! We just run the Secondary Engrams and give the person a full program of auditing – may be takes 10 hours or so, probably even less. Problem and person sorted – and ACTUALLY HELPED! As opposed to your Research labs spending millions of dollars and getting nowhere! A field of 1 man eh? You seem to forget the hundreds of thousands of people who have been helped by Scientology counseling. Put that in your research pipe and lab and smoke it!
1) L Ron Hubbard said Scientology processes work 100% of the time, but he offered zero proof.
2) You believe Hubbard
3) Hundreds of commenters on this site say Scientology did not help them, it hurt them, despite decades of dedicated application of the ‘tech’.
QED: Hubbard was a liar and you are a fool
You obviously can’t read – 97.5 % when applied exactly, with a possible working for the other 2.5% The proof was in the people who kept coming back for more. As to “Hundreds” of commenters – there’s probably less than 50 if that, and probably around 30 with a few hard core posting on this site and they overlap on the other anti-Scientology sites. And these are mostly the people not that have been “hurt” by Scientology processing, but those with some other beef against the organization.
QED: Get your facts right liar before spouting venom.
Weird — do you actually dispute there are more people who have abandoned scientology than are in it?
I think your ratio is reversed. I believe it is far more accurate to conclude that for 39 people (97.5%) who try it and reject it, there is one (2.5%) who stays.
Even your own figures on this blog sort of confirm this — less than 50 but probably around 30 (let’s call that 40) have rejected and there is one (you) who has kept coming back for more.
Logicproof babbled, “97.5 % when applied exactly” A Hubtard noted that absolutes are unobtainable,then you’re saying the “tech” works 0% of the time as it can NEVER be EXACTLY (an absolute) applied.
Which explains all the people who left scamology even when Hubtard delivered the tech to them.
quark:”1) L Ron Hubbard said Scientology processes work 100% of the time, but he offered zero proof.”
Worse, he showed zero evidence.
Quark, Yes, I love this comment!
Thanks, Ann. I always enjoy your comments, too. I should probably leave F P alone but I think if we could just get through his bubble shield we would have one heckuva fighter for the good on our side.
Stranger things have happened! Here’s hoping. ☺
Foolproof , I am constantly amazed that you attack whenever someone gets specific about L Ron Hubbard and his often nonsensical, irrational, and ego driven pronouncements.
I found Brian’s observations on where grief really is and what it really means to be quite healing.
I specifically remember a woman in our org who lost her sister in her 20s. This woman was red rim eyed for days. She was older than her twentysomething sister who had died and the loss was complicated by the antisocial actions taken by that sister. The sister who died had had some drug interactions and had made some poor choices about men, bringing a child into the world that the parents had to take care of prior to the death of the sister.
I was asked if I would audit her. I did audit her and she cried and cried and told me about feeling guilty about this and that having given up on her sister and she was so torn up about this and the church didn’t make it safe for her to feel her grief. And so the program ended and there was an expectation that she would no longer be in grief I could see that she still held onto guilt and sadness and she ultimately drifted away from the church. I feel that it is a big part because when she had a cataclysmic event in her life, the handling offered was merely to get her to stop crying and being sad over the death of her sister. And that’s ridiculous.
I’m very glad that Brian wrote this very helpful opinion.
Your comments simply confirm what I was stating – although you or the Org or a combination of both didn’t finish up the action on her and left her in limbo still with some of her grief. Your help was at least a start, Brian’s help? A few soothing words and that’s it it seems! How you can’t see the elephant in the room here is beyond me.
Been awhile FP…….crawled out and braved the sunlight to comment on a good mans opinion of a sociopath and his cults “tone scale”…..always cracks me up to hear anyone try and make sense of it. But Foolish Foolproof just know this…..the tide is rising my sick, confused friend. And nothing you or the osa or Davey boy does can stop it. You will all reap what’ve you’ve sewn. And us wogs, sp’s and escapees will dance and rejoice.
Well, D Minus, what exactly is your beef here apart from the fact that you want to vent your spleen?
There there Fuelpoop, no need to get all in a huff.
FOOLproof:
“I see we have another meeting of the Misunderstood Words & Glee club occurring, all venturing forth with their understanding of grief but more its position on the Tone Scale (slight Antagonism).”
i’m sorry, FOOLproof, but no matter how I parse those words, nothing intelligible results, and I don’t see any comments that correspond to the few somewhat-intelligible phrases in your screed. A search for scientology tone scale will allow you to see where Tubby misplaced grief in relation to antagonism if you don’t have the source material to hand. Frankly, I’ve mostly excised that garbage from my current working memory as it never quite made sense and didn’t correlate to the real world except when contorted into irrational shapes in an effort to match Tubby’s spoutings to real emotions felt by people who actually allowed themselves to FEEL them. Tubby, and by extension scientologists, didn’t feel emotions so much as approximate them as they USED emotions to control others. The Tone Scale® was just one of his half-baked theories, one that would have benefitted with peer review to craft it into something applicable in real life™. As proposed by him, it wound up being relegated to the “interesting but useless” bin for most folks, though some aspects could be contorted to seem to work. As with most of his ideas in scientology,it only seems to work in the carefully controlled environment of scientology. AND, the fact that scientology has no workable method to effectively deal with grief or other depression is WHY I’m out. First, my girlfriend got depressed though her stats were soaring, and nothing she or I could do got her any help , then she shook a bit of the depression off and unceremoniously dumped me. That put me in a funk, and nothing I could do got me so much as a sympathetic ear, much less a review session with my co-auditor. Finally, they threw me into the RPF, as if continual punishment was going to bring me up-tone…. “The floggings will continue until morale improves.” As I was in good shape from my previous “wog” jobs and school sports, the running and hard work were pretty relaxing, which annoyed TPTB of the RPF. My easy jog was faster than their flat-out running, so they couldn’t punish me for not running everywhere, and making me do laps for other transgressions was counter-productive as I could do that without breaking much of a sweat. They couldn’t actually punish me with the tools they had to work with, while I could keep saying in many ways, “This is ridiculous.” ’til the cows came home. Eventually they SAW that it was ridiculous and let me ship most of my stuff home and get on my bike and put CW in the rear-view mirrors, free at last. THAT application of the Tone Scale® actually worked for me – in the carefully controlled environment of scientology. In the real world™, I doubt it would have worked so cleanly. Months or years later later, finally heard from the ex-girlfriend – – when she tried to Reg me for my “freeloader’s debt” or something. Never did get to actually talk to her about her kicking me to the curb. scientologists aren’t big on sharing or other real communication. They only are taught to get an answer to their question, a one-way flow:”I ask, you answer.” Two-way comm gets some lip service, but I have experienced real 2WC only after leaving. Grief is to be avoided, Sympathy and empathy are to be avoided like poisons, genuine acceptance nowhere to be found unless you submit yourself unconditionally to scientology’s demands, and THAT *apparent* acceptance gets pulled immediately if you show any sign of independent thought. Leave/escape and that “acceptance” turns into blind rage and you’re subjected to the worst of ‘fair game’ immediately.
What is TPTB?
What’s TPTB?
To “foolproof”: Yep- lobotomized AND brainwashed – as I mentioned, I don’t have any connection to anyone here, but I am a very rational, logical and well educated person- and nothing you are voicing makes any sense at all. It sounds like a narcissistic, very mentally ill person devised some outlandish method to control a bunch of people by making them feel that human emotion and all the messiness that goes with strong emotions are weaknesses…making himself feel powerful and in control by making these poor misguided people feel bad about aspects of their humanness- definitely a mentally ill man. So sick! I feel so sorry for you and for the others who were conned into thinking that this way of thinking is good. It reminds me a bit of Hitler- hating the very things he knew to be true about himself – seeing these traits in everyone and wanting to control how everyone around him thought, and in the process making him feel superior to all others. I’m so sorry that you are disconnected from humanity by the teachings of a madman, and you can’t even see it. It is like the emperors new clothes- no one can tell the truth for fear of retaliation.
You haven’t got a clue what you are talking about, nor Scientology.
You are insane. You posited earlier that an unbiased individual would find your arguments persuasive and compelling. I am an unbiased individual as I have no connections to anyone or an affiliation with any entity mentioned here. Now you are saying that I haven’t a clue about anything since I don’t agree…I do, however know a mentally ill person when I see/hear one and L. Ron Hubbard was definitely troubled to the degree that he needed professional help, but instead set himself up as the “god” that others were persuaded to worship without question. Why can’t you step back a little and look at things as they really are- not through the blinders that you willingly donned when you joined this pseudo-religious cult? Don’t you owe it to yourself to break down the “facts” that you have to see as incongruous in a supposed religion? What would happen if you asked your “congregation” for clarification of things you may question? What would happen if you expressed doubts about the leadership of Scientology? About any of the topics on this web site or other sites that have questioned Scientology tenets? Would you still be accepted and welcomed? I think you know the answer to that question.
So, what are these “Scientology tenets” that you seem to know then? Name some of the more basic ones. Have you ever read a book from Hubbard or experienced auditing or done a course or visited their website or even talked with a Scientologist? Or is your “knowledge” of Scientology simply based on reading anti-Scientology websites? I think you know the answer to that question.
So you are grasping at and misinterpreting one comment (on purpose because you don’t want to address the rest??)- I read dianetics and thought it was mediocre at best. It resembled a quasi-self help mishmash that had some parts in psychoanalysis (which I also do not like) and some parts in new age blather. Sorry I was not struck by Hubbard’s “insight” into the human condition. I was underwhelmed. I also would never pay for something that -since it’s being packaged as a church- seems like a really sleazy practice. The reading I did prior to posting was from Scientology’s own website as well as other sites that are not sponsored by Scientology and sites like this one. I read what was there to read. I looked at all of the information that I had access to (your church has a bad habit of not giving full disclosures and information about itself, which makes it kinda difficult to make an educated decision regarding some aspects). However, if you read my post below, you may also see why I have reached the opinion that I now hold.
One more thing- ask yourself what the hundreds of people in Jonestown thought about their leader and their religion while they drank cyanide laced kool-aid….they all believed that the things they believed in were logical and sane and that the rest of the world just didn’t get it. Can you watch a documentary about that tragedy and doubt that all of those people probably were as convinced of their rightness as you are now? That’s the scary part about reading your comments- you are convinced of your rightness even in the face of logic and reality. When so many people are trying to get information about this “church” and the reaction is so strong and negative, it should make a member want to ask questions instead of rant about how everyone in the world is biased and bigoted….if the “religion” is so great and wonderful, questions should be welcomed and embraced- there should be complete transparency- not hostility and attacks designed to make people stop asking questions. And if a “religion” can’t explain its beliefs and tenets to a regular person in a way that doesn’t sound completely bonkers, then there’s an inherent problem somewhere.
No, I think you will find that most people reading the comments who know something of Scientology as a subject (not its people or Church actions) know that essentially what I state is correct, even from those who have some axe to grind against the organization or the Church or personal bias. Then there are those who don’t really know what they are talking about and just accept what they read here as gospel, some of which is true but mostly it is hyperbole and exaggeration and are just here because they are given a platform. And then there are those who feel they can’t or shouldn’t support my statements – again mostly out of personal bias based on their chagrin with some of the staff or the Church. For these people even if I stated that 2+2=4 then certain individuals would gainsay it just because I stated it.
As for you juxtaposing Jonestown with Scientology this is pure hyperbole and nonsense. I think even if you asked Brian or Wynski (no, actually not Wynski), let’s say Ms. P – what is the scale between 1-10 of Scientologists emulating Jonestown their answers would be a straight 0. This theme of Jonestown/Scientology is often repeated here to try and scare or “electrify” people into thinking that this could happen with Scientologists and that “something should be done” (shock horror), but then pigs might also fly!
As for you juxtaposing Jonestown with Scientology this is pure hyperbole and nonsense. I think even if you asked Brian or Wynski (no, actually not Wynski), let’s say Ms. P – what is the scale between 1-10 of Scientologists emulating Jonestown their answers would be a straight 0.
Well, I would have probably put it at a 2. Until I had the great pleasure of spending some time with a survivor of Jonestown (she was a “purchaser” who was in the capital city buying the food for the compound…). I raise by scale concerning the People’s Temple to an 8 after that. The similarities of technique between Jim Jones and Hubbard and now Miscavige are remarkable. Even down to the “safepointing” (Jones had spent a lot of time schmoozing Willy Brown and the police in Oakland and SFO) before heading off to build his utopian society of peace and love and holistic living. They also had front groups to help in the field of education, drug abuse and immorality. In the end, Jones began giving daily lectures that everyone had to listen to and when they were not being delivered live they listened to recordings. He convinced his followers that the only hope for mankind was the solutions he was offering and the evil outside their bubble was seeking to destroy them. They even had “disconnection” policies for the “disaffected.”
You are wading into unknown waters here Foolproof. Obviously you have NOT taken the time to find out about the People’s Temple and simply dismiss it as “scientology bears no resemblance” — oh how ignorant you show yourself to be.
Mike,
I completely agree with your assessment. The similarity in circumstances are disturbingly clear and I believe they are dangerous. When you have a group who expresses blind obedience to one man then there is always the chance that things can go very badly very quickly. If Hubbard was still alive, I could easily see him enacting the same scenario as Jones if he felt threatened (the fact that he isolated himself and a core group of followers on a ship is very troubling) Luckily for all, he no longer has the power to enact this….however, there is still an amount of blind, dangerous following. When such a man (in this case Miscavige) sees it all falling apart, people can (and often do) die. I worry that such an end is possible, and just pray that some get out and get the help they need to break free of this poisonous situation. I think that many who get into Scientology do so with the belief that they are helping others, but they can’t see past the propaganda to the rotten core beneath. I know that Jones portrayed himself as someone who could change society for the better- and in the beginning he had some success. However, giving one man blind obedience without question NEVER turns out well. I hope foolproof takes the time to read about cults and sees the correlations. But I doubt he will…
I studied cults when I was finishing my masters degree and this situation is very scary. Miscavige shows all of the traits of someone who can enact such a scenario.
Final question: if Miscavige told the sea organization members that they would need to follow Hubbard and leave their bodies in order to reach higher levels of awareness, what do you think would happen? This is the scenario I worry about…
Well it depends what “resemblance” you are talking about and you have studiously avoided the main one of the mass suicide. Your points are about as meaningful as suggesting that both groups wore uniforms or something. To suggest that Scientologists would commit mass suicide is totally ridiculous as you well know. Oh! How surreptitious you show yourself to be!
I said 8 out of 10. You are stuck on one final event and you have no idea where scientology will end. But we DO know scientologists will en masses lie, destroy families, bankrupt themselves etc etc These are not things normal people do. These same people would NOT do these things if they were not in scientology.
This is cold, hard fact. I know you don’t like it, but you can’t alter reality that is so well documented.
The simple glaring fact that you cannot accept how other people may see things that you don’t (or won’t) acknowledge says a lot about the control this organization has over followers. The similarities are there, you just cannot accept them. Do some research with an open mind instead of pre-conceived notions and bias. I did research on Scientology (what was available) prior to coming to a conclusion. The moral and ethical deficits shown by your “church” are astounding. Attacking individuals with vitriolic hatred isn’t the way most churches operate. I read the “dossiers” your “church” gathered and more than one thing jumps out- there is no independent proof to back up any claims made by this group- I read police reports that don’t match the “facts” your group states, I looked at news footage that consisted of ranting and raving about bigotry and bias, I saw “Scientology henchmen” Harrass, stalk and berate people who were doing nothing more than expressing concern (or even just minding their own business). I fail to see any good in that. Even if there were good to be had in this group, the fact that it encourages and praises such behaviors is reprehensible and you should be ashamed to associate with the group. I wouldn’t.
Foolproof- you keep trying to separate Scientology from its people and actions- that is a ridiculous premise- the people and actions are the reason there is so much controversy. I do not begrudge anyone their right to believe in whatever they want to believe in- if you want to worship fuzzy kitten videos- have at it. However, when you harm others through words, actions and official church policies I DO have a problem with it. You cannot have Scientology without all of the issues that surround it. Unless the church discards disconnection, has actual services for anyone who wishes them without a monetary value on them, stops harassing and attacking people, has actual programs designed to help and not promote unattainable benchmarks at huge cost (I’m sorry but I don’t see ANY Scientologists flying around like Superman or being able to teleport) and allowed others to read the doctrine in its entirety in order to make an educated decision about what they are getting into, then Scientology will always be seen as a cult by outsiders.
Scientologists consider grieving low toned.
This is true.
When my father died 1987 I was at CC Int to finish my “Grades”, and because I had to stay for a “repair” I barely but by God I made it to his funeral on the east coast. But I was numb. I did not really grieve for years, if I ever really did, just now and then still. You see, the death of my father, at my age 33, was a distraction from my staff duties and going up the Bridge. My father was dead, but my salvation, and money, and staff and FSM duties were far more important than any emotion I might have normally felt. This fact alone grieves me to this day, 30 years later.
Wonderful article. Thanks guys.
Thanks for this Brian. Being a born in Scn’er, it was always hard for me to understand this – the grief, sympathy being lower than anger & hostility – it was something I really grappled with and always got in trouble. I remember my young sister at 3 years old being hit by a truck on a dock in Copenhagen on the Sea Org ship there (around 1973), (she ended up being fine, thank goodness) I was on the Apollo and got a telex about it, I was devastated, but of course I was just put in session to handle my “grief”….then my parents in the SO in Copenhagen were about to get declared, I was devastated again and LRH just ordered me to go into session…..then in 1997 my Mom died (I was already out) but I seriously was devastated once again and of course they were pushing me to go into session, but I refused as I just really wanted to wallow in my grief. It has always been the one thing I really struggled with while being in……..now having lost a son to disconnection, I was in grief initially then would periodically go through a grief period but it is getting less and less….which is the way it should be! In addition to this, what is so bloody wrong with sympathy and/or compassion towards other people who have problems???? Some of my best friends have never been in and they are the best at this and have helped me through all of my various problems in life…..they have been so great and I have learned from them……especially to have compassion. Just a great essay!
Thank you Lois, your words mean a lot to me. For the ones that were born into the anti emotional intimacy environment of Hubbard’s organization, I have a special admiration for you guys.
LRH was a true sociopath. Even animals grieve!
Yes they do Robin. And, they will protect their young with their life too.
He was a twisted, emotionally stunted, manipulative soul. Who told you exactly what he was, but called his evil good.
What saddens my soul is that there are people who still seek (and see) wisdom in his mind-fuckery.
I know Kyle, and evil is one of those words not to be used lightly, but I believe that Hubbard sought out evil early on and put it into practice the rest of his life in hopes of becoming all-powerful. Look where it got him. A couple of strokes and a miserable death and left a path of heartbreak and destruction in his path. It’s not too late for those still trapped though and I sure hope that somehow they find a way out of.
Me too Peggy. I don’t use the word evil lightly either. Sadly and tragically it’s an accurate description of lrh.
I posted earlier, but lost what I wrote in the form. It was perfect, I tell you! I was saying how insidious the mental abuse is in Hubbard’s doctrine, especially when training to be an auditor. It’s not just the culture of being a Scientologist shaming you when you show any human emotion and reaction, it’s the hours you spend doing drills and training your psyche to distance yourself from your emotional connections. In essence, you are training to be more and more like Hubbard, who cared about no one but himself.
Exactly thank you, Carol! Training drills worst brainwashing ever! Talking to walls reciting the tone scale for hours and hours, day after day… How low toned Grief is and especially sympathy… and flunk for laughing??? WTF? Why is it ONLY high toned to laugh in session? Oh nevermind that’s so you can buy more auditing for the privilege… Clever.
It’s a mindfuck no matter how you slice it.
Well said Carol!
Thank you.
Very touching words today. After 2 years, I am still grieving from the loss of my beautiful daughter and grandaughter who have been brain washed by scientology. I love them so much. Unfortunately i am the only one in this that is allowed to grieve. So sad.
Sorry to hear that 🙁 Hopefully, you will be reunited someday.
Really appreciated this piece. I’ve always agreed that you can tell a lot about Hubbard and Scientology’s values by where things are located on the tone scale. When you consider that Scientology is a group that preys on those who want to help make the world a better place, it truly is a crime against its members’ humanity to attempt to erase away their natural connections and bonds with others into a system which places resentment as a higher order emotion than sympathy, grief and making amends. I suspect that it is also very difficult to do, and that’s why Scientology is losing so many members, and why so many of its still existing members have to be controlled through an authoritarian system of “ethics.” Scientology is a group of human beings, but it’s philosophy is anti-human being. That’s a difficult set-up! LOL
I once knew someone who was in Scamatology. He wrote a small autobiography on a site titled, “I am a Scientologist”. I went there today to see how he was doing but discovered they had completely changed the format of that site. They apparently have started a TV show and each episode consists of one of these people telling their story. They show they are now in Season Two.
If there is any truth to this, my guess is that they are terrified of the consequences of Mike and Leah’s show, “Scientology and the Aftermath”.
However, it seems to me they have made one terrible and tragic mistake. The web site shows a section titled, “The story of LRH as told in his own words”.
I would think that anyone who listened to that voice for more than a minute or two would be sorely tempted to change the channel or just shut off the TV.
In any case, it is heartening to see Mike & Leah continue to have such a strong impact.
Mike – thank you for today’s post. You really are helping here.
It has been my experience that Scientologists who get out of Scientology and don’t deprogram – still have Scientology in them. The ole saying – you can get the man out of Scientology (the cult) but you can’t get Scientology “the cult thinking” out of them.
They do it by deprogramming. Deprogramming takes work – studying, researching and thinking about one’s belief’s that were altered while they were involved in Scientology. One has to redefine one’s identity and it is painful to deal with cognitive dissonance so many ex members don’t do the work. They just latch on and get sucked into other cults. That has been my experience.
My loved ones and friends who are newly out – don’t emote, they don’t want to talk about anything “negative” or LOOK at the history of Scientology and L Ron Hubbard so they can figure out what happened to them and deprogram some of the “Scientological Think”.
They still use the loaded language. They are very arrogant and all knowing. They manipulate others and think it is some type of spiritual power they got from Scientology when in fact, it is the “tech” they trained in on how to manipulate people.
I feel like I am going crazy around them. It is a form of psychological gaslighting and has such a devastating effect on people who emote and feel. I never lost that ability – I was not in that long.
The cult member who does not deprogram are much like Narcissists and Sociopath, in my opinion and . I have the same reaction to those type of people as I do to a died in the wool Scientologist – inside the cult or out.
They are difficult people to be friends with and hard to like and admire. They are phony and fake and you can’t trust them.
Arrogance is a big factor they all have. They know and they are right. “IBe nsouciant” LRH
I don’t mean to be critical of ex Scientologists – they are human beings who have been victimized by a cult. They can’t help it. But – if any of this rings true for the newly out Scientologist – for your own sake – do some deprograming. You will be a better person in the long run.
Thanks for letting me vent here Mike. Keep up the good work.
Glad not everyone is as opinionated (bigoted?) as you against ex-Scientologists. Would make it that much more difficult for those that get out. I do agree it takes some time and work to mentally/spiritually separate the Scientology out of one, and some Exes are just arrogant, untrustworthy or have any number of other negative personality traits, but to generalize ex-Scientologists the way you do is a bit much, and not accurate in my experience with Exes.
Kev – Good comment. I left Scn in 1982 and never read a word about it until watching the HBO movie “Going Clear” got me interested in taking a look. I googled Mark Rathbun and landed on his “Deconstructing Scientology” series of posts. Exes and Indies were hotly debating the “pros and cons” of the subject. I dove in and most of the beliefs and attitudes I had carried forward seemed to bubble up for inspection as I followed the debates. This might work for some people rather than being told it was all BS and you were brainwashed. For me I was able to sort out fact from fiction and true from false.
https://markrathbun.blog/?s=deconstructing+scientology
I love and admire your intellect, wit, and ability to get into things, eg: the emotional tone scale, (which was prominently displayed on my wall for years) which we who were “in” simply accepted as truth, or “Source” (eye-roll) and even found “proof” of the truth/applicability of this stuff, like “bringing someone uptone” by hitting them at the next emotion up. I still have guilt over insisting my late son go into session at age 11 to “handle” the death of his puppy which he had found dead after school (will spare you the rest of that story). It was not due to insensitivity on my part, but more a feeling of helplessness over what Donovan had seen & was going through, and having bought in to the “fact” auditing would help. At least I was “out” at the time he was killed in 1998, and thus, was/am allowed to grieve. Sadly, life does not give us do-overs. Thank you for your brilliant essays, which I have only recently discovered! Wish you could be my mentor/guru/counselor/spirit guide! Apologies for the length of this comment.
While I can understand and I agree with some of your statements, I would say it’s a bit B&W. What you describe is indeed in use in official scn to victimize and control people, like in any (or a lot) of religions. Whatever the guy was in real life, his philosophy is a bit more subtle and demonstrate even some interesting aspects. Extremism, pro or counter, never shows the whole coin.
The phrase ‘don’t get or go all griefy on me’ is a well worn $cieno put down. I think that as Brian said, the tone scale is just another attempt to get the PC to be just like Lron. Plus, you might have to let the PC or Sea bOrg get some time off to go to a funeral. Yeah, I know that some clams are allowed time off to go to a funeral, but how common is that? Do you have to have your stats up? Do you have to find a replacement while you’re gone?
I wonder how many escape while at a family funeral? You could probably get extra time off if a reading of a Will happens.
This is awesome deprogramming information. I love how you are providing this information for the lurkers that still don’t quite get how much confusion Scientology sprinkled initially (to trap them) then poured the false data into their minds to control their thoughts and emotions. This is HOW Scientology gets control of your check book, your family and children and your career. This is how CULTS CONTROL people.
They use LANGUAGE.
L Ron Hubbard rapes language in order to give new definitions to words so that members do not experience normal human reactions and emotions. He is very clever at this.
Scientologists wrap their own ideas and concepts around the new definitions by using the STUDY TECH….clay demos, demo kits and using the words newly Scientologically defined – in sentences.
“Grief” is a great example – Mike. All Scientologists eventually learn to stuff any emotions.
Of course, Ole El Ron Hubbard tells you in Science of Survival that “GRIEF is normal under certain circumstances” and then over time, – the definition changes to the REAL meaning you just didn’t not quite understand when you first got in.
You have all witnessed Scientologists not cry ever. They don’t get angry or upset in front of others. Unless you have a Senior that is abusing you verbally and physically to get your stats up.
I did not grieve when family and loved ones died. I did not cry. I thought I had obtained a skill from Scientology. I HAD – it was thought stopping tactics so I would not emote.
The problem was – I have been grieving for 10 years now all of the losses Scientology gave me – I did not want.
As soon as I left Scientology – the grief has been pouring out of me weekly.
I cry – I cry for our losses.
Loss of family and loved ones – dead – never to return.
Loss of dreams of careers
Loss of friends
Loss of life lived and experiences had
Loss of trust
Loss of beliefs
Loss of understanding from others
Loss of hope
Loss of love
We need to STOP SCIENTOLOGY from hurting any more people.
Lurkers – if you are sitting back doing nothing – please, do something about it. Anything!
People’s lives and sanity are at stake.
Do Something to Stop Scientology!
I am really thankful that you posted this, Flag Trained Word Clearer (and that I was able to read it. I am sorry that you were deeply trained at Flag as a word clearer. That’s not good. I think I did my Student Hat over at Flag twice, and twice at AOLA before that. It’s enough to make a person go absolutely insane, not just knowing every definition and derivation of the word “if,” but what you say about Hubbard redefining almost every word in the dictionary in Scientological terms. If you control the language and communication of the people, you have control over them totally. That is a very important piece of information both people in and out of the (any) cult needs to understand.
As for grief. Thank you for sharing yours. I TOO stuffed mine for the time I was in, then right after I left, I could not stop crying. I admit, I am still very sensitive and snot-cry when I see the commercial with the abandoned dogs in the cages.
I too cry for the loss of the years I wasted. Friends that now think I’m evil. My ignorant bliss. All of it. I still grieve. And I am still losing friends. I just lost probably my closest one recently, so there’s that. No more Scientology friends now. Not since I’ve been posting here.
“If you are a father, could you even imagine that state of mind if your beloved son died?”
The error in that question is “Beloved”. LOVE had no place in Ron’s worldview. He had affection – a low-grade similar idea– Only as long as a person was useful to Ron’s current operations, but that disappeared as soon as their utility evaporated. He had no difficulty hurting others in a just cause, “just” meaning whatever he wanted to do t the moment. Thus MSH was the #2 executive in scientology until Ron deemed the GO’s office a liability for doing EXACTLY as he ordered in “snow White”. So he threw Mary Sue under the bus without a second thought and no ceremony. Well, he DID take one or more pictures of her before she reported for incarceration, but that’s pretty weak tea. The guy was hardly UP to human when it came to emotions Homo Novus: NOT. Grief, sympathy, empathy, and such are what helped humanity advance to the point where it could and would support his excesses. Had he tried what he did a few centuries ago, or had he done it in a less permissive society, he would have been stopped in his tracks very early; possibly burnt as a witch or warlock (which would have been a poetic end, given his dedication to the Magick). He wasn’t what *I* call a father, but was merely a sperm donor, for the little attention he gave his progeny in their lives.Suzette seemed to get the same attention any Messenger would have gotten, no more, no less; The one public statement I recall reported that he made about her on Apollo was her doing well as a Messenger. Wasn’t much of a husband either from the available evidence. Love? HARDLY! Too low-toned & nothing a TIGER can afford to have. Anything that wasn’t attack or FIGHT (Anger and rage) didn’t win the battles he always found himself embroiled in.
OT: Today’s Underground Bunker is odd. Seems to be written by scientology’s attack mad-dogs AND comments are disabled on the most recent stories.
All I can say here is that I am truly grateful that scientology doesn’t actually work. I was never able to find and erase an ‘engram’, let alone a ‘lock’ in order to ‘run out’ a grief incident. And it sure as hell wasn’t for lack of trying and emptying my purse and maxing out credit cards in an attempt to do so.
It wasn’t until years after extracting myself from the cult that I was able to actually experience real grief. I was going thru a painful divorce and encountered emotions that I didn’t even know existed. It scared the shit out of me because of its intensity, but it was so overwhelming that I was unable to fend it off or suppress it. At times I thought that I was going crazy. As a result, I just decided to experience whatever happened without resisting it. I was on one hell of a roller coaster ride at the emotional amusement park but once I decided to accept it and not fight it, things calmed down considerably. The emotions didn’t go away and never will, but I found a place of peace and contentment within myself that lasts to this day. I would have never said this at the time, but I am eternally grateful to my ex-spouse for the opportunity to experience that and get to where I am today. We both have moved on and are doing well. We both learned a lot about ourselves, we’re where we need to be and there are few regrets.
love your post Miss B Haven.
Perhaps the wrong definition of engrams and locks.
Engrams are weighty mest objects that people spend called money.
Locks are loans or debt people take on to “do” Scientology.
When Scientology says they are clearing the planet – they are actually clearing bank accounts.
Brilliantly expressed. Many thanks !!
There’s a great deal of confusion about two disticntly different things here:- Sympathy is, basically, “Oh you poor, helpless and innocent little victum…”. It serves to affirm a succumbing or being overwhelmed and it does nobody any good. Sympathy is dramatization. Empathy, on the other hand is basically, “I thoroughly understand and feel what you’re experiencing as if it were my own.” Empathy is an ability; like ESP. It is felt and is not dependent on words. It tends to affirm the validity of anothers experience without attaching anything else to it. It is BEING the other person. Sympathy is absolutely not.
Where is empathy on the tone scale?
Exactly, it’s not there. It’s not recognized as a point on the tone scale in scientology other than being implied (in a sterilized form) in the explanation of ARC itself and the tone scale overall. It’s more like it’s the “Empathy scale”. Empathy should go up & down as one moves on the tone scale. So the higher one is on the tone scale the more empathy (ARC) they would be capable of, theoretically. But in reality and for a great many reasons, Scientology itself ensures Empathy never sees the light of day. “Moving up the tone scale” is a great theory but when you add in so much other bizarre shit – like KSW1, for example, like Fair Game, etc. ect. it’s a self-defeating phenomenon. So the supposed level of Empathy one has achieved in Scn has itself been demonized and negated and compartmentalized into something “counter-productive” by many other aspects of Scn. How could a Flag reg get anywhere while feeling actual empathy? Automatic cognitive dissonance.
And the other absurdity is that Scientology is supposed to raise a person on the tone scale (on the empathy scale), Hubbard said that was the purpose of auditing – and yet overall, it accomplishes the exact opposite.
The truth isn’t in the words, it is in the outcome.
Scn-911 – You are still confused because you are still using Hubbard’s definition of Sympathy.
Sympathy is a normal human reaction and emotion. It is needed by the human race. It is not bad or wrong UNLESS it is used to control people along with any other emotion. Scientologists FAKE emotions to manipulate others. They fake nice, happy, glad to see you, happy to help you until they get their stat. Then you see their fangs come out – their real miserable selves.
Here is an example:
If I see a Sea Org Slave walking down Cleveland Street in Clearwater, I feel sympathy for them. I feel sorry that they are in an evil cult, wasting their lives, aiding and abetting criminal acts to harm people that come to Flag.
Empathy is – I can put myself in their shoes and understand how they feel. I was there – I donned the uniform, ate the rice and beans, was humiliated beyond belief by the Organization and Seniors,
I BELIEVED I was saving the planet doing the most important thing on the Planet.
Grief is – I was in the Sea Org and during that time I stuck my Mom in a Nursing Home because I believed she was just a meat body who was a liability to society. I was able to manipulate her out of her money too and then I gave it to Scientology. I never cried over her death. I was numb and did not emote when I was in the Sea Org because I would get punished for it. I did not go to her funeral.
Then I got out and I started to deprogram. I start to dissect my beliefs and I lose the loaded Scientological language.
I realized I was a horrible person – I was a Scientologist.
I am embarrassed. I felt humility and shame. These NORMAL human reactions and important to feel in order to heal. They don’t last forever if you let yourself emote.
Now here comes the grief….
I am feeling waves of sadness I cannot stop. It is grief. I am crying and feel very sad not only over losing my Mom but basically manipulating her out of her money so I could save the planet and give it all to Scientology. I was a criminal con man…I was being just like L Ron Hubbard and I did harm to my own Mother. I “not ised” her and stuck her in a Nursing Home where she was all alone with no one to visit or love her.
She died all alone and I was in the Sea Org – saving nothing – not even myself.
She did not want Scientology to have any of her money. She put that in her will. I gave it ALL to Scientology because the Sea Org manipulates you out of every dime you get.
I am in grief over that too.
Now I am PISSED!!
That is normal too.
You are NOT a horrible person. You were taken in by a sociopath as were many others. You were brainwashed – as were/are many others. Yes your actions towards your mother were horrible at that time. But please know, your mother loved you with all her heart and soul and absolutely forgives you for the life lesson mistakes you may have made. The very fact that you are grieving so very hard still makes it crystal that the last thing you are now – is a horrible person. And I would bet that your level of empathy, compassion and understanding and real fellowship with anyone you interact with will be making your mother very happy and very proud. A million hugs to you and a million thanks for sharing your pain with us.
Beautifully said Didi M!
Thanks!
Wow Billy, you are beautiful for being so true and authentic.
I understand how you feel. You are fucking awesome for sharing your story.
You are a good person. I feel it and so do others here.
Much love to you
SCN-911, what you have stated is not sympathy. It’s enabling, it’s manipulation. It’s what manipulating negative people do to vulnerable people.
If you are a Scientologist, I would ask you to be one. Read the dictionary definition of sympathy. The dictionary is where to get words defined not Hubbard.
Hubbard either had an MU, or was a sociopath and could not feel and saw sympathy as a weakness just like tyrants world wide, or he consciously manipulated the definition of words to control people and degrade intimate connections.
You have an MU SCN-911, or an imprinted manipulation from a man who threw family and friends in the trash when they did not serve him.
Use a dictionary.
Hi Brian, Great article. I will add that in my research of Scientology as a religion Hubbard was so totally full of MU’s and BS that I wonder how I ever followed him. He covered his MU’s by insisting that he was correct and boasting. Hubbard was the perfect example of the stupid man who could project that he was right – a totally false viewpoint.
So true George.
Hey George, did you happen to listen to my interview with Ron Miscavige?
I mention you. You are an important voice in my view.
Thanks Brian. I will listen to it. I did not know you mention me. Brian, I notice that you are more and more interesting in your analysis of Hubbard as time goes on. I feel the passion.
Thanks George?. It’s fun to think, write and be inspired. These ideas hit me upside the head and I have to write. It’s like giving birth. (Not that I know how giving birth feels lol)
Lots of people ARE innocent victims, Scn911, so what’s wrong with showing them sympathy? Sympathy has nothing at all to do with dramatization, sympathy is an understanding of other people’s suffering.
sym·pa·thy
/ˈsimpəTHē/
noun
1.
feelings of pity and sorrow for someone else’s misfortune.
“they had great sympathy for the flood victims”
synonyms: commiseration, pity, condolence, consolation, comfort, solace, support, encouragement…
2.
understanding between people; common feeling.
“the special sympathy between the two boys was obvious to all”
synonyms: rapport, fellow feeling, affinity, empathy, harmony, accord, compatibility
Brian I think this article is spot on. In my opinion and experience you have to recognize and accept grief as real so healing can begin. This is perfectly said!
I like this article lot. I had a “friend” who began screaming at her husband around their 7 year old child. It was outrageously loud and vulgar and disturbing. I asked them WTF? They both said she was becoming “more uptone” and being “nice” was just 1.1 (covert hostility) on the tone scale. She was now higher than that? I asked about their son who was living in all this screaming…he’ll come uptone too they said. Ugh!
So true. Once, when I was in the SO, I got called by an RTC staff member for a metered ethics interview. I had been up all night the night before, and had just gotten word that my son had broken his leg and taken to the hospital. I might not have been “griefy” if I had not been up all night, but I was griefy. I explained I had been up all night and that my son just was taken to the hospital. This RTC staff member (who, BTW, had been a friend of mine before being “promoted” to becoming an RTC enforcer) gave me the biggest NO SYMPATHY flow ever. Should have punched ’em and walked out.
Thank you Brian and I concur after having witnessed the reaction of indoctrinated Scientologists.
In this case it was the Tech Sec for Solo NOTS around 2005. I was in tears as I needed to get OK to leave and visit my mother who was very ill at a hospital. (eventually I did manage to go)
But while going over this with the SNs Tech Sec, she said: ‘what is the big deal, my mother died last week and I have not even gone to the funeral’.
And to be honest, her words shocked me. True, LRH´s teachings are behavioral and that is a pity as that Tech Sec could not feel the correct emotion re her mother’s death.
This is, imo, a large and volatile subject trying to understand grief (or any emotion) as something that can be fixed by reaching for a mental tool kit and following the instructions as given in a manual – it’s insane. It’s just not right that some mathematical speculation shoved down your throat as “scientifically researched” according to Hubbard can do that. Just do what the manual with the pretty pictures says and see… all fixed! The tone scale’s format at best, is better suited as a diagnostic tool for developing a longer lasting light globe or something, not solving the tears of emotional anguish we all feel from time to time, or for some unfortunates, to suffer from chronically. The way it relates wavelengths and such to the delicate emotions associated with being human doesn’t work in solving things that I’ve ever seen. It does however turn people into pieces of wood. It has no real application or meaning and does not give solace or respite to anyone to have your responses to life coldly plotted on some make believe scale. Just look at the state of Scientology and the people in it – that’s what believing & applying crap like that does!
Scientology, the perfect example of doing the same thing, over and over and over again expecting life to magically all fall into place and smell like roses.
Grief is closely linked to process of guilt and remorse. Given Hubtard’s record as a violent criminal one can see him not wanting people to acknowledge grief nor have his followers think highly of his victims who, inevitably would feel grief as part of their scamology experience.
Well dissected Brian!
Not to defend Hubbard, but I believe he said grief is appropriate at times in Science of Survival.
He also said “love despite all provocations to do otherwise” then said “ruin them utterly.
He also said “there was no Christ” then he said “Christ was a pedophile”
What Scientology has become is more in line with what my essay reveals. The application of Hubbard’s wordsare the outcome of study. Studying Scientology is what Scientology has become.
There is totally no grief or sympathy for the harm Hubbard and now DM have perpetrated on human beings.
It’s the outcome that demonstrates the philosophy.
Perhaps a more appropriate comment re Hubbard would be ‘white man speak with forked tongue.’
I don’t remember that from Science of Survival but it may be true. What I do remember is the original dedication in the book was to his daughter, Alexis. Later, the old grifter was to deny that she even existed. So, I would take anything written in that book with a HUGE grain of salt (with or without the semi-colon issue resolved). The ‘tone scale’ itself is just something Hubbard pulled out of his ass without any research into the validity of its claims. The numbers assigned to each ‘tone’ are just random numbers to create the appearance of scientific validity. That’s just my opinion, but agree or not, apparently the whole “science of survival” is completely unworkable. That is an irrefutable fact. Why? Because the great ‘OT’ hisself was unable to notice that his organization was rife with suppressive people with evil intentions that were out to get him and undermine everything he worked for. That would be like Warren Buffett coming up with a successful investment formula and ending up a pauper. Or maybe more accurately it’s like Bernie Maddoff coming up with a successful investment formula and ending up as he is. Bottom line: nothing in scientology works as advertised. It’s a scam and world class con. It’s all about the money and only about the money.
AMEN!!!! Totally arbitrary bullshit that thing is.
To Ms B Haven,
The tone Scale, is actually the robot motivators called implants from the “History of Man”.
If LRH was to tell you what he eventually discovered the orgs and money would go away.
Bye Mike