MWesten, thank you, that was a really interesting chat. I always seek a logical explanation beyond hubbard’s dogmatic assertions. The “mechanical/functional” part that either comprises them or discredits them. After scn, I embarked on a spiritual journey (a genuine one, from my point of view, including a perspective influenced by quantum physics, why not?) and what I currently consider valid is that there is a single Consciousness that manifests from any existing point of view with the purpose of gaining self experience. So there are no past lives ‘lived’ as we understand them, but rather different ‘identities’ of a single consciousness.
However, these points of view seem to have a margin of free will. The extreme is believing to be independent from the single Consciousness. Hubbard’s nonsense was in that direction and will surely remain in “lowers” for a good while. Lol.

Thanks, Loose. Yes, priming…good word. And I agree that confirmation bias plays its part well. I still remember the first time I ever “exteriorised” (during OT TR0). I was so confused. I didn’t know anything about dissociation at the time so my only real point of reference was Hubbard. I wanted to believe! I was high as a kite for weeks afterwards. It was such a game changer.

Thanks. In a previous post I wrote something about it. Here it is.

There are two psychological phenomena to look at.

The first is priming. This is a psychological phenomenon whereby exposure to certain stimuli influences the subsequent response to similar or related stimuli. This process occurs implicitly, often without the person being aware of the influence of the initial stimulus on their behavior or perceptions. For example, if a person is exposed to ideas associated with the concept of ‘past lives,’ such as ‘thetan’ or ‘incidents’ or ‘whole track stories’ they may then respond more quickly to words or images related to that.

Priming works by creating a kind of ‘ground’ in the mind, preparing the subject to interpret subsequent information in line with the initial stimulus. This ground can be influenced by past experiences, personal beliefs, and previous information. This primed ground can then influence the emotions generated by beliefs.
For example, if a person is convinced they are a spiritual being with specific past-life experiences as teached by hubbard, priming may predispose them to interpret current experiences in a way that confirms this belief. Previous information and personal beliefs thus become the groundwork upon which emotions related to past spiritual experiences develop and amplify, even if these experiences are not objectively verified.

In this way, priming and emotions generated by beliefs are closely interconnected, as priming creates the mental context that makes it more likely to experience emotions in line with pre-existing beliefs.

Hubbard knew that and used it extensively.

In other words a lot of meter reads can happens.
Stay well.

Yes, I fear Hubbard’s sci-fi religious imagery was for him to inspect, and him alone.

It’s not much of a stretch to imagine the subconscious drama within the mind of a troubled sci-fi writer with a penchant for blaming others, would present itself as prison planets, theta traps and body thetans.

Or that HCOB Pain & Sex came from the mind of a self-loathing, mythomaniacal manslut who could no longer get it up.

The mind is so fragile. Preconditioning the student in space opera, often long before the first session, will undoubtedly affect recall during therapy. Would a pc have recalled blowing up a planet, gazillions of years ago, if Hubbard hadn’t already told him, repeatedly, that he could? I’m going to say…no.

Accepting this imagery as literal truth arguably increases the potency of the placebo effect but it misses the opportunity for genuine inspection – especially on the metaphorical/symbolic level. The subconscious vomits up all kinds of crap, lets face it. From dreams to peak experiences. Even a scientologist should know the imagery presented when dreaming is not necessarily/literally “true” and that prior events and conversations can influence content. But such distinctions are rejected when it comes to scientology.

MWesten, I always appreciate your comments. I might have misunderstood, but in the end, hubby makes you go on a much longer, convoluted, and expensive journey to understand what you can achieve in a couple of months of Zen meditation or yoga (done properly). Just a confusion about Consciousness identities instead of pastlifes. You are the observer, and everything revolves and happens around this condition, period.

It was demeaning, invalidating and introverting being hammered to get it.

Wtf, wire hanger abortions result in homosexuality, Clams, meat grinders????

Come to find out, my problem was trying to understand crazy, and make it “my own.”

OT3 and NOTS are also visualisation processes, comparable to modern “guided imagery” techniques. The same could be said for engram running. Whilst holding Hubbard’s clammy, dead hand, the subject is guided through i) image generation, ii) maintenance, iii) inspection and iv) transformation. [1]

The assumed collective trauma addressed on the upper bridge means this process becomes impersonal and abstract. And because this imagery is presented as literal, the subject is unable to inspect it unreservedly, thus arguably limiting the possibility of real transformation.

I’m reminded of Geir Isene, who claimed to have had great success when viewing BTs as nothing more than extensions of himself: past viewpoints, valences/archetypes, etc, that he’d distanced himself from and was no longer taking responsibility for…

‘The solution is to take full responsibility for all one’s viewpoints and roles and retain those which serves one well in present time. When one asks the question “Who are you?” to such a viewpoint on OT 5-7, one is seeking to realize that the viewpoint is in fact oneself – hence one answers “me” to the question. It is not a “me” from another person that answers the question, it is one’s own realization that the viewpoint is “me”. One’s old viewpoints comes under one’s own control and responsibility. That one is not running out and blowing off thousands of separate beings solves the conundrum that there are no verified records of any body thetans having shown up later in a body and continuing his spiritual journey in Scientology.’ [2]

But what do I know. It is interesting though. As is the claim that effective guided imagery, like “effective” scientology, requires hypnotic susceptibility and dissociative ability. [3][4]

Refs

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guided_imagery

2. https://isene.me/2012/12/10/ot-8/

3. Tellegen, A., Atkinson, G., Openness to absorbing and self-altering experiences (absorption), a trait related to hypnotic susceptibility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 83, No. 3, 1974, pp. 268–277.

4. Bond, K., Ospina, M. B., Hooton, N., Bialy, L., Dryden, D. M., Buscemi, N., Shannahoff-Khalsa, D., Dusek, J., and Carlson, L. E., ‘Defining a complex intervention: The development of demarcation criteria for “meditation”‘. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, Vol. 1, No. 2, May 2009, pp. 129–137.

Ma. B. Haven, actually, I personally found several connections between Eastern practices and the “techniques” of the early periods – the 1950s, to be precise. Surely, that early period was more influenced by the idea of adapting Buddhist techniques with psychoanalysis and practices of Crowley’s OTO. But without giving credit to any of them, instead making it appear as if they were his own discoveries. There are ancient meditative practices that believe emotions, as energy, are stored in the body and can be released to heal or not influence the body. This is surprisingly similar to the tale of BTs.
In fact, as you pointed out, simply promoting meditation or these techniques wouldn’t have brought in money, nor would it have kept people engaged, eventhough it would have been more helpful.