John, “it all went wrong” when scamology didn’t deliver what Hubtard said it did. What it did deliver was on its BEST days nothing that couldn’t happen by taking a nice walk.

Also, “credentials” are irrelevant. Either you can demonstrate something or you cannot.

Well said, John Harry Watson.

I’m going to butt in here as a veteran ex-Scn and successful auditor back then (until 1983); my credentials are easily found on the Internet. All this discussion and focus on the e-meter bugs me. The real reason auditing (or any other one-on-one talk therapy) works, when it does, is the high and unimpeded level of communication (ARC) between the auditor/counsellor and the PC/client on issues of intense interest, albeit buried, to the PC/client. The e-meter is, at best, a tool and is often entirely unnecessary to the process.

On the original Apollo Case VIII course LRH required students to audit PCs without an e-meter, relying only on “PC indicators”. He himself, in his recorded sessions, both solo and with PCs, flagrantly violated his own mandated TRs and meter reading.

I myself gave and received many sessions with significant or even life-changing results but my meter handling in these sessions would have doomed me to Miscavige’s deepest dungeon. And that’s where it went wrong: the e-meter obsession derailed the whole subject of auditing.

In his attempt to “standardise” and then automate the auditing process to make it “100% workable” LRH lost sight of its essence: ARC and, a word he significantly never used, TRUST.

Miscavige, with his various ”golden ages” is taking this further into “robotisation”. And thus any real benefit to the practice of Scn has been lost, and worse, become harmful.

My last session was in 1983 at AOLA with a spiffy Class IX (?) Flag auditor who was more interested in her manicure than my problems with over-run NOTs. She assessed a whole NOTs GF40 and declared a floating needle throughout. Had apparently never heard of an ARCX F/N. I walked out that day. So much for instant reads.

“If I had allowed myself to look for outpoints instead of always looking to agree…
well… who knows what would have happened!”

secret, What you just described is basically how scientific study is done when one is presented with a theory. Hubbtard did NOT want scientologists who were trained in science. For all to obvious reasons.

Have a great Christmas!

…well I can quote the crap he wrote and explain how it was done and used, and what was right and wrong according to the teck, according to whatever I knew, used, read, studied, and so on….

but for me it’s all nonsense now – it doesn’t feel like I ponder about the teck or would want to – I’m just testifying as to what it was like.

but you have a cool concept. If I had allowed myself to look for outpoints instead of always looking to agree…
well… who knows what would have happened!

🙂

While on the OEC I was inspired by the car washing and window washing HCO PLs… I wrote a tongue in-cheek checksheet just for shits and giggles. It included a PL on “Keys” and a bunch of other inane trivial PLs from the back of Vol 7. I put in drills, clays and essays .. the whole works.

I didn’t show it to many people… just a few others who had a bit of flippancy left inside.

Kyle, are you an auditor? If so, did you find the e-meter to be disfunctional?

Foolproof,
It seems clear to me that you have a great deal of belief tied to the functinality of the e-meter.

For those of us without the trappings of faith surrounding the device, we look at the design and see it for what it is.

Maybe one day you will see with eyes that are not so heavily filtered.

I didn’t know they had their own spaceship story but figured after getting to whatever their version is of Clear some people might get curious.

I’d be interested to know if the NOI uses any parts of scn or if they consider dianetics a totally separate subject. After clear do they just drop out and pursue their own beliefs? Do they use e-meters and have review auditors? Public information says they have lots of people getting auditing but I haven’t seen anything about what procedures they use.

Maybe the NOI will start a website with people posting success stories. Yikes!

what I stated was quite straightforward and quite non-controversial?

Very little you say is either.