In these 3 examples there is only dynamic to benefit from the ”ethical measures”:
– the Arian race (a 3rd dynamic),
– terror, let’s say, American society and perhaps British and Spanich ones as well (therefore, also a 3rd dynamic) and
– Fast-food chains (a first dynamic in itself when Profit is regarded).
“The greatest good for the greatest numbers of dynamics” is being surpassed.
I can’t see in none of the examples more than one dynamic. They are 8.
The examples should refer at least more than 4 dynamics.

Yes, it does seem like something may have gone sideways with the creation of the Sea Organization.

Makes sense. Thanks for your response.

I’m of the belief that one of the best ways to understand the true nature of a philosophy, religion or political system, is to examine those areas where a philosophy, religion or political system is most intensively practiced by its most ardent supporters.

In the area of philosophy / religion it would appear that the INT Base is the place where the most highly qualified, most thoroughly trained Scientology practitioners attempted an earnest implementation of the red-on-white and green-on-white from LRH. The outcome, as reported by more than a dozen senior executives who fled the facility, is pretty unpleasant and certainly not a model of conduct / results that warrants export to the rest of the world.

Similarly, the descriptions of experiences reported by many of the most senior, trusted, highly trained individuals that were aboard the Apollo with Hubbard, paint a picture of a culture that was quite different from the one that “the tech” seems to promise.

The comparisons between what happened on the Apollo more than “30 years ago” and what is still happening at the INT Base today are relevant because of the similar nature of the frightening events depicted by those who witnessed them. Those events seem to flow from a hostile, insular culture that is unique to the Scientology philosophy / religion. That hostile, insular culture spans all the more than six decades of the existence of the philosophy and appears to be worsening.

It is a thorny situation precisely because of the dissonance between the promises of the philosophy, the occasional transcendent experiences delivered by auditing, and the overwhelming evidence of corruption / suppression within the organization. The corruption appears to prevent compassionate understanding / resolution of common issues that the organizational membership attempts to express. Because the membership’s expression of concerns are met with hostility by church management, many folks just exit the organization and look elsewhere for answers. Net inflow of new members is close to zero. A quick survey of the internet for information about Scientology explains why. The real-life experience of ex-Scientologists is enough to scare away practically anyone considering the religion anew.

You should follow your own judgement, obviously. If your judgement of the more benign aspects of the Scientology philosophy / religion is that there is value, then no one here should work to dissuade you.

For me, becoming open to new ideas, expanding my reading list and looking for solutions / understandings beyond those found in Scientology has been very rewarding. And there are a few gems I picked up in Scientology that I continue to consider useful. Most of those gems I probably could have obtained elsewhere, but for whatever reason, the Scientology version of that useful information is what I was open to at the time.

I wish you success on your own path.

How many times do I have to repeat myself that I discovered Scientology a few years ago. That’s AFTER I graduated from University and had a whole lot of life experience. I view Scientology from a very different angle than someone who may have been born into it.

Anonymous, thank you for a thorough explanation. I do believe it’s quite unfortunate there is so much suppression of open communication in Scientology or the very heavily distorted version of it. My view is that Scientology as I understand it is not practiced at the Church, and that’s the bottom line of it. I also differentiate between Scientology as a spiritual practice and Scientology in terms of organizational politics. Whatever happened in Hubbard days, that was over 30 YEARS AGO, and I tend to assign responsibility to individuals that are doing Scientology now to change the group/organizational structure so that the true spiritual goals of Scientology can be fulfilled within the framework of modern world environment which has changed quite a bit since the 60’s and 70’s.

Again, there is no “coming out” for me anywhere as I have never gone into an agreement with reducing my reach and communication toward the world at large, and I find it repugnant that Scientology staff and parishioners continue to subdue themselves to some authoritative pressures to NOT LOOK and to NOT COMMUNICATE which is the opposite direction of where people should move in the practice.

Things like COMMUNICATION, OBSERVATION and CONFRONT is at the core of Dianetics and Scientology and the emphasis on these is ABUNDANT in its literature. So for me, it is not very clear why people would agree to practice the complete opposite, and I do not think it can be simply blamed on some faulty policy (as those covering the subject of suppression) or Hubbard himself who I again repeat has not been around for over 30 years now.

Not all cases are the same, but I tend to assign responsibility toward the INDIVIDUALS in Scientology for continuing to go along with things that go in opposition to the basic tenants of Scientology practice itself.

Oooh. Thanks for the book recommendation. I just checked it out on Amazon. Looks good!

Eugene,

You may have stumbled upon one of the more interesting aspects of Scientology on the internet. The only open internet discussion (which you declare to be pointless) about Scientology, especially open discussion engaged upon by former members, is in fact negative. The discussion is negative largely because the people having the discussion were mistreated / defrauded by Scientology and they want to compare notes with others who were mistreated / defrauded.

Oddly, there are virtually ZERO internet discussion boards where the conversation about Scientology is largely positive. Occasionally a benign site will appear, attract almost no traffic, then disappear or languish unread until the domain expires.

But there are DOZENS of hate sites created by the church slandering former members who have dared to speak out. Those hate sites are the church’s largest internet presence.

Could that be because the church is a Totalist ideological organization that seeks to completely control the milieu of information to which its members are exposed? Scientology church management attempts to micro-control every single aspects of Scientologist’s lives and simply cannot tolerate people having an open conversation about their actual experiences inside the church. They can’t even allow open positive discussion by “still-in” Scientologists because they are terrified of people’s natural curiosity. And they KNOW that the crimes of Hubbard and church management would be discussed. It’s called community awareness.

Hubbard knew exactly what he was doing when he created the Scientology culture of atomized fealty to his ideas. He knew that if one were to openly discuss the ideas of Scientology with others, including one’s own personal experience with “the tech,” that he would lose control and the whole thing would unravel.

Well guess what?

It is unraveling and nothing can be done to put Humpty Dumpty back together again.

Many wise folks predicted years ago that the internet would be Scientology’s Waterloo. And those predictions are playing out with gathering momentum.

People discussing their actual experiences with Scientology tech will NOT harm their “cases” by discussing those experiences openly. QUITE THE OPPOSITE. Open discussion with others allows one to find out how “the tech” has been used to delude one into false beliefs and fake “certainty.”

Come on out into the sunshine Eugene. The cloud that you feel surrounded by is NOT your case. It’s your own natural curiosity emerging and asking WTF have I been doing all this time with Scientology?

Well that’s not surprising. No one here would expect a person who is incapable of demonstrating empathy or an appropriate human emotional response to pass a simple Turing test. Still can’t tell, can you Eugene? Some tech.

I remember every class I took and the sequence which they were taken in my university courses. You don’t even seem to know if you took Differential Equations or not, which I find odd.

You must not be around many people who have graduated from college to think that your coursework was “higher level” (especially in the undergrad level). What you are describing is just standard undergrad coursework, not “higher level”. Just typical classes in the Calc/Physics sequence.

Hang around people who have advanced degrees and you’ll know why bragging about undergrad mathematics courses is rather silly. I have to admit, though, among Scientologists, there aren’t many who even go to college at all, so hopefully you aren’t letting that limit your circle of friends and contemporaries.

It’s nice to be around others who share the value of a classical education and can converse about those subjects. It’s too bad the C o S doesn’t value a traditional college education. There are so many of its members who are being deprived of something very special.

Take care and have a good week!

I’m starting to wornder if I have really been talking to a computer bot.