9:07 PM me: is this working?
9:08 PM Brian: yes, hi
me: hey, miracle of technology :-)
how are you?
Brian: Okay, how are you?
9:09 PM me: me am fine, I almost missed it because I did not realize we were Thursday today, still was thinking we were wednesday
only by luck when I look at my watch did I see we were Thursday
9:10 PM Brian: Yeah, I here you. After a while the days seem to run together ;)
me: especially with different time zone, can get kind of complicated
9:11 PM Brian: mmm-hmm...
Are you ready to go?
me: ok
9:13 PM Brian: OK. I read most of the info on your site, but in the interest of quotes, can you give me your basic criticisms of both Scientology and the anti-Scientology movement? What harm does the church do and what harm do overzealous critics do?
9:14 PM me: well, I was thinking recently the Scientology issue is rather complicated because there really are two scientology
one is a rather nice spiritual system
the other is the cultish aspect
the two being entangled
the spiritual system does not do a lot of harm
but the cultish aspect can
9:15 PM namely it claims to deliver things it eventually can't
and also it claims to be unique, exclusive, and absolutely necessary
so people end up investing in it more than it is worth
9:16 PM and they will defend it in an unreasonable way
justifying the fair game and other criticism we see on the net
that's basically my criticism of scientology
over-zealous critics do harm because they push their case much too far
they create undue fear in family and society responsible
9:17 PM that brings sometimes over-reactions
and discrimination
they promote myths rather than criticisizing scientology for what it is really worth
that would be my criticism against them
9:19 PM Brian: Can you elaborate a bit on the first part of what you said? Where does the "nice spiritual system" end and the "cult" begin? Is there a point on the upper levels where it stops being positive and starts being destructive or repressive?
me: No, I think it starts right at the beginning
it is a constant that runs throughout
it you take a text by l ron hubbard
9:20 PM there would be wisdom in it, and then there would be statements that I would call cultish
statement such as scientology is the only hope for mankind, that kind of things
of course when people get more into it
9:21 PM the get at the same time more into the spiritual aspects
so they end up appreciating scientology more
and at the same time
they get more in the cultish aspect
really thinking scientology is the only way, that there is an evil psychiatric conspiracy, etc
so the cultish aspects tends to get worst over time
9:22 PM whereas the spiritual one sort of stays the same
i often compare it to drugs
it will deliver heightened perception and awareness to a certain extend
but the fix to it gets worst over time
9:23 PM Brian: So, in spite of that does the auditing process of "recalling" instances or memories to rid them from you "reactive mind" actually work on some level? It seemed to me like so much New Age-y nonsense, but plenty of people swear by it apparently.
9:24 PM me: I think it does work to a certain extend
it does not work when compared to the absolute claims scientology is making
but to a certain stage i do believe it works and can sometimes deliver quite strong results
9:25 PM Brian: has it helped you?
me: Well, I received some auditing while on staff and some of it created quite strong effect
whether it actually helped me that's a more difficult question
9:26 PM if you take drugs and it creates strong effects, does it help or not, independently from the fix, I don't know...
but I believe someone who is a scientologist and tries to apply the system can be helped by it
9:27 PM Brian: You said you were able to leave the church with relatively little pressure from officials, but you also hadn't attained the level of "clear". Would it be fair to say they might have been tougher on you if you had reached a higher level?
9:28 PM Would officials have been more troubled by an OT apostate who knew about the secrets of the upper levels?
9:29 PM me: I doubt it.. I think they just don't like people leaving the movement, like many movements just don't like people to leave. I don't think the OT levels in 1980 was such a strong issue as it is now
I think their attitude was also very much based on mine
9:30 PM I was not overly confrontational with them
most people who want to leave just blow
I wanted to see to what extend they would let me leave and mostly I argued gently with them
at the end they just saw I was determined to go and thus let me leave
9:31 PM or course I received my freeloader bill etc and had to sign documents that I would not reveal antything
9:32 PM Brian: You also said you didn't see any instances of abuse, coercion, physical repression. etc., while you were on staff. But again, just because you didn't see it, can you say with reasonable certainty that it didn't happen elsewhere, particularly among higher levels such as the Sea Org?
9:33 PM me: Well, I saw abusive behavior, cultish behavior, like people shouting on others etc
so in a way I did see abuses of that sorts, that I file under silly things people to in the cultish mindset
that could be quite traumatic as well
but never things about coercion etc
9:34 PM it may happen in the sea org, am not sure, but it certainly is not general or typical to scientology
and i don't think even in the sea org it would reach a point that would clearly be illegal
if the person is determined to leave, I believe he just can
9:36 PM Brian: Yeah, plenty of people say teh Sea Org is basically boot camp. What would you say to that, or to specific testimonials of people who say they were physically restrained in an auditing session, subjected to intrusive "sec checks", etc.?
9:37 PM me: you know I did have a peek in the sea org
when I was in denmark that was a sea organization
and I lived in seo org quarters
even in the rpf for a while because for some time they have no bed for me
9:38 PM I do think the sea org can be quite tough
resources are limited and it also is the spirit of dedication people want to have and expect of others
as for leaving from auditing sessions I think it is a bit of a different matter
scientology consider that if you are in an incident, you should go out of it
9:39 PM the auditing sessions should finish with the incident resolved
if you leave while you are in the incident, that would be much worst than not getting into it in the first place
so I think they do have training even where the auditor has to "control" his preclear and even physically bring him back to the chair
I think this certainly can happen in some cases
9:40 PM but again, this is limited, if the preclear really wants to get out, he will be able to, i so think
sec checks still something else and I think it can be quite abusive indeed
9:41 PM Brian: in cases where it has happened--physical restraint--do you think it is at all justified?
me: it could be to a certain extend, but not beyond some limit
I think it could be justified if the auditor would try to keep the person in session
9:42 PM but not if he really forces him against his will over a certain point
it's a matter of degree
I would not call this really coercion in the legal sense
9:44 PM Brian: Do you think Scientology is at all a homophobic organization? What is your reaction to Hubbard's controversial statements: "the homosexual...is quite ill physically", "extremely dangerous", etc.?
9:45 PM me: I don't think I read those statements before but I do think there was a degree of homophobia in Hubbard's mind
I would not call scientology a homophic organization though
9:46 PM it really isn't a key issue for Scientology like it would be for fundamentalists for example
9:47 PM Brian: So have they modified their beliefs at all since Hubbard made those statements, or do they just not pay attention to them?
9:48 PM me: I think hubbard himself has tuned down that sort of rethoric over time. That was also one of the point that guy (sorry his name don't pops up right now) was saying, that hubbard sort of canceled statements to that effect he wrote before
9:49 PM toned down
not tunred
9:50 PM Brian: Do you know what Hubbard said specifically? Do you think those statements were sincere or could they be just a PR maneuver or political posturing?
9:51 PM me: I am not sure what specific statements you are referring to, but I believe they were not PR manoeuvering, I think he most probably must have thought sincerely that homosexuality is not something "normal" and I guess he believed it would be "cured" by Scientology
9:52 PM Brian: No, I mean the statements YOU mentioned Hubbard made to balance or cancel out his previous statements, or tone down the rhetoric.
9:53 PM me: ah, ok
sincerly, I don't know... it could be both way but it is possible that at some point he realized they were not warranted
9:54 PM as I said before, it really isn't that important in scientology
because scientology does not put much emphasis on what you should do or not do
it puts emphasis on the technology of the mind so that people are free to do whatever they want
theoretically
9:56 PM Brian: yeah...
9:58 PM I did some undercover work yesterday. Went to the church in TImes Square and posed as a gay guy trying to better cope with his sexuality and wanting to be able to fully accept it and be open about it.
me: ah? Interesting :)
Brian: I hoped that this would give them enough leeway to tell me I could be "cured" if I wanted to, but the suggestion never came up.
Quite the opposite in fact.
9:59 PM By the same token, others have said that they have went to an Org with the SPECIFIC intention of wanting to be rehabiliated of their homosexuality, and apparently they were told right away that process could be taken care of through auditing.
10:00 PM So it seems like you're right when they say the put emphasis on "allowing people to do what they want"
10:01 PM But even if this is not specifically homophobic it is irresponsible in my view, or even destructive to allow people to go through this kind of reparative therapy without warning them of the dangers or even suggesting to them it might be better if they came to terms with their sexuality.
10:02 PM In my case, the people seemed sincere in wanting to help me reach my supposed goals, but I could also tell they really wanted my money.
Your thoughts on all this? :)
10:04 PM me: yes, of course in both case they mostly want you (and those other people) to join in, so they they would tell what you want to hear, but also, again, they could be sincere as well, because as I said these are not key issues in Scientology. The important thing for them is to get rid of the reactive mind... what you do after that is mostly up to you. Also they will never contradict you on your goal because in Scientology people don't "evaluate" for you. You are the one to set your own goals.
10:05 PM Brian: But do you think it is wrong of them to allow people to try to rehabilitate with out at least offering other alternatives?
10:08 PM me: this is sort of a moral issue, I think it is right for them not to be involved one way or the other. If your goal is to assume responsibility for it, fine, if someone else feells they want to "cured" of it, this is just a different perception. I don't think scientology should be involved one way or the other in this debate and it seems right to me to allow people to set their own goal
10:09 PM so, in this case I think exceptionally they did kind of the right thing, but I understand that your view is not along that but this is really a moral, subjective, issue
10:12 PM Brian: Of course it could have been a case of them telling me exactly what I wanted to hear to get me on the bridge. There have been testomonials of closeted upper level Scientologists or kids raised in Scientolgoy caught engaging in gay acts and then severely disciplined.
10:13 PM go ahead, sorry...
me: no, I was just waiting for you to finish, no problem
i don't have much experience with this google chat thing
10:14 PM but it says "typing" when you type
but basically in the case of the "regging" of new people, they would not "evaluate" one way or the other
so this is in line with what they believe, and of course it is very convenient for recruiting as well because whatever people's goals are is ok
10:15 PM in the case of disciplining that's possible but the context is different, because they may have some rules within the organization I don't know, they may have been disciplined too if it was straight sex, am not sure
10:17 PM Brian: While you were on staff or in the church did you know of anyone who is openly gay, particularly at any of the higher levels?
me: not that I can remember
Brian: Do you know if the church would be at all reticent, even for PR purposes, of putting an openly gay person in a high profile position?
10:18 PM me: ah...
I can only guess on this one, but they may be reticent
10:19 PM Brian: why do you think so? I know you're only guessing but can you elaborate?
10:20 PM me: because their goal is not about being very liberal, they will want to give a strong image of "normalcy". In many ways scientology really is quite conservative.
10:22 PM so they may not give that much emphasis on that issue, in that an openly gay person would be allowed in the church and would not be otherwise discriminated, I think, but they may consider their image in putting an openly gay person in a high profile position, especially if it is a public position
10:23 PM or maybe they will not, am really not sure, but my feeling, knowing how conservative they tend to be would be to think they would at least have reticences towards it
10:24 PM Brian: Do you know if there is ANY legitimacy or scientific accuracy to those tests they give you? Are they designed so that everybody "fails" in some sense, as many have alleged?
10:25 PM me: Well, I used to give results of these tests myself at some stage. Some people would not fail at all and the test would be quite high
this does not mean there is any legitimacy to it but if you give the "right" answer the result will be positive
we had two strategies
10:26 PM the most common, because most people would have at least some low point on the graph, was to offer scientology as a help for that
in the case of a person who had all the points high on the graph (rare), we would say something like "would you like to became even more able and help others"
10:27 PM but the principle of the test is to "make people aware of their ruin", and we were assuming the vast majority of people had such a "ruin", and this is how we "helped them become aware they need scientology"
because of course most people are considerated abberated, under the spell of the reactive mind, so they necessasrily must have a "ruin"
10:29 PM Brian: Some of those personality questions seemed strange. Who reads railway times tables for fun?
me: haha :)
Brian: Do you know if these are actually accurate in determining someones personality?
10:30 PM me: I personally don't think so, but they often give out similar results. At least one of the point on the graph will be quite low
I remember myself when I took the test I felt rather bad
i guess that would be the feeling of most people
10:31 PM when you think of it is rather nasty
because when people do a test they like to have some positive results
and here they get the contrary
all this just to "make them aware of their ruin" so that they would do scientology course
because of course scientology is so necessary they don't even realize how bad they need it
10:32 PM I would file this in the cultic category, all justified because of the exclusivity and absolute necessity of scientology...
so really I don't think the test really is a valid measurement
10:34 PM Brian: One thing I also thought was strange was that the IQ test answer key was numbered backwards, from right to left instead of the usual left to right? Was this to trick people up and get them to fill out the key wrong?
10:35 PM me: I don't remember we offered an IQ test for the public. I know there is one for staff and possibly for preclears
not that this was 30 years ago!
note, not no
not
:)
10:36 PM I don't remember the details of the IQ test we did for staff, sorry
Brian: okay, no prob
10:37 PM They also kept insisting Dianetics was a bona fide science and the mental health community rejected it because they knew it worked and there was no money in actually curing people, just masking their problems with drugs and such.
Are these just bald faced lies?
me: well, that's what they actually believe
10:38 PM that's how they justify opposition to it, at least that's how hubbard did so everybody else is following on it
of course it's not bona fide science
10:39 PM and the mental health community rejected it because they saw no value in it or maybe other reasons too, if they rejected it at all, I think they just did not put much interest in it
10:40 PM but since this is what they actually believe i would not call it lies, it is just how they perceive it, through hubbard's eyes
10:41 PM Brian: Well did Hubbard lie about mental health reaction to it?
10:42 PM me: it is possible he actually believed it
10:43 PM you know, the whole hubbard question is kind of difficult, because everything could be either way, one way or the other. We will probably never know the truth about that
did he actually believe all his stuff or did he just make it all up?
10:44 PM I don't know, but in doubt I would tend to believe he actually believe it, it just makes more sense and is also more "christian" in a way (am not a christian just use the expression)
10:45 PM Brian: I've always thought that most self-professed profits--Muhammed, Joseph Smith, Hubbard, Rael, etc.--start out as frauds and then end up believing their own hype.
10:46 PM me: eh, who knows...
Brian: Do you know if there's any truth to the oft-repeated tale that Hubbard said something to the affect of "The real money's in starting a religion"
me: yes, I think he most probably said it, but I also think it is rather over-quoted and I do not read the meaning many criticis read in it
10:47 PM they often use it as a proof that scientology is a religion for profit
but he could have well said such a thing refering to religions and then later on turn his movement into one without necessarily thinking to make money with it
10:48 PM in fact I think he turned scientology into religion more for legal matters than actually making a religion
it started out with dianetic, the science...
but for tax exempt and general protection awarded to religiousm movement he turned it into a church
Brian: That's what I heard
10:49 PM me: many people in scientology in fact do not like scientology to be a chirch
church
Brian: why?
me: I know because I did not like it and many other staff students did not like it either
10:50 PM because they want it to be a science, a philosophy, not a church
in some respect they are aware that being a church is mostly for legal purpose
but they can't express their opinion about it
I remember as a student I read a policy saying it was a crime of sort to say it was not a church
10:51 PM they personally don't view scientology as a religion
most of them
10:53 PM Brian: The orientation film kept referring to it as a church and a religion but the staff I talked to seemed to want to downplay the religious aspects. They even denied that Scientologists believe in reincarnation as a matter of doctrine even though this is part of public record and most literature doesn't hide this fact.
me: yes, that's it.
you see, they view religion as believing in things
whereas they claim scientology is a technology, that you do not need to believe in anything
10:54 PM that it is not about belief but applying a technology that would reveal things for yourself because you discover them yourself, not because someone tell you to believe in them
that's why internally they really don't like to be identified with a religion, but for legal purpose they heavily play in that direction
10:56 PM Brian: But why does most info admit a belief in reincarnation if they don't want to preach religious doctrines? And why deny that belief to perspective members?
Do they mean to keep this belief under wraps until later like the Xenu thing, or is it supposed to be a matter of public record?
10:58 PM me: I think it is because they don't want it to be a belief, something that people how to believe in order to be part of the group. They want people to discover for themselves whether this is true or not. But of course it is a belief in Scientology and scientologists believe in it, but it is not a "belief" you are required to adhere to. I think this is why. They just don't want to be a religion where you ought to believe in things...
10:59 PM Brian: If you wanted to type something else, go ahead
11:01 PM me: no I think that's the main thing. What I want to say maybe was that again, it is not that important in Scientology. What is important, as they view it, is that people "get up the bridge", all the rest, including the gay question, including reincarnation, are not things central in scientology (but of course you need to at least believe that reincarnation is a possibility or else you would not be able to go very far in auditing).
11:02 PM Brian: If someone admits to not believing in it, could that be a problem?
me: not really, but when it comes to auditing it may be. it goes like this
in auditing you start with an "incident", then you go to an "ealier similar" incident
11:03 PM you can go back in time but when you reach birth or something the auditor will keep on asking you the question of an earlier incident
they may say "but I don't believe in reincarnation"
then the auditor would say "it does not matter, is there an earlier similar incident, what do you see, just tell me what you see"
11:04 PM so the person may end up telling "what he sees" and so maybe come to believe in past lives
11:05 PM Brian: So when people are supposedly recalling these past lives, is it just the power of suggestion? Do they fool themselves into thinking they see something?
11:06 PM me: am not sure but it could be, at least that's how it starts
even if you say "but it is only my imagination" the auditor would say "it does not matter, just tell me what you see"
in fact, they themselves admit that at the start it could be imagination
11:07 PM but they believe that with time it will give way to actual perception of real past lives
Brian: interesting...
me: and you know it is strange how it works, because in some respected it kind of works that way
11:08 PM when you start telling things they are not very real
but at some stage you end up seeing things that are extremely real
now I don't say it can't be imagination too, but sometimes it is so strong I think they may actually be snippets of actual past lives
I remember one time I was recalling somebody being burned at the stake
11:09 PM when I came back in present time, the smell was really in the room so much so I asked the auditor if he smelled that smelled of burned flesh too
of course I never smelled burned flesh (luckily) but somehow I knew it was exactly that
11:10 PM Brian: Wow...
So you seem to be intimating that some of this stuff is actually legitimate.
Or was it just the power of suggestion, do you think?
11:11 PM me: that would be a matter of belief, but as for me I already believe in past lives before scientology and still believe in them, so it kind of make sense to me that way and so I tend to believe that at least some perceptions actually comes from viewing one's past life
when I was in doubt about scientology I made some experience
11:12 PM I wanted to see if I can go back in my past lives outside of auditing
so I lay on my bed and started a similar process, and sure enough I got the same strong results
11:13 PM it is of course never 100% that these are past lives actually, they could still be suggestion, but at least the impression is very strong, much like when you make a strong dream that is sensed to be very different than just superficial dreams
Brian: mmm-hmm...
Do you think media coverage of Scientology has been fair?
11:15 PM me: historically I think media coverage has been very critical, maybe overly critical, but then maybe that's also its role somewhere. Actually it seems major outlet do make an effort to be fair, so much so that critics are actually angry with them
11:16 PM (I remember a recent incident)
11:17 PM not sure which it was anymore, but anyway even though the feature was rather critical critics were angry they did not describe scientology as scam brainwashing its followers. It's hard to say. It seems media coverage would be rather critical to over critical though
11:18 PM Brian: In what aspects?
11:20 PM me: well, that's my general impression. My view may have changed now with the internet. I must admit I am not reading enough on the subject to really make an assessment in present time so I am left with the impression of footage I saw in the past that were presenting more like a sinister cult the type of jim jones and such
11:21 PM Brian: Do you think there is too much emphasis, either from the media or from internet critics, on the Xenu story? I know you mentioned its not the core belief and not that important in the scheme of things.
11:23 PM me: well, it's important in scientology at a later stage, but critics present it as what scientologists actually believe, and it is often summarized that way also in the media or popular description (for example the cartoon, what was the name of it, where they put tom cruise in the closet). It is misleading to present it as what scientologists believe but then I understand it is very spectacular so it's a 'story to tell"
11:26 PM you know, another problem I have is that I am not following the issue that close enough anymore. My web site is still running because it is on auto run but it has been years I did not participate in forum or really read news about it. Recently I made some effort to try and update my site with the anonymous things and such but now I am again taken by other things, so making an assessement of the situation in present time is a bit difficult for me. I am mostly aware of the situation as it was like five years ago or such - though I do try to keep afloat a little bit too...
11:27 PM Brian: That's okay. Five years isn't that long ago, and I don't think much has changed in terms of awareness
me: no, possibly not...
11:28 PM in feb-march i had some time and make quite a few new pages, am still interested in the subject but nowadays just try to keep up with people writing me
11:29 PM later on i may have more time and want to make a page about my new idea of the two scientology
it explains much I think about its mystery
anyway...
11:30 PM if you have more questions, feel free to ask them, or if you want to continue another day it's fine with me too
11:31 PM Brian: Yeah, a few more questions. Hope that's not a problem. This shit is endlessly fascinating :)
me: yeah, hehe
for me it's not a problem as long as they will keep me in the restaurant I am in
11:32 PM the staff already tried to kick me out but I explained my situation with the owner and he said it's fine I can stay and the staff went away and the owner is here making his accounting
I get my diner here and using their free wireless
11:33 PM Brian: Are they closing up or something or do they just not want you to sit around after you finished eating?
me: no, they are closed already, but the owner is ok with me to stay because he is busing on his laptop too, so that's fine until he tell me to get out
11:34 PM Brian: Okay, few more hopefully it won't take long...
me: no problem
owner is nice I just had a few kind words with him
11:35 PM Brian: You were saying it is misleading to portray the Xenu story as what Scientologists actually belieive.
11:36 PM Is this because most Sceintologists don't believe it becuase they are simply ignorant about or becuase it is more a "creation myth" or sorts to symbolize other things? Do most OTs that you're aware of believe it literally or do they take it figuratively?
11:37 PM me: yes, most of them just don't know about it as it is only revealed on upper level where in fact very few of them ever reach, so that's one reason
now for it being litteral or figurative, I think they believe in it literally
11:38 PM maybe some people in the freezone may interpret it as figurative
11:39 PM Brian: I know you said Scientology is not really about "beliefs" so if an OT were to say they take it as metaphorical among his colleagues would that cause any problems? Is it true from what I've heard that people aren't even allowed to talk about it?
11:41 PM me: yes, they don't talk about it. Mostly people don't "talk about their case". You only do that with your auditor. That story would be part of their case. They would also be afraid to "evaluate" for the other person or invade his case. so they basically just don't talk about it, but I am not sure that it is becaues it is not allowed, except in the sense that it is not allowed to talk about your cases to others
or in fact
it may also not be allowed to divulgue information about confidential OT level to outsiders, even insiders maybe who did the course as well
11:42 PM I remember a meeting with high OT I attended
I was there because I was living in the same house and they had guesses
guests
haha
11:43 PM and that woman was telling how she would admit (exceptionally) that she had not achieved the result she expected, and that mostly other people excpect, and that she is afraid to go back to her country becaues of this, and so she keeps on running OT III in the hope that this would resolve her case
11:44 PM this was very exceptional because the guests were very high ranking OT so she would just feel compeled to talk about it in spite of not being allowed to talk about your case and in spite of non OT like me being present, but even so she would not specific about anything, just saying she kept on running OT III
Brian: What was she expecting? That the info would be different?
11:45 PM And when she kept running, was she given the same documents containing the story over and over again?
me: no, I think she was expecting to be an OT that can fly around and that sort of things
the document you receive only once
and then you "run the process"
11:46 PM that would be to audit out BTs (body thetans)
Brian: oh, yeah
Is that something they try to keep under wraps as well, the supposed supernatural abilities of OTs? Or is that a part of public record?
11:47 PM I'm sure they wouldn't admit it to prospective members or people just starting out on the bridge anyway, seeing as they wouldn't even tell me they believed in reincarnation
11:48 PM me: no, it's very public record, that's one of their main promotions and attraction though at the first level they would just promote scientology can make you more able stuff.
but you fairly quickly get into the OT abilities things
it is very much in the literature as well beyond the mere basics, hard to escape
11:49 PM Brian: Doesn't that cause some disallusionment or a disconnect with people as they get on? I think it's pretty safe to say that Tom Cruise can't perform telekenesis. Doesn't that cause people to question it?
11:50 PM me: ah... well, yes, but again, because you don't talk about your case and because you don't evaluate for others and because they know OTs are not allowed to speak about this kind of stuff with mere mortals, the illusion can persist
11:51 PM people believe OTs have this ablities and they are just not showing them up
as for OTs themselves, they usually believe others have these abilities only them have not :-)
that's like the joke in the communist times
people joke about the fact that there was only one communist in the whole country, but nobody knew who it was
11:52 PM meaning that if they admited not to be communist, they would be reported...
11:53 PM Brian: Wow...but don't OTs at least confront their auditors with this stuff, or are OTs only being self audited at this level?
11:54 PM me: well, yes, they may talk about it to their auditors, but they would always find out reasons why, and most of the time it would be that they still have a case and need to do the next level! WHich of course is a very convenient explanation if you like to see scientology as a scam... But then there is also another aspect
people do have things happening and they give an higher explanation to it
for example, I always thought that exteriorization was going out of your body, and seeing your body from far etc
11:56 PM one day during some auditing (actually not auditing but review), the person was asking me if when I felt super good I was not seeing things from an higher perspective and if I did not feel like I was floating, which is a rather accurate description in fact when I feel good (or anyone else I guess), then she suggested (not told but suggested) that this was exterorization...
so when people say they would exteriorize, they would use that definition, so it's not like they think they don't have these abilities at all, they think they have but they have to seriously compromise with their initial idea about it!
11:57 PM same for speaking telepathically with other thetans...
Brian: Wow...just wow....
The power of suggestion...
11:59 PM Do you think Scientology, like other religions, can learn to moderate and abolish some of their more controversial and "cult like" doctrines, and have a reformation of sorts? Might this be necesarry for their survival or public acceptance? And what do you think of the Free Zones? Could they be an example of this?
12:00 AM me: (the owner tells me ten minutes left now before he goes home)
well, maybe, but...
12:01 AM the first thing I think it would be almost impossible to rid the writing of hubbard of all the cultish stuff that bring people to act in a cultish way. But then if you think of it the bible is full of it too, and coran even more, and yet these religions have come to a more moderated view, in actual practice
12:02 AM so maybe there, but the question is really open, I really don't know...
as for the freezone
I have yet to see a movement that is significant
as individual I am sure many do a good job
12:03 AM they also allow people to keep on practiciing scientology without having to put up with the crazyness of the church, maybe until they realize the limit of auditing itself
free zone has many pro and con, am not a specialist of it though
12:04 AM Brian: Who "allows" it? Church officials? Isn't that beyond their control?
me: no, the freezone allows them
Brian: Oh..
me: it gives them the opportunity
Brian: okay, just one more
12:05 AM You may have already mentioned this, but are the people at the very top of the Sceintology tier--Dave Miscaviage, etc.--sincere in their efforts to help people or do you think at that point it is just about the money and power?
me: I tend to think they fanatically believe in it
12:06 AM am not sure the influence of money and power, it may have an effect too
but I don't think it is their main motivation
Brian: Makes sense.
12:07 AM Can I just have your personal info: full name, age, where you live, occupation, etc.?
me: yes, in some extend
won't give my full name cause I want to remain pseudonymous (for many reasons)
but I live in Belgium, I am an IT person as a profession
12:08 AM and currently am 53 years old
Brian: Okay. Thanks for the time I didn't think it would take so long but chatting is a slow process!
12:09 AM me: yes, no problem - and we only scratched the subject :)
thanks too, it was interesting for me as well :)
Brian: Great! Take care :)
me: ok - you too. bye
