Hi, I don't know if I'm in the correct part of the forum, feel free to move it. When you speak to a scientologist, they often say stuff like "read the book, you'll see". I'm becoming quite curious about what's in these books. I'm curious about understanding how the hell people get caught. Where is the flaw ? What kind of shit is written there ? And maybe more importantly : how is it written ? I'd like to read one of these (Dianetics ?) so I know what I'm talking about. I already did this with the Coran, the Bible (boring as ***, but full of wisdom if you read between the lines), the Necronomicon (I almost regret spending money and time to read it, but it made me lol a lot) and other books that religions/philosophies/cults/whatever use as an example. I still don't identify with any of these books, so I think I'm capable of reading this with criticism. Has anyone read a LRH book ? Is there any free copy of these books available somwhere (don't want to give them money) ? Which of LRH's books is the most representative of Scientology ?
Here are some reviews of Dianetics. http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/179166.Dianetics Here's a professional review. http://www.salon.com/2005/06/28/dianetics/ The reviews on Amazon and B&N are heavily biased in favor. There was a review war on Amazon a few years ago, with the book receiving hundreds of negative reviews, many very well written, but almost all the negative reviews disappeared. Some suspected the editor in charge of reviews for this book at Amazon was a shill for Scientology, others speculated that since Amazon is in the business of selling books, they don't like having the book being given negative reviews since it cuts into sales. If you still want to read it you can get a used copy for pennies, or you can find it at a library. I wouldn't recommend buying it new since that will put money in the Scientology corporation's coffers and inflate their meticulously kept statistics on books sold.
Many have tried, few have succeeded. Reading Dianetics is like walking through glass, so painful you can't wait until its over and even then you have little shards of it stuck in your foot.
Tony Ortega did a blog series on reading through "Dianoetics" with Vance Woodward. Quite entertaining too: http://tonyortega.org/blogging-dianetics-from-cover-to-cover/
I have . Dianetics is a self help book and I was intrigued. In fact I urged friends and family to read it, at the time it was revolutionary. Then it got weirder and weirder and then it was clearly a personality cult.. LRon lost me pretty early in the process . Psychocybernetics came out about the same time, then The Games People Play and Subliminal Advertising. Anyway they were interesting ways to use the mind. So I guess that is a touch embarrassing especially remembering I reccomeded it. Fortunately no one fell for it. Subliminal Advertising was pretty darned good and eye opening. I tried to read lron's SciFi but it blew chunks.
It's similar for me, but it was a smart relative who got roped in for a while and kept on handing me the book. I couldn't get very far before hiding it.
I think people will agree the book that has become the most representative is An Introduction to Scientology Ethics. Jeff Hawkins blogged through it chapter by chapter with Tony Ortega, so if you want a book read that companion commentary along with it.
Read the History of Man. Probably the weirdest "non-fiction" book LRH wrote. But read the original, not the DM revision.
I tried several times to get a scientologist to talk to me about that book, clams on the shore, Piltdown Man. They told me "Read a book" I said "I did. Let's talk about Piltdown Man, or the relationship between clams and dentists or using speed during auditing sessions (that's from Dianetics)." Oddly though, whenever they found out I had read a book, they couldn't get away from me fast enough.
No surprise. Think on how fast they'd run if you pulled out a copy of Dainetics full of tape bookmarks and highlighter.
I've read almost everything written for Scientology by L.Ron I've read the red set, the blue set, dianetics, history of man... OT levels, Almost all of it. (I'm sure I missed something in my reading) and what I found was a crazy man trying to explain his crazy so that other people would bye into it. There is nothing wrong with reading any of them as long as you are reading critically, If you are reading and asking, "Is this assumption logical?" Does he have evidence to back up this claim? What values is he espousing? Are these shared values? Is this reasonable? Lots of people (like L Ron) try to BS their argument by force of personality or will instead of having sound logical and factual basis for their arguments. They tout their values as being more important than other values without fully explaining why, and saying things like, "Everyone knows x value is better... you would be an idiot to not value x" and based on that value then justify their whole argument without really addressing the balance of values that must be present in a good rhetorical argument. SO, if you are good at reading critically, and not just accepting what you read, there is no harm in reading what he writes... However, many intelligent people have not developed this skill, and get sucked into the cult because of this lack of skill. Critical thinking, and picking apart written rhetorical arguments is a very important skill!! It is a highly valued skill here with anonymous, and will keep you safe from cults of personality.
"Science of survival" - I've read enough of that to know that while they're wasting my time they're fantasising about a world from which I'm "eliminated quietly and without sorrow." http://www.solitarytrees.net/racism/dispose.htm You may find the above webpage partial, but please try to read and understand the Jefferson Hawkins tear-down of the "ethics" and consider the value of being "impartial." The criminal organisation known as the "church" of $cientology laughs at "impartial." They want critics turned into non-critics or manure. I'm partial to that not happening, and that's all there is to it.
I read Dianetics the Modern Science of Baffling Bullshit but that was after I already bought into the scam and declared myself a Scientologist. A couple of times I was convinced that Hubbard was brilliant whilst I was reading the book. Most of the time I thought it was the most boring, dense, unnecessarily dificult book in the world. I was pretty sure that I could have written a much simpler, clear and an easy to understand version of that book. I was a true believer but even I knew what a chore that book was. Dianetics and Science of Survival, (which I never read to completion), were Hubbard's most difficult books to read, in my opinion. Hubbard the blowhard, just had to write a book so hard to read in order to impress you. It was as if he equated ''boring and dull'' with scientific validity. Maybe he thought university courses were boring and if he could write something boring, people would see Dianetics as subject worthy of being taught in universities or something like that. I don't know. I just know I could have written a better book. Hubbard's later Scilon books were rather easy to read in comparison and I found myself agreeing with the old blowhard many times while reading them. If you find yourself agreeing with Hubbard it is probably because he is stating something that is common knowledge. If you still find yourself agreeing with Hubbard; I suggest you take a break, wash your face with cold water, and realize that you are falling under the spell and are being conned. Whenever I read anything by Hubbard now, I see it in an entirely different light. Sometimes I get the feeling the old dead bastard was laughing at me when I read his shit.
I'm a never-in, Mr. Duff, but I've studied the cult of scientology for a long time. As for free copies, search the Internet and ye shall find. When I need a good laugh, a laugh at the vile stupidity of l. ron hubbard, amongst the many choices available to me, I turn to the section on "piltdown man" in the text known as "The History Of Man" authored by by mr. hubbard. Viz: pages 24 & 25... Mr. Hubbard obviously missed the memo circulated by the scientific community pronouncing the "man" to be a hoax: Viz: Of course, most everything mr. hubbard ever wrote or did was a hoax, but let's not let that stop us from seeking and having some lulz. For a laugh riot, I turn to anything mr. hubbard wrote about 'radiation' and I recommend all of that to anyone seeking merriment and lulz.
Quote from New Slant on Life: http://www.tep-online.info/laku/usa/reli/scien/SECRETDOX/A_NEW_SLANT_ON_LIFE.pdf Go to page 38. I see this example in a very different light these days. Hubbard, to me seems like he is describing the trap of Scientology and the trap of brainwashing. Scientologists view it as an inspiring invitation to ''freedom''. I can almost imagine Hubbard laughing up his sleeve. I may be wrong on that but either way it still describes the trap of Scientology beautifully. The story of the fish sounds like pure bullshit and Hubbard most likely pulled it out of his ass but Hubbard was trying to make a point and all us Scilons were mightily impressed with the point. Just like the fish, if you could set the people in the RPF free; most of them would never take you up on your offer and would choose to stay. This is a trap that the Scilons involved don't consider a trap; the worst kind of trap of all. We all were trapped in a cult and actually thought of ourselves as being ''free''. At least the fish in Hubbard's story think of themselves as being trapped. It is writing such as this that make me think the fat slob was having a joke at my expense. There are many more examples. From Dianetics The Modern Science of Etc; Hubbard advises the reader to never trust a hypnotist. Considering the fact that Hubbard was a very skilled and cruel hypnotist; I can't help but think that Hubbard had a big laugh as he wrote that piece of advice.
Introduction to Scientology Ethics is fairly short and worthwhile, not in that it is good but it gives you a lot of insight into how the CoS works, including the idea that charity is bad and turning any Scientologist over to the authorities is a High Crime. If you like Spinoza but wish it had more pseudoscientific babble you might enjoy Fundamentals of Thought. I myself did not.
I read DMSMH once. It's pathetic. But if you listen to any, and I mean any, of Hubbard's 'lectures', you cannot fail to identify Hubbard as a complete charlatan, rambling on and on about nothing - a total embarrassment. I can forgive an uneducated fifties audience for not laughing out loud at his ludicrous claims, but now...are you having a laugh?
I can see how people get caught by these books. He starts from an affirmation, claiming it's a well known truth (or that some "studies" proved it). Then he builds his entire deductions on this affirmation. People who don't see why/how the first affirmation is worth nothing could be amazed of his deductions and fall into the trap. Looks like he does this for all his ideas. From what I've read so far, there is not even a single bit of truth in everything he says. I'm amazed.
He does do this for all his ideas. You just explained what I was struggling, (or forgot), to explain in my above posts. It is the reasoning of a liar, con artist, and/or madman. It can catch you quite unawares if you are the trusting sort and/ or very young like I was. What always amazed me was the fact that university educated people would read books like History of Man and fall for this.
https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Chanology_Research_Portal https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Scientology
I read about ten altogether I got them free from an ex scientologist who gave me also diplomas the green and red hubbard bibles ' these one were destroyed not long ago in a leak accident ....) I am in paris you can borrow them you know how to get in touch with NONO LA PATATE
I noticed the absence of a link at https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Index_On...ntology_Victims_and_Abuses#Related_References to a certain list of thousands of former members who have spoken out
I once owned an old copy of 'Dianetics' and another book called 'What is Scientology?' Both of these ridiculous books were thoughtfully disposed of. I don't recall reading more than rehashed psychobabble. Recordings of LRH can be found online if you want to listen to the madness spewing straight from the madman himself.
I have to congratulate anyone who managed to read dianetics, it is without exception the dullest, most opaque and bullshit infested book I've tried to read! What I find incredible is that anyone would ever join the cult based on the piss poor writing in that book. I didn't get far reading dianetics and made lots of annotations about the insane overblown claims Hubbard makes, then I tore the book to pieces and binned it! I've read bits of the OT materials- freaky and deadly dull in places. Goes to show the power of the mind fuck that auditing and "ethics" has on the poor scilon mind.
Recently discovered a poster promoting the Church of Scientology at my local mall. Some high school girl, who looked very troubled, I might add, was looking at it and seemed to be trying to decide whether or not this was the place for her. So I approached her and commenced random small talk, which soon became me explaining to her why the Church of Scientology was a bad thing. By the end of this discussion, the young girl looked at the poster in disgust, back at me, thanked me, and went on her way to the frozen yogurt shop down the courtyard. Really glad she decided against getting a copy of that damned book. It is, without a single contest, the most mundane and downright ridiculous things I have ever read in my entire life. I really want to take that poster down. Or at least find away to make it completely redundant. Because it is in a very strategically placed location in the mall.
Thanks! Doing what I can. But what creeps me out is the fact that at least one million of people go through this mall every week. How many of them have seen this poster and then actually gone on to investigate the CoS and then perhaps even join their ranks? I really wish I knew what to do about that poster.
Is there any way to add something on/near this poster ? Like a QR Code leading to a website who warns of the dangers of scientology or something like this.
That would, in theory, be possible. But the largest issue about that lies in the fact that the poster itself is locked in a display case. So anything posted on it would likely be taken down by the time I was able to go look at it again. The second problem lies in the fact that ironically enough, this poster is located right outside of the mall security office. I've tried defacing the display case itself. Security was out of their office within seconds, and when I returned a couple days later, the entire display case had been replaced.
No. I don't have a picture at the moment. However, I may be able to find one on the internet or even take one within the next couple of weeks. Give me just a moment to see if I can find anything.
I wasn't able to find anything, unfortunately. But I'll take a picture of it soon. The display case is one of the triangular ones that you see at malls. The Scientology poster is the first thing you see when you walk in, the mall directory is on the side opposite to that, and the side facing you when you leave is something food related.
I had a thought and this seems like a good place to put this. I don't want to start a separate thread. We all know that Scientology is a lying fraud and a cult. People on ESMB never get tired of making threads pointing this out and I can understand why they never seem to get tired of pointing out what seems to be obvious. They are just so freaked out that they fell for it for so long. So at the risk of being guilty of the same behaviour; I would like to share with you a Hubbard quote. http://myscientologyblog.blogspot.ca/2008/11/sanity.html . Because we all know that people like Leah Remini and Jason Beghe are insane. I mean, they can't tell the difference between an evil cult and Scientology. They think it is the same thing. This is how Scientologists think. They constantly use Hubbard's books to explain EVERYTHING. I guess it is not all their fault. Scientology was tweaked over the years by Hubbard to maximize its ability to keep the con going.
