There is a specific sector of scientology ‘technology’ that clearly betrays the subject’s hypnotic, mind controlling nature.
That is L. Ron Hubbard’s ‘False Data Stripping’ technology. In short, Hubbard dictates that one identify the source of any data that is getting in the road of a person adopting, with 100% certainty and exclusivity, any datum from scientology’s indoctrination. Hubbard has the practitioner search for the data that conflicts with a datum Hubbard is attempting to get across. The objective is to eradicate the earlier datum utterly so that only Hubbard’s datum remains unopposed.
First the practitioner and the recipient are indoctrinated to accept that holding conflicting data of any sort is a sort of aberration or mental dysfunction. There is no concept of plurality or synthesis when it comes to understanding in scientology. Please read this from the Hubbard indoctrination very carefully and try to think with the consequences of accepting it as Gospel.
There is a philosophic background as to why getting off false data on a subject works and why trying to teach a correct datum over a false datum on the subject does not work. It is based on the Socratic thesis-antithesis-synthesis philosophical equation.
Socrates: 470 B.C. – 399 B.C. A great Greek philosopher.
A thesis is a statement or assertion.
Antithesis: opposing statement or assertion.
The Socratic equation is mainly used in debate where one debater asserts one thing and the other debater asserts the opposite. It was the contention of Socrates and others that when two forces came into collision a new idea was born. This was the use of the equation in logic and debate. However, had they looked further, they would have seen that other effects were brought into play. It has very disastrous effects when it appears in the field of training.
Where the person has acquired a false thesis (or datum), the true datum you are trying to teach him becomes an antithesis. The true datum comes back to smack up against the false datum he is hanging on to, as it is counter to it.
In other words, these two things collide, and neither one will then make sense to him. At this point he can try to make sense out of the collision and form what is called a synthesis, or his wits simply don’t function. (Synthesis: a unified whole in which opposites, thesis and antithesis, are reconciled.)
So you wind up with the person either:
- attempting to use a false, unworkable synthesis he has formed, or
- his thinkingness locks up on the subject.
In either case you get an impossible-to-train, impossible-to-hat [train for one’s scientology job] scene.”
In other words, it is Ron’s way (to the exclusion of all other ways, including even your synthesis of his way with something related you may have learned earlier) or the highway.
Why could not ‘a’ above have been ‘attempting to use a remarkably new, fresh and workable synthesis he has formed?’
Because, in scientology there is only one way, and that is the way Ron Hubbard tells you it is. Now, I can already hear the apologists claiming ‘well, damn that applies to critical stuff that could happen in an auditing (counseling) session.’ I have news. This bulletin, and ‘technology’, was not developed because of any scientology counseling problems being encountered. The bulletin begins by telling you that it applies to just about everything but scientology counseling:
“When a person is not functioning well on his post, on his job or in life, at the bottom of his difficulties…”
This bulletin in fact was issued one month before Hubbard’s wife Mary Sue and eight other top ranking scientologists went on trial for crimes committed in running the largest domestic espionage ring in the history of the United States of America. (Fittingly, scientology’s chief justification for the operation was to ‘correct false data in government files.’) It was headline news across the world. What ‘false data’ do you suppose all outposts of the scientology network were fixated on ‘stripping’ about that time?
Many outsiders have wondered how could such apparently intelligent, cheery – if sometimes overly focused – people as scientologists adopt such Hubbard sociopathy as forced labor re-education concentration camps and dictates to treat critics as ‘fair game’ for personal ruination. I’ll tell you how I did. I was heavily false data stripped. I recall specifically some of those nasty ‘false datums’ that were stripped from my mind through ‘false data stripping technology’ to make me amenable to doing it Ron’s way:
Datum: ‘The best a man can do is to do the best he can do.’ Wrong. The true scientology data is that if someone fails it is more likely that they are secretly engaged in criminal activity and have billions year old hidden evil intentions towards Ron and scientology, and that any failure should be interrogated intensively to uncover such.
Datum: ‘The most effective form of leadership is to lead by example.’ Wrong. The true scientology data is that it is far more effective, and necessary, to ‘muster bayonets’ as most people are ‘degraded beings’ and it is fruitful sometimes to ‘make Captain Bligh look like a Sunday school teacher.’
Datum: ‘When under attack it is best to take the high road.’ Wrong. When under attack ‘ALWAYS ATTACK…The defense of ANYTHING is UNTENABLE…cause [the attacker’s] professional demise, or if possible, of course, ruin him utterly.’
These are actual examples. They really shouldn’t be needed though to get the point across. It is quite evident from the theory section above where all this might lead.
So thorough is Hubbard’s ‘tech’ for ferreting out and disappearing ‘false data’ that conflicts with his data, ironically, that those steps applied to one’s scientology experience could actually de-hypnotize someone from years of mind control programming. That is provided that on the last step ‘Have the person study or restudy the true data on the subject you have been handling’ one did not impose on the person what it was he had to study. In other words, free him from the implant and give him the freedom to start out at square zero to discover for himself the plurality of ideas (thesis, antithesis, synthesis, or otherwise) available in a free society.