🙂

Peter : As I said before – and this isn’t a personal attack to you – you have a VERY strange perspective of life , but to each its own. I feel at peace just as I am right now w/out doing any single thing for anyone. I possess a great certainty about life and enjoy the most small of the details about it. When I do a selfless act , it IS a selfless act. I don’t seek “feeling good with myself” as I ALREADY feel good with myself as I am right now. I don’t seek “recognition” (and frequently my help goes unrecognized) , as I have a perfect sense of Being just as I am right now. You should stop hanging out with psychiatrists, Roger ; their strange perspective on life can be contagious!!!

Roger : “Other peoples’ suffering makes me suffer so if I can mitigate their suffering it will mitigate my own. It’s all about me and it will never be any other way.”

Peter : Good! , have it your way then, if you feel satisfied with it. I am certainly not going to try to change your views as I wouldn’t with anybody. Only Scientologist do that , and I am not one of them. Wish you well , though.

Best,
Peter

Richard : “Peter – And THUS we reach a meeting of the minds! Laughter! ”

Peter : Yes , we have! 🙂

Richard : “Here is something t hat has been rolling around in my mind, not related to our conversation, just in general. I probably read it somewhere:

“It’s a great blessing that human beings can’t laugh and be angry at the same time ” – author unknown

Peter : That’s a great quote indeed! , so true , thanks.

Peter – And THUS we reach a meeting of the minds! Laughter! Here is something that has been rolling around in my mind, not related to our conversation, just in general. I probably read it somewhere:

“It’s a great blessing that human beings can’t laugh and be angry at the same time” – author unknown

Richard

Richard : “Hi thetaclear – The threads or whatever they’re called filled up below so I’m posting here.”

Peter : Got it , Richard.

Richard : Maybe a bit of background first, I left scn 40 years ago and have no desire to further pursue scn dogma. (dogma; doctrine, tenets, or beliefs, collectively – that was an interesting word search for me – smile) Certainly others wish to pursue things learned in scn further and that’s great.”

Peter : Wow, 40 years is a long time. And I am quite all right with you not pursuing Scn or whatever other practices , for that matter. It is a very personal decision , and people should always seek what works for them , and what they in affinity with.

Richard : “This discussion (below) started with Eamonn attempting to logically apply a scn (evaluation?) procedure to the running program. Eamonn sharing his thoughts indirectly caused me to clarify my own thoughts about the ‘tone scale’.”

Peter : Got it.

Richard : “My misunderstanding was that I was looking at the whole scale as if they were all emotions which they are not. Many are just elron’s take on state s of being. I doubt that any psychologist would describe a patient as covertly hostile which Hubbard portrays as an evil witch ready to lash out. – lol ”

Peter : I see your point. However, I think that Scn needs to be looked at as a whole instead of as individual and isolated parts , if we want to REALLY be unbiased and objective about it. Otherwise, many faulty interpretations can occur. For example, perhaps just reading the Chart of Human Evaluation one might get the idea that LRH thought of 1.1s as “witches” ready to be burned at the stake . But if you read SOS carefully ( “Science of Survival” ) , and others books that followed. And if you read the C/S Series and LRH’s personal C/Sed cases, you would understand how little he cared about the person’s tone level. He couldn’t care less about it as far as auditing was concerned.

Not in even ONE of LRH’s C/Ses you will find not even ONE single critical comment about a PC regarding his alleged tone level. What you WILL find are many, many criticisms towards auditors that assumed a critical attitude toward their PCs. You see what I mean ? Scn is frequently evaluated using a two-valued “logic” system instead of a infinite-valued logic system where proper discernment and many factors are evaluated as well , and properly taken into consideration .

This does not mean that LRH was infallible and a saint ; he wasn’t by a long, long , long ways. He acted very destructive in many , many ways , and that’s why he had the Karma he had. He deserved that Karma. He EARNED it , all right. But it DOES mean that just because LRH lied to us in lots of occasions, that ALL of Scn is then immediately a lie or unworkable ; that ISN’T the case at all. But Richard , you want to know one cognition that I recently had ? I realized that VERY FEW Scientologists really understood Scn to begin with ; very few indeed. They didn’t because of the cult mentality they adopted about it all (precipitated by LRH’s own writings, of course).

Richard : “I don’t negate my own wins or those of anyone else. I think we just place a different level of importance on the scale.”

Peter : Yes, we do. My importance is based, however, in hundreds of hrs of DIRECT application. And the scale is something that becomes a knowingness in you in that you don’t “think” about it in your daily life, or in your handlings and interacting with other people. It is more like those wise advises from our parents that became so useful to us once we acquired a firm reality on them. I do NOT think on the tone scale. I seldom do. But I instinctively use it in life to ESTABLISH ARC with others , not to “control” them or “handle” them to do what I want.

Richard : “My co-auditor took a ration of shit in CoS even though he kept his sexual preference totally outside of scn lines. Hubbard’s venomous mind led others to immediately regard him as. . . (fill i n the blank) So yes I would say that looking at “1.1” in a new unit of time quite pissed me off.”

Peter : And I quite agree with you on that point. And in fact , that’s the point more protested about as regards to the scale. That and LRH’s comment about “disposing of the ones below 2.0”. But out of those two points (BOTH misguided and totally WRONG) , the WHOLE scale was discarded and invalidated. A two-valued “logic” was used to evaluate it all. NO historical context was taken into consideration in such “evaluation” as apparently even you are failing to use now.

Richard 90-95% of Earth’s population BELIEVED , around the ’50s and the ’60s , that homosexuality was some kind of mental disorder. Please , let’s not be hypocrites now and PRETENT we didn’t. Homosexuality was OFFICIALLY considered a mental disorder by BOTH psychologists and psychiatrists around that period of time and up to the late ’70s when things stated to change a LITTLE ; just a little.

Homosexuals tended to be (forced to be by a suppressive society pretending to tell us who the fuck to love) covertly hostile towards society at large, and who the hell is to blame them for it ? I would have felt EXACTLY the same way. That’s only natural when we feel cornered.

But not in even ONE single of LRH’s C/Ses ; not even in one specific of those C/Ses did LRH EVER C/Sed to CHANGE the sexual preference of any one PC , nor to order any “Ethics” handling regarding the alleged “misconduct” of any PC , save it was an obvious misconduct that would affect his auditing such as promiscuity, cheating on your sexual partner, or engaging in sexual practices with minors. But other than that , he couldn’t care less, and most of the time , he didn’t even bother, but opted to just process the individual as the ultimate handling for deep-rooted 2D aberrations. So you can see, Richard, that using a multiple-valued logic system and taking into account historical context is a must for any unbiased and objective evaluation of ANYTHING.

Richard : “I’m ok, you ok? – (smile) – I left another reply to you way below. Best, Richard”

Peter : Yes, my friend , I am ok if you are ok. :-)))

Best ,
Peter

Peter, I have never done a selfless act in my life. Every act of so-called ‘kindness’ I’ve ever done was for the sake of preserving my own peace of mind or to be recognized as a wonderful person. Other peoples’ suffering makes me suffer so if I can mitigate their suffering it will mitigate my own. It’s all about me and it will never be any other way.

Roger : “Thank you Peter for your deep analysis of the Tone scale and my views about it. In contradiction to you I say, life is NOT about understanding people. It is about understanding YOURSELF. If you understand yourself then you will understand EVERYBODY because we are all the same person operating under a different mix of conditions.”

Peter : Yeah , I can agree with that viewpoint. That’s why I read and agree with many of Adyashanti’s teachings. My point was that the scale wasn’t designed to “control” and “handle” people in a bad way , and I stand by what I originally said as regards to that.

Roger : “I’m afraid I’m going to have to officially object to being moralized to by somebody who says, “with all due respect…”. ”

Peter : You are perfectly entitled to so object.

Roger : “You denounced my perspectives and said they sounded without purpose and inspiration.”

Peter : I didn’t “denounce” anything unless you take expressing my opinions about your views on that as a personal attack which it wasn’t at all. But I disagree with living our lives like that as you perhaps disagree with living a life where Scn is used in it. So let’s not take this personal as it isn’t.

Roger : “I understand how you would see it that way because you need purpose and inspiration. I do not. I’m completely satisfied. Don’t purpose and inspiration merely serve to provide satisfaction? I’m already satisfied.”

Peter : Yes, it can serve that goal, but it can also become something completely selfless. I don’t care to satisfy myself as such, you know ; I care about helping others find satisfaction in life. And I am quite all right with you being satisfied with life. I dropped the need for a two-valued logic about life a long time ago.

Roger : ” You needn’t take a morally superior tone with me. It doesn’t cause me to think I’m being spoken to by a person who is morally superior to me.

Peter : I am really sorry if that’s the way you perceived it. I don’t feel superior to anybody. I got rid of that cultic habit that so many Scientologists had, a VERY long tike ago. I just didn’t agree with your viewpoints about the scale and about life. If that makes me “superior” from your perspective, then so be it.

I gain a new piece of human subjective reality.

Thank you Peter for your deep analysis of the Tone scale and my views about it. In contradiction to you I say, life is NOT about understanding people. It is about understanding YOURSELF. If you understand yourself then you will understand EVERYBODY because we are all the same person operating under a different mix of conditions.

I’m afraid I’m going to have to officially object to being moralized to by somebody who says, “with all due respect…”. You denounced my perspectives and said they sounded without purpose and inspiration. I understand how you would see it that way because you need purpose and inspiration. I do not. I’m completely satisfied. Don’t purpose and inspiration merely serve to provide satisfaction? I’m already satisfied. You needn’t take a morally superior tone with me. It doesn’t cause me to think I’m being spoken to by a person who is morally superior to me.

The problem as I see it, is there is a whole swath of beings whom the Church currently does not cater to. Those neglected brethren I am referring to here, are the beings without bodies. Shortly I will shed this current bag of bones (in two weeks time my body will be 60-years-old). So when I ‘leave the building’, why should I have to acquire a new body in order to continue services? If one simply remains exterior, due to not going the ‘inhabiting another body route’, one will not then need to bother exteriorizing one’s soul with processing. There are also other benefits. The Running Program would be so much easier without a body — not being located in space, one would be at the beginning and the end of the running track at the same time. Therefore, completion of the program would be instantaneous, due to no time being involved to move from start to finish. The Purification Rundown would be no sweat, because one would have no sweat to sweat out. And why shouldn’t one be right at the cutting edge, right there with the latest and greatest and thoroughly up-to-date stuff Ron is messing with? Afterall, this is the latest research he’s been working on for years now; what he’s been involved with since 2000 hours, Friday 24 January 1986. “The body he had used to facilitate his existence in this universe had ceased to be useful and had become an impediment to the work he must do outside its confines.” (Hollywood Palladium announcement of LRH’s passing).