MOCKINGBIRD'S NEST
Hubbard had a Scientologist receive one piece of his doctrine in indoctrination far more than all others . It is repeated over and over and referred to again and again .
It is KSW and it rests on an interconnected series of lies that rest on one big lie to be the absolute undoubtable unquestionable foundation of Scientology. I had an ED at a local org who said " if they make it past KSW they might become Scientologists - if not we don't keep 'em " . And she was right - I did not know why then but think I do now .
The big lie that all the rest rely on is : there is " workable " I.E beneficial , reliable , scientific methodology that can consistently produce good and even miraculous results in the subject called Scientology . That is the lie . It was NEVER and will NEVER be true , at all , EVER not even a little . But the lie is the heart of the fraud and con . You have to at first find it remotely possible - even a tiny bit . Then through repetition and confusion you are nudged over and over to buy into it .
In the primary piece of Scientology doctrine Hubbard used many many tricks and fallacies to both imply and state his authority and hypnosis and mind control as well .
He made a group of implants specifically intedended to stack , or combine rhetorical methods and results , they are for the authority for Hubbard and tying it to the elite status Scientologists gain by recognizing and submitting to Hubbard - the two ideas are bound to each other in a large circular argument where each reinforces and props up the other . The clever thing about this is that attacks , criticism or doubts about Hubbard or his " technology " quickly become seen and emotionally felt as personal attacks on the competence and pride of individual Scientologists . This is entirely intentional .
I actually believe his implication and statements on this even exceed
the ad hominem implant group with which it intersects as both bolster
one another often .
I will here include some quotes from THE centerpiece of ALL Scientology
doctrine - many consider the dividing line between Scientology and other
practices to be IF a person or group recognizes this reference as
valid and attempts to follow it or if they consider it expendable or as
having exceptions or lacking importance :
Note in my description I use the following terms as methods from
hypnosis or mind control : confusion , anxiety , attention , overwhelm ,
induce , direct attention , ambiguous language , focus , misdirect and
repetition .
Keeping Scientology Working selected quotes
1) We have some time since passed the point of achieving uniformly workable technology.
2) The only thing now is getting the technology applied.
3)If you can get the technology applied, you can deliver what's promised.
4) Getting the correct technology applied consists of:
5)One:Having the correct technology.
6)Two:Knowing the technology.
7)Three:]
Knowing it is correct.
8)Four:Teaching correctly the correct technology.
9)Five:]
Applying the technology.
10)Six:Seeing that the technology is correctly applied.
11)Seven:Hammering out of existence incorrect technology.
[
12)Eight:]
Knocking out incorrect applications.
13)Nine:Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology.
14)Ten:Closing the door on incorrect application.
15)One above has been done.
- 16)Two has been achieved by many.
- 17)Three is achieved by the individual applying the correct technology in a proper manner and observing that it works that way.
- 18)Four is being done daily successfully in most parts of the world.
- 19)Five is consistently accomplished daily.
- 20)Six is achieved by Instructors and Supervisors consistently.
- 21)Seven is done by a few but is a weak point.
- 22)Eight is not worked on hard enough.
- 23)Nine is impeded by the "reasonable" attitude of the not-quite-bright.
- 24)Ten is seldom done with enough ferocity.
- 25)Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten are the only places Scientology can bog down in any area.
26) The reasons for this are not hard to
find. (a) A weak certainty that it works in Three above can lead to
weakness in Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. (b) Further, the not-too-bright
have a bad point on the button Self-Importance. (c) The lower the IQ,
the more the individual is shut off from the fruits of observation. (d)
The service facs of people make them defend themselves against anything
they confront, good or bad, and seek to make it wrong. (e) The bank
seeks to knock out the good and perpetuate the bad.
27) Thus, we as Scientologists and as an organization must be very alert to Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten.
28)only so long as it does not seek to alter basic principles and successful applications.
29) We will not speculate here on why this was so or how I came to rise above the bank.
30)Similar examples exist in
instruction and these are all the more deadly as every time instruction
in correct technology is flubbed, then the resulting error, uncorrected
in the auditor, is perpetuated on every pc that auditor audits
thereafter. So Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten are even more important in a
course than in supervision of cases.
31) Squirreling (going off into weird practices
or altering Scientology) only comes about from noncomprehension.
Usually the noncomprehension is not of Scientology but some earlier
contact with an offbeat humanoid practice which in its turn was not
understood.
32)With what we know now, there is no student we enroll who cannot be properly trained.
33)The
proper instruction attitude is "You're here so you're a Scientologist.
Now we're going to make you into an expert auditor no matter what
happens, We'd rather have you dead than incapable." end quote
Now I numbered the selected quotes to make referring back easier for the
reader and so I would not be constantly repeating the quotes .
The first observation I have is that there are a lot of pieces of info
that refer back to each other in a CONFUSING DISJOINTED WAY -
intentionally AS A VARIATION OF confusion AND a fallacy in their own
right .
From Wikipedia :
Proof by verbosity (argumentum verbosium,
proof by intimidation) – submission of others to an argument too
complex and verbose to reasonably deal with in all its intimate details.
See , Hub presented a ridiculously complex and long PL with tons of
points that in a deliberately confusing way present tons of points that
are referred to and back to with ambiguous language so you try to
remember what all the points are and how what is said in one place
relates back to something presented in a giant group of points and - it
is all a confused mess !
But the sheer size of it IMPLIES a body of knowledge well organized and
thoroughly understood by an AUTHORITY who must have made it ! Never mind that there is no such body of knowledge - the PRESENTATION is where your attention goes NOT validation . The monolith is simply too big to understand easily and so implies wisdom without EVER demonstrating it .
Line one is intentionally written in a confusing style to distract your
mind off it's truthfulness or lack thereof as you FOCUS your misdirected
mind on the VERY unusual use of " since " to mean " earlier " instead
of its usual meaning of " due to or from that point on or from which
point in TIME ".
See , many hypnotists use statements with ambiguous or paradoxical
wordings regarding time to generate slight cognitive dissonance and in
the moment of blankness accompanying the dissonance - swoop in and
direct attention . THIS is what Hub was really doing when he pretended you have an MU ! Jon Atack informed me about the dissonance at the exact moment of
blankness and I - upon reflection and investigation of cognitive
dissonance - agree fully .
Hub makes you confused with his odd , unclear and eccentric word
choices - which further implies his authority as a master of language ! THIS is what he was doing with all those odd ways to say things and
referring to things with two almost identical terms - so YOU would
wonder why he said both characteristics AND qualities or used an unusual
idiom like first and foremost - making you clear foremost and to pass a
checkout LEARN foremost is a synonym for first and that the redundant
use is best explained as either having no additional meaning or as an
idiom it focuses attention slightly more on the concept of both words
but in either case the wording CONFUSES your mind as you try to find why
he uses more words than are needed over and over - you think the
problem is YOU or your vocabulary or not really getting the deep meaning
in his " wise words ". In any of the cases above you are confused , gain anxiety about this (
which as an " MU phenomenon " makes you focus more on words and not
ideas ), and have the constant implication Hub knows something just out
of reach .
In point 26 Hub IMPLIES that he is not among the not too bright and that
he has a high IQ by speaking in a round about way where others with
flaws he implies he does not have have their errors listed, also
implying immunity to those for himself .
Points 1 , 3 , 5 and 15 ALL refer to one another in a circular argument
mixed in with the other points to generate confusion sorting them out -
further implying his brilliance in keeping them straight and tying up
the attention of his victim - even writing about the method is confusing
and I KNOW what he is doing !
The term " Technology " is initially confusing as one tries to sort out " just what the heck is this technology ? " . It is not a material science like engineering or something familiar . This ambiguous term that just refers to Scientology and Scientology is
defined as the technology - which gives a hidden circular argument that
there is SCIENTIFIC validated method here - with no real proof or clear
explanation . So that further confuses a person . At some point a person may accept that there actually is a technology -
just to understand the rest of the reference better ! Oopsies !
Lines 4 through 14 refer to each other in very slightly different ways -
to confuse and imlpy through complexity, ambiguity and repetition that
there is SOMETHING genuine to this " technology " !
Points 15 through 25 refer WAY back in a disorganized incoherent way to
5 through 14 and this is intentional as if you where to rewrite it with
15 linked to 5 , 16 to 6 , 17 to 7 , 18 to 8 , 19 to 9 , 20 to 10 , 21
to 11 , 22 to 12 , 23 to 13 , 24 to 14 and 25 as a separate clearer
sentence or even short paragraph the constant keeping track of and
referring back to ideas would not DIVIDE the attention to the edge of
madness - further reducing the critical factor by MISDIRECTION . The ideas are actually simpler than what is written here IF better organized .
Having the correct technology has been done.
Knowing the technology has been achieved by many.
Knowing it is correct and that
is achieved by the individual applying the correct technology in a proper manner and observing that it works that way.
Teaching correctly the correct technology and it
is being done daily successfully in most parts of the world.
Applying the technology which is consistently accomplished daily.
Seeing that the technology is correctly applied which is achieved by Instructors and Supervisors consistently.
Hammering out of existence incorrect technology which is done by a few but is a weak point.
Knocking out incorrect applications is not worked on hard enough.
Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology is impeded by the "reasonable" attitude of the not-quite-bright.
Closing the door on incorrect application is seldom done with enough ferocity.
Now if this was there it would be a LOT clearer and 25 should really be a
little paragraph set off and completely redone for clarity as well . Now , if stated THIS way the constant overuse of the term technology
with no definition becomes abundantly clear - it is referred to over and
over !
It is also clear that there are MANY claims asserted with NO PROOF EVER !!!!
The other way sorting out the vague garbage is ALL you are even trying to do - NOT decide if you accept or believe ANY of it .
Point 23 redefines " reasonable " as a BAD thing , with NO explanation
for free loaded language AND acceptance of the ideas within the new
language ! Point 23 has the not-quite-bright and point 26 the not-too-bright - to
further confuse , as why choose such similar wording except to induce
confusion ?
Point 26 should be rewritten as several sentences and made much clearer
but it is also intended to divide attention and further confuse - not
inform . Point 27 further divides attention .
Point 29 directs your imagination to speculate on how Hubbard in some
mysterious way overcame the bank and why this was - so you ASSUME he DID
overcome the bank AND that it EVEN exists ! It functions like saying do not think of a pink elephant - you automatically think of it in hearing it !
And he as an expert hypnotist KNEW you would be distracted by wondering why and how he could do this . Points 30 , 32 and 33 ALL assert (largely through very slight variation
to confuse ) and repetition that Scientology works - again with no
proof !
Point 31 says a lot in one place - that by calling going off into weird
practices squirreling it IMPLIES Scientology is NOT weird - making it
orthodox in some undefined way .
It also says this comes about from noncomprehension - linking this to
the MU doctrine AND misdirecting attention off the fact that
noncomprehension can be from incredulity , finding contradictions ,
being confused by things that do not add up - all triggers for CRITICAL
analysis and inquiry ! You know like in normal pre-Scientology life .
It also further combines tricks as it claims noncomprehension is not
from Scientology ( discouraging close examination ) but earlier off beat
humanoid practices .
Okay this is to IMPLY earlier practices existed and may effect people
now - meaning it links to the whole track doctrine as " proof " and has
the corollary that if the earlier practices are offbeat THEN it follows
that Scientology is NOT offbeat - with no proof .
And by saying the earlier practice "in its turn " is a vague way to
imply all these earlier practices ( and earlier civilizations ) and tie
up your mind wondering what and when it was and not notice that he says
the practice was NOT UNDERSTOOD as a cause of noncomprehension . That has a couple more ideas too - the idea noncomprehension comes from
not understood things - which is a synonym for misunderstood and that
this can be linked to earlier similar things a vital and unproven
Scientology doctrine .
Point 33 implies that a Scientologist is CAPABLE and being one is
automatic by being here and death is preferable to not being a
Scientologist - ALL strong extreme unproven claims mashed together so
the overwhelmed confused student just hypnotically intakes and does not
evaluate ANY of the claims for authenticity or desirability ! See , he makes many , many claims here almost all of which are NOT to be
inspected or questioned or even perceived really - just taken in and
followed .
I have ONLY taken a small sample from one reference - this entire PL is a
huge logical fallacy designed to stir emotion , wonder , confusion , an
air of expertise and certainty that there is a real subject here and
Hubbard MUST be the authority on it and only true originator ( asserting
the single source myth with no proof ) and make you buy and never
question many other ideas and bolster lies from other doctrine linking
them in your mind .It is intended to through repetition and confusion gain dominance and install the double bind ( or circle of lies )
Explained in the following link :
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthrea...NTOLOGY-PART-1
Supplemented by the following link
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthrea...UENCE-OF-STUDY
This is my first quickie off the cuff analysis of KSW - Keeping Slaves Willing .
I hope it can help show many claims are asserted with no shred of proof
and ideas accepted without direct examination as a requirement to even
participate in Scientology .
This trend only expands over time .
There are many , many other places Hub pretends expertise and authority - all without merit . I started with this as IT hangs up exes often for decades in confusion - as it was intended to . Simply put the confusion is a kind of trance state that can impair thinking and happiness covertly for life if unhandled .
There are many of these states that a Scientologist accumulates and pile
up , even moving from one to another seemlessly after they replace
normal thought and identity enough . Some people cancel a few trances or many but not all and so are " weird
" years after leaving Scientology or still enthralled or fascinated by
parts of it even if knowing Hub lied or the tech fails and the group is a
criminal cult .
I am sorry I am very sure that is how it works - I wish just figuring
out he lied or there are no OTs or the SO and orgs are running a fraud
would magically make us wake up but for many that is simply not true . I do plan to soon write another thread entirely on trance states so
people can better understand what happens to their mind and what
Scientology does to it .
But I hope this served both as an example of Hub's unsubstantiated
claims of authority and the utter fraud and deception KSW was always
intended to serve as . It is a circular argument : the tech works this way and only this way
because Hub as the top expert knows it and he is the top expert because
it works but neither is ever proven at all !
Enjoy sharing this with everyone especially indies and under the radar folks .
Mockingbird's Nest :
http://mbnest.blogspot.com/search?up...08:00&max-resu
