Hello , I am an ex Scientologist , this blog is primarily about that but I may address other topics as the mood hits me to . I was in Scientology for 25 years and spent about 10,000 hours using the indoctrination and thought reform method "study tech " . I also spent time on staff and met hundreds of Scientologists and did hundreds of the cult practices . Many were the "ethics cycles and OW writeups " that really are an attempt to suppress or remove a person's identity and replace it with a mental pseudo clone of Ron Hubbard . To make a fanatical slave for the cult .

I looked outside the cult for answers in about January 2014 and left the cult in about March of 2014 . While in about 99% of members have no idea of the truth .

We are told we are in a mental therapy or spiritual enhancement or religion or science for helping people unlock potential . Or any of several other fronts that all pretend kind and humanitarian goals .

The truth is Scientology is a terrorist mind control cult and this blog is my attempt to understand and expose that . And try to state as clearly as possible the tools that I have found helpful in dealing with this .

Tuesday, October 4, 2016

Devil's Advocate - Scientology Watchers - Horny Housewives !

I recently heard a comment that reminded me of a few ideas and I was able to put them all together for a kind of thought exercise or example of something some people might find interesting or educational or just goofy.

An ex Scientologist that was raised in the cult was attributed with saying something. I won't use her name for a few reasons. First I didn't personally witness her saying or posting it online, so I don't know if she said it, or if she something that was misquoted. It's kind of unfair to quote her by name that way.

Also, I don't know how she said it. If it was in a private conversation and a confident was broken in it being posted online then I don't want to add to that. So, I will use a comment and not a name.

The comment was along the lines of " Most never in Scientology watchers are lonely housewives that NEED TO GET LAID and don't know what they are talking about when it comes to Scientology..."

Now, I personally don't agree with that statement. I must admit it is somewhat humorous, but not accurate in my opinion. But, I don't like rejecting everything on instinct or fully believing things that way either. It's a bad habit and one I had far too much of while I was in Scientology. I honestly think it helped me stay in for many, many years long after I should have left.

Here's a short quote from John Stuart Mill that is relevant.

"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion" John Stuart Mill On Liberty

So, I try to play devil's advocate and sometimes if I consider an idea wrong instantly or as an important foundation for other ideas that I accept then just to be careful and considerate I try to build an argument FOR the idea as a claim. I try to think if it's true or part true, what does it mean ? What are the consequences of it being true ? What is the best evidence for it ? 

It's a habit that sometimes leads to changing my mind on something, or going from sure to uncertain. But a doubt based on good reason is better to me than certainty based on poor reason to me. 

Naturally, since leaving Scientology I have far more doubts and more uncertainty than I did while a devoted Scientologist. I consider it an improvement. 

So, to follow through on the "horny housewife" hypothesis let's see what it would mean. And look for supporting evidence. 

I found a quote from a historic book on mass movements: 
“A man is likely to mind his own business when it is worth minding. When it is not, he takes his mind off his own meaningless affairs by minding other people's business. 

This minding of other people's business expresses itself in gossip, snooping and meddling, and also in feverish interest in communal, national, and racial affairs. In running away from ourselves we either fall on our neighbor's shoulder or fly at his throat. 2.10.” 
― Eric HofferThe True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements

Okay, so one could think the alleged bored and unsatisfied housewife hypothesis has a shred of evidence. The idea that their business isn't worth minding, so they mind the business of Scientologists and ex Scientologists. It's quite far fetched to me, but an argument for it could be built.

Now, recalling the antics OSA has pulled in interfering in the personal lives of Scientologists and critics leads to an interesting possibility.

Say OSA picks up on the comments and latches onto it as a big solution. OSA has long known that ex Scientologists need support from the larger world to be effective at warning people or presenting any serious threat or obstacles for Scientology.

Without larger social support ex Scientologists can't defeat Scientology in virtually any situation.

So remove the social support and ex Scientologists are effectively neutralized. If OSA believed the Scientology watchers from outside the cult and ex Scientologists are bored and horny housewives who look for something to be interested in then they could follow past practices and play their usual fair games.

They could blackmail, I mean assign ethics programs for , attractive male Scientologists trying to avoid getting SP declared and require them to seduce the women watching Scientology, thereby giving them plenty of business of their own to mind !

And if that's not enough, they could of course gather evidence against the wives and blackmail, er persuade, them !

That sounds like about how Scientology would handle that situation. Now, I still am not convinced of that...unproven scenario. But I just thought carrying it out to it's absurd conclusion would illustrate that it's not likely and that the Scientology cult would handle it in a highly immoral and criminal manner if it even seemed possible, because that's what they do.

Sorry to anyone that hoped for lurid details of torrid affairs, that's a bit beyond my own skills at this point, but you are free to use your imagination if you like. The internet has plenty of resources for that type of thing.

It's just a goofy and preposterous story to illustrate a few things. OSA pulled off absurd and half assed operations for decades and still does to protect Scientology and destroy their enemies.

An idea, even an unlikely one, deserves being looked at from both sides, or more, before being ruled out. Even then it could be true but just not recognized.

That skepticism and caution could help people to double check on everything in Scientology. Many people could leave and weigh the evidence for and against Scientology with independent thinking and critical analysis.

Many would reject it for a variety of reasons including a lack of scientific evidence and strong evidence that Scientology harms families and deceives its own members. But that's just one example. We all can be careful to weigh evidence for and against ideas, especially important ones.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.