Category Archives: ethics

Sitting In Judgment

 

In December 2012 I posted an essay on this blog suggesting that  judgmentalism is a negative  trait that Scientologists ought take care to curb.  This blog is frequented in the main by former members of the church of Scientology who still consider themselves Scientologists.  These are people that have been out of the organization for years and who profess that Scientology ought not be used to control and dominate the lives of others.  Nonetheless, a popular counter-position posted in response to my essay was that ‘labeling, and judgmentalism, is just fine in and of itself – the only problem with such practice is inaccuracy of the labeling.’   Even years after their participation in the organization, many Scientologists considered a judgmental attitude a positive virtue provided it is done in keeping with their own standards of accuracy.  The most zealous proponents of that idea resorted to ad hominem attacks on me for raising such issues, and ultimately disconnected from me.

I do not contend that the labels Scientology promotes usage of are inaccurate or harmful provided they are used in a professional manner as initially intended upon creation.   Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard created numerous constructs against which the mind, spirit and human condition could be understood and improved.   He observed and recorded gradient scales ranging from horrendous, painful conditions all the way up to beautiful, joyous conditions.   The scales are invaluable when used by professionally trained Scientologists to help move people up those conditions.  But, just like any other field of the mind and spirit – including psychiatry, psychoanalysis, and other religions and systems of spirituality – the moment one takes the diagnosis and treatment or practice scheme out of the hands of trained, responsible practitioners and applies it casually and inexpertly in the field of day to day human relations, disaster is close to inevitable.

Imagine a friend telling you that you are an obsessive compulsive disorder case – in all seriousness – , and thereafter treating you as leprous until you conformed with that friend’s standard of acceptable behavior.  How long would you tolerate that friend in your proximity?  Not for long I suspect.   Scientologists – regardless of levels of training – are encouraged to apply their own, equally judgmental, labels to others and apply them in life.

Scientology has a substantial lexicon of judgmental labels that rivals the scope and complexity of the American Psychological Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM).   Its organizations promote their facile use in day to day life.  Despite that, Scientology organizations spend millions of dollars a year condemning the DSM and its misuse or even professional use.  Their argument is that such labeling is judgmental and as such it does not promote improvement but instead categorization and stigmatization.

Perhaps the most commonly used stigmatizing terms in Scientology are “suppressive person” or SP and “potential trouble source” or PTS.   An SP is defined in Scientology as one of those roughly 2 ½ percent (Scientology founder  L. Ron Hubbard estimation) of any population who exhibit the characteristics of a sociopath or psychopath.  Scientology’s diagnostic scheme for identifying an SP is nearly identical to psychology’s and psychiatry’s diagnostic standard for identifying the sociopath or psychopath.   A PTS is a supposed  member of approximately 20% of the population who are intimately connected with an SP and consequently are mistake-prone or act ill or cowed.

Scientologists are encouraged to take a three week course of study in order to achieve the purported professional  ability and  license to identify and handle an SP and the target of his effects, the PTS.  All Scientologists are required to take this course and are expected to apply it with an attitude of certainty regardless of lack of any other professional credential.   The result, bluntly, can denigrate into a community  of untrained, arrogant, Monday morning shrinks passing the most condemnatory judgments upon one another at the drop of a hat.

To make matters worse, there is a distinct SP characteristic in Scientology writings that takes precedence over the other dozens that align with the psychology field’s similar diagnostic characteristics checklist.  That is, if someone exhibits an ‘anti-Scientology’ leaning he or she is sure to be diagnosed as being an SP.  To qualify one only need question the wisdom of any Scientology writing.  This fact alone is probably more responsible for Scientology taking on the character of an insular cult than all others combined.

L. Ron Hubbard once quipped that it is futile to get into an argument with a psychiatrist.  The problem, he noted, was that the minute you get a leg up on the psychiatrist he definitively ends the debate with the evaluation, ‘you are crazy.’   Ironically, this ad absurdum joke could almost describe the modern day Scientologist.  If you attempt to even discuss a shortcoming of Scientology the debate decisively ends with the evaluation, ‘you are an SP.’  Per Scientology policy all Scientologists must disconnect from an SP.  That is, the Scientologist must refrain from any type of communication with the SP, directly or indirectly.  That policy holds whether the declared SP is one’s spouse, child, parent, business partner or best friend.   The SP is entitled no civil or human rights as far as any Scientologist is concerned.

By way of comparison, the psychiatrists’ condemnatory label ‘crazy’ is a rather mild evaluation.

Nonetheless, Scientologists – even those who have disaffiliated from its organizations because of its alleged proclivity for judgmental evaluation, trying and sentencing of followers and the population at large – believe ‘judgmentalism’ is not a problem with Scientology.   They are so dead serious about that that they are prepared to prove it by disconnecting from anyone who says otherwise.

Decompression is important in any cult recovery effort.

Re-education is probably even more important.

Introduction to Horizontal Growth

 

Scientology is perhaps the most powerful technology ever developed for vertical, cognitive individual growth.  Unfortunately it comes with an instilled mores that devalues and prohibits meaningful horizontal growth.   In my opinion, vertical growth, absent a horizontal foundation can cause spiritual vertigo.

The following 2,000-plus year old story is translated by Eva Wong in  Lieh-Tzu: A Taoist Guide to Practical Living (Shambala Publications, Inc.).  It gives a flavor of what I mean by horizontal growth.

What is Wisdom?

One day Tzu-hsia was chatting with Confucius.  When they came to discussing the merits of each student, Tzu-hsia asked his teacher, “What do you think of Yen-hui?”  Confucius replied, “Yen-hui is very kind and gentle.  His compassion far surpasses mine.”

“How about Tzu-kung?”

“Tzu-kung is much better than I am when it comes to debating and presenting arguments.”

“And what about Tzu-lu?”

“Tzu-lu is a brave man.  I cannot match him for courage.”

“And Tzu-chang?”

“Tzu-chang can hold his dignity better than I.”

Tzu-hsia was so surprised by his teacher’s answers that he stood up and exclaimed, “How come they all want to learn from you?”

Confucius motioned his student to sit down.  When he saw that Tzu-hsia had calmed down, he said, “Yen-hui is compassionate, but he is stubborn and inflexible.  Tzu-kung can be very persuasive, but he does not know when to stop talking.  Tzu-lu can be courageous but does not know tolerance.  Tzu-chang can be dignified but does not know how to be harmonious with others.  I would not exchange their merits for my own even if they offered. That’s why they all come to learn from me.”

Wisdom is not competence in one skill or many skills.  It is the ability to recognize strengths and weaknesses in ourselves and others.  Thus, a wise teacher knows that although he may not surpass certain students in specific skills, he can give them what they need to become better individuals.

Keeping Scientology Working

I  noticed there were several contributors recently commenting that Keeping Scientology Working (L. Ron Hubbard Policy letter of 7 Feb 65) ought to be adhered to to the letter.  Some commented that they agreed that as far as ‘technology’ was concerned Keeping Scientology Working was supreme and unalterable, but that they didn’t necessarily agree with applying it to Administration (Admin) policy.

Well consider this from Policy Letter Keeping Admin Working (Policy Letter of 10 July 1986 I):

Therefore, to keep Scientology working, all of Scientology, one must insist on standard tech and admin.  The principles of unvarying adherence to precise technology, constant alertness to tech alter-is and insistence that every Scientologist abide by these rules apply just as severely to the third dynamic technology of standard administration – POLICY.  

Now consider this from Policy Letter Admin Degrades (10 July 1986 II) :

The following actions or omissions are classified as HIGH CRIMES:

…2. Adding comments to the Org Exec Course or other administrative checksheets or instructions, policies or directives labeling any material ‘background’ or ‘not used now’ or ‘old’ or ‘it doesn’t need to be followed exactly,” or any similar action which will result in the student not knowing, using and applying the standard administrative data in which he is being trained.

Having established that Keeping Scientology Working extends to administrative policy too, please read the following Suppressive Acts from HCO Policy Letter of 23 Dec 1965 RB:

Violation of any of the eleven points listed below which are Admin Degrades:… (which includes the passage above from the Policy Letter Admin Degrades)

Seeking to splinter off an area of Scientology and deny it properly constituted authority for personal profit, personal power or ‘to save the organization from the higher offices of Scientology.’

Public disavowal of Scientology or Scientologists in good standing with Scientology organizations.

Public statements against Scientology or Scientologists but not to Committees of Evidence duly convened.

Holding, using, copying, printing or publishing confidential materials of Dianetics and Scientology without express permission or license from the author of the materials or his authorized licensee.

Using the trademarks and service marks of Dianetics and Scientology without express permission or license from the owner of the marks or its authorized licensee.

A) Do you agree that these policies should be followed with unvarying adherence?

B) If not, where and how do you draw the line on unvarying adherence with Scientology tech and policy?

Luis and Rocio Garcia vs. The Machine

From the author of a Letter From Garcia, please see a Lawsuit from the Garcias.  Updates forthcoming.

ABC Action News Tampa

CBS News Tampa

NBC US News

NBC News Tampa

ABC World News

see also: Rocio’s story

Rock Center with Lawrence Wright and Paul Haggis

I have a feeling that Rock Center’s segment tonight on Scientology from the viewpoints of Paul Haggis and Lawrence Wright is going to be rather interesting.  You may not agree with all you see and hear, but I suggest you ought to see and hear it.

NBC Rock Center Scientology segments

And, A preview from NBC Today show.

Suppressed – The Hole and the FBI

Despite millions of dollars of legal threats, propaganda and creepy investigations directed to shudder them in to silence, Joe Childs and Tom Tobin of the Tampa Bay Times are still at it.   Their new series includes video interviews of Mike Rinder and John Brousseau as well as court footage of Debbie Cook. Not a lot of new revelations, however.  Clearly, though, another validation of the truth of the axiom, ‘if you lie it becomes part of your future, if you tell the truth it becomes part of your past.’

Suppressed: The Hole and the FBI

What More Can I Say?

There is an interesting little undercurrent rumbling through the “Independent community.”   It is peppered with lines like this:

“Something has changed with Marty recently; and I don’t like the feel of it.”

“Marty has all the sudden stopped making a stark distinction between Scientology Inc. and Scientology.”

Rumor mills – generally energized by the not so bright false data prone – have embellished and alarmed it with bells and whistles.   All the way to the recent Chicken Little claim in the comments section of this blog itself:

…Tony Ortega has taken over the blog.

To highlight how absurd that conclusion is, though I haven’t spoken to (nor read much of his writings) in months I bet Ortega fell off his chair laughing on that one.  He is more frustrated and perplexed by my criticism of his views than he is of Scientology Inc. propaganda about him.  Incidentally, that Tony Ortega line, along with several of the others circulating were first published on OSA anti-Marty sites.

To all of you who are getting on the back channels alarmist rumor mill bandwagon, I suggest you are in denial.   To those actively fueling it, I suggest you are cowards.

I published a book almost a year ago where I made my views – that are not dissimilar to those expressed on this blog of late – about as crystal clear as a person can make them.  Those blog views are consistent with what I took the time to lay out in context and with supporting history in my book, What Is Wrong With Scientology?  That I am not a robotic, lock-step follower of Scientology has been made clear in the continuously posted Welcome section of this blog since its inception.  I haven’t heard a single comment on the blog, or even in communications directed to me or relayed to me that challenge any of those views, at least not by the very best Independents now covertly fueling the alarm wave.

I am beginning to express them more often in posts in the hopes that it will prompt some thinking and exchange of ideas and views.   I am not seeing much reasoned debate with them.  Instead, I am seeing Scientology Inc. style undercutting, back biting, rumor milling, questioning of the source of views.  The dead agent caper.  David Miscavige and OSA are having a field day with this coffee klatch mentality.  The big shots originating it are, at best, oblivious to the fact that they are doing the work of Scientology Inc.

To those engaging in such, and energizing and forwarding it,  is that Independent Scientology?

It is not what I considered Independent Scientology to be when I suggested people declare their independence from Scientology Inc.

The thrust of the backchannels chatter is “Maybe the guy who coined (or as freezoners assert, re-coined) the term Independent Scientologist doesn’t qualify for membership.”

Your views?

Scientology Inc. Obsession With Celebrity

For how  Scientology Inc.’s obsession with celebrities turned its greatest Public Relations assets into liabilities,  see excerpts from Lawrence Wright’s book concerning the courting of Tom Cruise and  John Travolta.

Is there something about Scientology that would lead to this inevitability, or is this simply a Miscavige Scientology Inc. deal?

While the Miscavige/Cruise business is in a league of its own in terms of excess and obsession, is the inhumanity exhibited by Scientology Inc. pre-Miscavige (as most of the cruelty reported in the Travolta sections are) any more tolerable in a civilized society?

 

 

 

Past and Future

I’ll say it again –

‘If you tell the truth, it becomes a part of your past. If you lie, it becomes a part of your future.’  – origin unknown

Three and one half years ago after and because of the Tampa Times original Truth Rundown series, the BBC launched an investigation.  In response David Miscavige spent a year and millions of dollars attempting to discredit and attack the Truth Rundown witnesses and intimidate the BBC into silence.   Miscavige rejected my repeated, public advice that ‘If you tell the truth, it becomes a part of your past. If you lie, it becomes a part of your future.’   Notwithstanding, Miscavige no doubt congratulated himself for having had a significant in terrorem editing effect upon the BBC.   Reporter John Sweeney and his producer were apologetic after their one-hour documentary aired.   Too much of the truth they had recorded, and intended to report, fell to the editing room floor at the over-the-top, threatening insistence of David Miscavige’s Scientology Inc. attack dogs.

The result was that John Sweeney decided to set out upon his own to write a book reporting on all that Miscavige had succeeded in backing the BBC off from reporting.   While I have yet to read the book, per Tony Ortega’s account, it contains nothing that has not already been reported upon on this blog.  However, it is international news once again.   Why?   Because,  ‘If you tell the truth, it becomes a part of your past. If you lie, it becomes a part of your future.’  And, if you threaten and bully in order to perpetuate the lie, it can become an explosive part of your future.

What more can I say?

Obsessed Stalker – David Miscavige

Please view these two short videos shot and narrated by Mike Rinder outside his home today:

Here is another video Mike shot showing the garbage man delivering his garbage to an Office of Special Affairs (OSA, the dirty tricks and propaganda arm of David Miscavige’s Scientology Inc.) operative: