Scientology Reflections (13) 10 Years After Leaving-Hypnosis in Scientology
This is the thirteenth post in a series that I am publishing in 2024. The series is on the journey I have been on AFTER leaving Scientology and Dianetics and what my experiences were, and mistakes I made, and things that I learned, some shortly after leaving Scientology and others further along the way, even up to the present day. Some of this involves Scientology and Dianetics. Some involves the process of leaving a cult. Some is just knowledge that I could have benefited from knowing sooner, that may even be unrelated to the cultic topic entirely.
For anyone who is unaware, I was in Scientology for twenty five years, between 1989 and 2014. I left in 2014 and discovered that Scientology is a harmful fraud and jam packed with lies and further it is composed of techniques plagiarized from other practices and sources. Ronald Hubbard had the ability to take a practice, file off the serial numbers and repackage it as his own in first Dianetics and later Scientology.
(Please note: this was originally a comment in response to a comment regarding the mind of Scientology founder Ronald Hubbard at Mike Rinder's blog on the post Why the Expensive Scientology Buildings?
June 7, 2024 By Mike Rinder)
I have long run into ex Scientologists and Independent Scientologists who insist that either Scientology is not hypnotic or that they avoided hypnotizing people somehow. Some have claimed their intention to not hypnotize made it so that techniques that hypnotize people routinely didn't do that when they applied them because of...reasons...
I have frankly found the same thing to be true every time. I would ask them about methods of hypnotic induction and other basic questions on the subject and they have had no answers at all. The sad reality is that every single ex Scientologist or ex cult member or cult expert that I have encountered that actually studied hypnosis to any significant degree all have agreed that the techniques in Dianetics and Scientology are hypnotic. One hundred percent.
I remember in the first couple of years after I left Scientology going into online groups that were for students of hypnosis and they adamantly agreed that Dianetics and Scientology are obviously chock full of hypnosis and that the most raw of new students to the subject could see this as the very most basic concepts and phenomena of hypnosis are present and front and center.
They used numerous terms regarding hypnotic techniques and language patterns and in my opinion a lot of these are various ways to describe or attempt the basic techniques and they vary in how one tries to get the result. The example of repetition and repetition-with-variation as two methods that are based on the same idea (repetition) shows two similar but different methods.
Many of the hypnotic language patterns have various names and they encourage the use of different techniques but often come down to variation of the same technique (confusion.)
I had to read quite a bit and watch numerous short videos on the particular techniques to understand them.
The gradual process of finding statements on the subject then deciphering the details of exactly what steps are taken is not short or easy. One might have to devote a hundred hours or so to studying hypnosis to begin to have enough education to examine Dianetics and Scientology and form an educated opinion on the presence or lack thereof of hypnosis in these subjects.
Plainly, you have to understand hypnosis far more than an uneducated layman to be able to even look for it.
The "education" one gets regarding hypnosis in Dianetics and Scientology is inconsistent, contradictory, and in my opinion a combination of truths, half truths, and flat out lies.
Hubbard said many things that are denied by Hubbard and this is spread all throughout Dianetics and Scientology and since nothing is ever cancelled in Scientology doctrine the Scientology student is left utterly confused by his inconsistent and often irreconcilable statements regarding hypnosis.
(Some things ARE cancelled in Scientology, but they are not old ideas that Hubbard claimed as his own, they are ideas that are described as coming from other people, in other words Hubbard himself didn't classify ideas he put out as being his creations as outdated)
Jon Atack in his article Never Believe A Hypnotist made the case quite thoroughly and in my opinion convincingly.
I wrote my own article quoting his article and using the words of Hubbard himself to support his points.
I will put my article at the end of this.
I have written many, many other posts using specific quotes from Hubbard to demonstrate that he described Dianetics and Scientology as being based on hypnosis and hypnotic in nature.
Additionally, I have seen hypnotic techniques taken verbatim from books on hypnosis and used in Scientology and Arnie Lerma has documented this at his blog and Steve Hassan has studied hypnosis and made his own statement that this is his observation as well.
Arnie Lerma went through the trouble of finding old books on hypnosis and copying the pages next to pages that have Scientology auditing techniques and the commands are identical in several cases.
I think the unavoidable reality is that the evidence that Dianetics and Scientology are hypnotic in nature is overwhelming.
I think that auditors being careful to not use hypnosis is, well, not plausible. I mean they can be careful, but I think that they are unlikely to prevent hypnotic techniques from being hypnotic and that they frankly don't understand hypnosis, certainly not if they relied on Scientology doctrine exclusively to explain it.
Auditors were given such contradictory information on hypnosis and so much was lies that I think that they are far more confused on the subject than educated.
I do not believe "intention is cause" as Hubbard claimed. I think that hypnosis is a process with components and steps. When you "process" someone as Hubbard described you have the auditor follow steps to change a person and the person gets changed by these steps which are hypnotic, if the process is successful.
Hubbard noted that hypnosis had this wild variable. It worked sometimes and it didn't work at other times. It worked on some people but not on others. A technique might work on a fellow one day but not another. A technique might work on a person for so many hours then not, another might work for hundreds of hours on a subject.
This makes it so that some people, like myself, entered hypnotic trances while undergoing auditing or the use of other Scientology techniques such as study tech, for example.
Some people didn't ever get hypnotized.
Every school of hypnosis that I have seen agrees on the idea that some people are easy to hypnotize, some people are harder to hypnotize and some people apparently are impossible to hypnotize.
Laymen often believe myths about intelligence, sanity, strength of will, or other factors deciding who is capable of being hypnotized. I think that those ideas are flat out wrong.
I think that the truth is we don't know what is the reason that people are easy, hard, or impossible to hypnotize and we might never know.
I think that for anyone trying to understand cults and Scientology in particular a significant degree of education regarding hypnosis is absolutely essential.
You may agree or disagree with me regarding Scientology being hypnotic but I think that if you don't take the time to examine hypnosis at length for yourself you can't understand what you are even saying regarding the subject.
Ex Scientologists have the experiences they had and usually a vast amount of Scientology experiences to draw upon but in my opinion education on undue influence, what people routinely call brainwashing, and hypnosis and the true history of Scientology and Hubbard is necessary to be able to form an educated opinion on Scientology, no matter how long one was in or how much Scientology one practiced.
Here's a link to my blog archive by topic:
Here are several posts that are referred to in this post or that elaborate on the points raised here.
A Psychiatric View With Comments On The Admissions...
TUESDAY, JULY 23, 2019
Scientology as Described by Experts - Jon Atack
Scientology has been described as based on hypnosis by many Scientology experts. Now, this is not a statement that these people are infallible authorities or that their consensus or near consensus on Scientology and hypnosis is beyond questioning or absolute proof. I hope that people take these statements as reason to consider that they might be correct and it is worth serious examination of the evidence for a claim when you have a consensus or near consensus by a variety of experts on a topic. They are not automatically right but the claim they make is worth looking at.
I am going to start with the person I consider the top living Scientology expert - Jon Atack. Jon Atack has studied influence for around thirty years and written several books on influence and one on Scientology and numerous articles as well.
I am going to quote his article Never Believe A Hypnotist. This article is available in full online.
"Hubbard was ambiguous about suggestion: "We never give positive suggestions” (R&D1, p.48); but "you are putting in positive suggestion whether you want to or not, no matter how careful you are” (R&D1, p.336)."
"As well as showing genuine insight into hypnosis, Hubbard's statements are a fascinating maze of contradiction and misdirection. It soon becomes apparent that Hubbard is both eager to show off his knowledge and determined to hide something vital: that Dianetics is a form of hypnosis.
Prolonged and deliberate study of Hubbard's teachings makes it impossible to escape the conclusion that Dianetics is a form of hypnosis, differing only from that subject in the words used to describe the procedures. Hubbard's own Policy Letter "Propaganda by Redefinition of Words” (PR series 12) gives some understanding of the sigificance of redefinition (something Hubbard was frequently prone to, "reasonable” and "postulate”, for instance). "
"The current Hubbard Dianetics Auditor Course seeks to re-establish Dianetic "auditing” as it was performed at its inception in 1950 (see The Hubbard Dianetics Auditor Course or The Hubbard Dianetics Seminar)."
"In his second article, Hubbard admitted "I knew hypnotism was, more or less, a fundamental” (EoS, p.22) and said that "hypnosis was examined” (ibid, p.23; see also EoS, p.96; R&D1, p.183). Hubbard also claimed to have used "hypno-analysis” (EoS, p.24) - psychoanalysis practised on a hypnotised subject - and recommended a book on the subject (Hypnotism Comes of Age, R&D2, p.12)."
"Hypnotism "reduces self-determinism by interposing the commands of another below the analytical level of an individual's mind ... It is the sort of control mechanism in which an authoritarian individual, cult, or ideology delight. People who indulge in hypnotism may, only very occasionally, be interested in experimentation upon the human mind ... Genuine experimental hypnotism, strictly in the laboratory and never in the parlour, and done wholly in the knowledge that one is reducing the efficiency of the human being on whom one is experimenting and may do him permanent damage, and the use of hypnotism by a surgeon ... should end the extension of hypnotism into the society. Submission to being hypnotized is analagous to being raped, with the exception that the individual can, generally, recover from being raped. To any clear-thinking human who believes in the value of people as human beings, there is something gruesomely obscene about hypnotism. The interjection of unseen controls below the level of consciousness cannot benefit but can only pervert the mind ... The individual who would permit himself to be hypnotized is, frankly, a fool ... It was thought by hypnotists that the mere remembering of ... suggestions would relieve them, and that the power of the suggestion died out with time. These two ideas do not happen to be true” (SOSII, p.220f; see also pp.225f). "
"Hypnosis defined:
According to Hubbard, hypnosis is a relatively simple mechanism, "By deep trance or drugs we take a patient into amnesia trance, a state of being wherein the 'I' is not in control but the operator is the 'I' (and that's all there is, really, to the function of hypnosis: the transfer of analytical power through the law of affinity from subject to operator, a thing which had a racial development and survival value in animals which ran in packs).” (DMSMH, p.94)."
"Hubbard gave various descriptions of hypnotism, for example: "Hypnotism is the entering of the hypnotist's personality and desires below the choice level of the individual.” (SOSI, p.16); and "Hypnotism is the art of implanting positive suggestions in the engram bank.” (DMSMH, p.384). By the time Science of Survival was published, in June 1951, Hubbard asserted that "Hypnotism never has and never will raise an individual on the [emotional] tone scale” (SOSI, p.161)."
"Positive suggestion:
Hubbard made various assertions about suggestion: "positive suggestion means in hypnosis a suggestion which is given to a hypnotized subject which will result in some change in the manifestations and actions of that patient” (R&D 1, p.48); "It is a suggestion by the operator to a hypnotized subject with the sole end of creating a changed mental condition in the subject by implantation of the suggestion alone. It is a transplantation of something in the hypnotist's mind into the patient's mind. The patient is then to believe it and take it as part of himself.” (R&D 1, p.237; see also R&D 1, p.33); "Shut down the person's analyzer [the 'analytical mind' of dianetic hypnosis] and what follows goes in as positive suggestion just as though he were hypnotized. He cannot reason on this data, he can only react, and he reacts as dictated by the engram.” (R&D 3, p.244). Hypnotic suggestion is very powerful: "No matter how foolish a suggestion is given to a subject under hypnosis, he will carry it out one way or another ... Any suggestion will operate within his mind unbeknownst to his higher levels of awareness. Very complex suggestions can be given” (DMSMH, p.56). Hubbard went on to say that neuroses, psychoses, compulsions and repressions can all be perfectly imitated through positive suggestion."
"According to Hubbard, trance states are common, and can even be induced through the normal procedures of education: "In altitude teaching, somebody is a 'great authority.' He is probably teaching some subject that is far more complex than it should be. He has become defensive down through the years, and this is a sort of protective coating that he puts up, along with the idea that the subject will always be a little better known by him than by anybody else and that there are things to know in this subject which he really wouldn't let anybody else in on. This is altitude instruction.” As an aside, it is worth mentioning that Hubbard was later to assert that every major tenet in Scientology and Dianetics was his exclusive discovery (see HCOPL "Keeping Scientology Working”, February 1965). Hubbard continued, "And in order to get people to sit very alertly and do exactly what he says, he has another trick: he gives them examinations ... So there is this anxiety around a person's grades, and this comes forward until he finally gets up to a point in education where when somebody says the word examination to him it not only push-buttons him but it also threatens Mama, Papa, love and general survival. It is a terrific whip. It keeps people in a state of confusion, and when their minds are slightly confused they are in a hypnotic trance. Any time anybody gets enough altitude he can be called a hypnotic operator, and what he says will act as hypnotic suggestion. Hypnotism is a difference in levels of altitude. There are ways to create and lower the altitude of the subject, but if the operator can heighten his own altitude with regard to the subject the same way, he doesn't have to put the subject to sleep. What he says will still react as hypnotic suggestion.” (R&D 4, p.324; see also R&D 3, pp. 246 & 248). This is a point which should be considered long and hard by anyone who has been involved with Dianetics or Scientology. "
"Trance in Dianetics:
Hubbard was also aware of the signs of trance: "a pre-clear after he closes his eyes will begin to flutter his eyelids. This a symptom of the very lightest level of hypnotic trance.” (SOS II, p.227); "A simple test is to watch the person's eyeballs. You will find as he lies there that the eyeballs under the closed eyelids will hunt back and forth. You can see the bump of them on the eyelids, and they will be wandering ... the hunting indicates a hypnotic state.” (R&D 1, p.336); "The eye moving underneath the eyelid is the indication of when a person is lightly or deeply tranced. That is the second stage of which the fluttering eyelid is the first.” (R&D 3, p.94); "The preclear's eyes will roll a little bit under the lids and when he returns, particularly, the eyelashes will flutter, which tells you immediately that he has become more suggestible than he ordinarily would be.” (ibid); "Sometimes you will notice a tremble on the eyelids. This means the preclear has deepened his sense of sleep and has left some of his attention units somewhere. This is a very early stage of hypnosis. Be careful of such a patient.” (R&D 4, p.38).The current use of the Hubbard Dianetics Auditor Course and the Hubbard Dianetics Seminar is in total contradiction to these admonitions. By returning to the 1950 method, Scientology has returned to direct trance induction. Both of these courses give: "When the preclear's eyes close and you notice his eyelids flicker, finish counting...” (p.54 and p.42 respectively, step two).
These are not the only signs: "If the person begins to answer you literally ... that means your preclear is now a hypnotic subject and you are running him in hypnosis.” (R&D 3, p.94; see also R&D 1, p.336). These prohibitions form no part of any auditor training course known to this author."
"Use of hypnotism in auditing:
The auditor "must be prepared to use hypnotism, he must know how it works, what he should do to make it function, how to regress a person in hypnotism and so on, which is definitely very different from Dianetics in that one produces a trance.” (R&D 1, p.307)."
"After Dianetics: MSMH was published, Hubbard withdrew the system of counting the preclear into reverie: "Sometimes people go into a hypnotic trance by accident with this count system ... so at the Foundation we no longer use it.” (R&D 3, p.15; see also R&D 4, p.37; DMSMH, p.201). Unfortunately, this advice is ignored in the current Hubbard Dianetics Auditor Course, auditing reverts entirely to Dianetics: MSMH, so by Hubbard's own statement, the Church of Scientology is using a hypnotic induction as standard procedure ("Count slowly and soothingly from 1 to 7”, just prior to the flickering of the eyelids already mentioned. Hubbard Dianetics Auditor Course, p.54, Hubbard Dianetics Seminar, p.42, step two). Hubbard was perfectly aware that counting out loud is a method of hypnotic induction (DMSMH, p.123)."
"Having said that fluttering of the eyelids is indicative of trance (see above), Hubbard gave the following instructions for inducing reverie: "The patient is made to lie down and shut his eyes. The operator begins to count. He suggests the patient relax. At length the patient's eyelids will flutter (Medicine drumming will also accomplish this without producing a harmful amnesia hypnotic state.) He is permitted to relax further. Then the operator tells him that his 'motor strip' (his sensory perceptions [sic]) is returning to a time of unconsciousness ... With coaxing the patient will begin to feel the injury and sense himself in the location and time of the accident.” (R&D 1, p.8). This statment, which comes from Hubbard's first published article on Dianetics, shows an interesting choice of words - the auditor is called the "operator”, he "suggests” that the preclear relax into a state which is not a "harmful amnesia hypnotic state” (which does not rule out light trance, or even "harmless” amnesia), and the engram is found through "coaxing”."
"In lectures given in 1950, Hubbard recommended three books on hypnotism to his followers: "Anyone in doubt as to how hypnotism works need only consult the authoritative books on the subject by Estabrooks [George Hoben Estabrooks, Hypnotism]. In fact, this is recommended as a means of proving that Dianetics and hypnotism are total strangers.” (R&D 4, p.345); "There is a little book by a man by the name of Young written about 1899, which contains in it about as much hypnosis as one ever wants. It is called Twenty-Five Lessons in Hypnosis ... Practically everything in that book works, and clairvoyance, mesmerism and so forth are also delineated” (R&D 1, p.307); the third, and most significant, work recommended is Wolfe and Rosenthal's Hypnotism Comes of Age(R&D2, p.12)."
"Despite protestations that hypnotism and Dianetics are "total strangers”, Hubbard several times advocated the use of hypnotism alongside Dianetics: "it is even allowable to use actual hypnosis if it is possible to procure any results from it. So hypnosis has some value, but it has value only to a professional auditor ... If he can spill emotion in deep trance or even in narcosynthesis, he has achieved a gain on the case. This is for a very special tough type of case” (R&D 1, p.182). Hypnosis and Dianetics are not the only approaches "Faith healing, when not practiced on the hypnotic level of 'This is not going to hurt you any more', has ingredients that you can use.” (R&D 1, p.186).
Auditors do need to be aware of hypnotism: "it is quite usual for the auditor to have to exhaust hypnotically implanted material received either from some hypnotist or from the analytical mind itself when the person has been operating under auto-control [sic].” (DOT, p.69). Also, "It is pertinent to diagnosis whether or not the preclear is highly suggestible or can be hypnotized” (SOS II, p.220). Further, "understanding the mechanism of post-hypnotic suggestion can aid an understanding of aberration.” (DMSMH, p.56); "The next thing an auditor should know well is the effect of hypnotism and drugs, and he should have observed this actually.” (R&D 1, p.307). The auditor should be aware of hypnotism, because, as already cited, "hypnotism is very common in this society” (R&D 1, p.24)."
"Unfortunately, auditors share an ignorance of hypnotism with the general populace and simply parrot Hubbard's calming assurance that "auditing is not a form of hypnosis” or that "auditing removes hypnosis”. Despite their implanted obsession with the meaning of words, Scientologists are largely unable to define the "hypnosis” which auditing supposedly removes. They believe it to be drowsiness or lack of awareness, rather than the heightened state known to hypnotic subjects and touched upon by Hubbard in Dianetics: MSMH: "By suggestion the power of hearing can be tuned down or up so that a person is nearly deaf or can hear pins fall at a great distance”. Most usually, hypnotic trance is a state of heightened awareness which excludes certain perceptions. It is a highly focussed state, often accompanied by a sensation that "the colours in the room are brighter”, as well as spatial dissociation (called "exteriorization” by Scientologists and "depersonalization” by psychiatrists)."
"Suggestion:
Hubbard was ambiguous about suggestion: "We never give positive suggestions” (R&D1, p.48); but "you are putting in positive suggestion whether you want to or not, no matter how careful you are” (R&D1, p.336)."
"Hubbard added "A motto one could use is 'Never believe a hypnotist'" (SOS II, p.228). "
References:NB: page numbers vary in later editions, and some material may have been censored from these editions.
Astounding Science Fiction, May 1950.
Atack, Jon - A Piece of Blue Sky, Lyle Stuart books, 1990.
Freud, Sigmund - the Clarke Lectures in Two Short Accounts of Psycho-Analysis, Penguin books.
Hubbard, L.Ronald, Dianetics - the Modern Science of Mental Health, Hermitage House, 1950; later editions until the 1985 Bridge edition have identical page numbering.
- Dianetics the Evolution of a Science, 1950; AOSH DK Publications, Denmark, 1972.
- Dianetics the Original Thesis, 1951; Scientology Publications Organization, Denmark, 1970.
- Hubbard Dianetics Auditor Course, Bridge, L.A., 1988
- Hubbard Dianetics Seminar, Bridge, L.A., 1988
- Research and Discovery Series:
volume 1, lectures June 1950; Bridge, 1980.
volume 2, lectures July - August 1950; Bridge, 1982.
volume 3, lectures 10 August-8 September, 1950; Bridge, 1982.
volume 4, lectures 23 September-15 November 1950; Bridge, 1982 .
- Science of Survival, 1951; Hubbard College of Scientology, 1967.
- The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology, 1979.
Miller, Russell - Bare-Faced Messiah, Henry Holt, NY or 1987.
Wolfe, Bernard and Rosenthal, Raymond - Hypnotism Comes of Age, Blue Ribbon Books, NY, 1949.
Young, L.E. - 25 Lessons in Hypnotism, Padell Book Co, NY, 1944.
abbreviations used in the text:
AstSF - Astounding Science Fiction, May 1950
DMSMH - Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health
DTOT - Dianetics the Original Thesis
EoS - Dianetics the Evolution of a Science
R&D - Research and Discovery, followed by volume number
SOS - Science of Survival, followed by volume I or II
Scientology Reflections (13) 10 Years After Leaving-Hypnosis in Scientology
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.