Affirmations as Conversation Enders

 


I should have mentioned something when Tony Ortega posted the affirmations story recently.

As many of you already know I "enjoyed" the "benefits" of being in the Scientology cult for twenty five years. I came out about two and a half years ago and spent hundreds of hours reading about cults, hypnosis, thought reform, social psychology, influence, cognitive dissonance theory, abusive relationships, narcissists, sociopaths, rhetoric, critical thinking, logical fallacies and mass movements.

The usual stuff for an ex cult member and I read maybe thirty books on those topics, including about eight on Scientology and Hubbard in particular. A lot of people have heard this a million times.

But the amusing thing is that I ended up on Facebook groups posting links to my blog. It's extremely critical of Scientology, the Scientology cult, Scientology technology and Ron Hubbard and David Miscavige.

I got a lot of Scientologists who hold a false dichotomy. They are sure I don't have any experience with Scientology OR I was already against it before I examined it. I explain over and over that they are sidestepping criticism by addressing the critic. Of course with Hubbard's tone scale and SP doctrine and attack the attacker concepts repeatedly drummed into them as loaded language with thought stopping cliches the Scientologists feel certainty that their method is right.

I explain that is the genetic fallacy and a claim should be careful examined on its own merits, and not based on the claimant (meaning person making the claim). It's a useful principle in scientific investigation, which Scientology warrants. If it really works that should be both reproducible and verifiable.

And Hubbard made very specific measurable claims regarding health, especially in Science of Survival, and memory. There are others in Scientology too.

But if I posted links to definitions for genetic fallacy, ad hominem, appeal to authority, anecdotal evidence, burden of proof and other ideas like ethos, logos and pathos from classic rhetoric Scientologists just keep using fallacies. Tu quoque is meeting criticism with criticism and a cornerstone of Scientology PR.

Think of an example. A neighbor takes your mail. You see it and call the police. The police arrive and you say "my neighbor took my mail, he has it with my name on it in his hand ." The neighbor says "you are stupid, you are just complaining because you have hidden evil purposes and are hypercritical."

The police should disregard that irrelevant comment and LOOK at the mail your neighbor is holding with your name on it, verify your identity and investigate WHY the neighbor has your mail and probably return it and tell your neighbor it's a federal crime to steal mail in the US.

Meeting criticism is a common but very irrational response. Claims should be investigated, not countered with "you are bad too".

That is immature in children and dangerous in adults.

I have shown all this to Scientologists and found some no matter how many short definitions or articles are shown to them won't stop using the couple dozen fallacies Hubbard implanted in them.

I get responses like "you are a slippery eel", "you never read a book by LRH", "I know auditing works, I have seen it", "you dislike auditing so you must either be a bigot or know nothing about it "

You can notice none of those answers address criticism. And in my posts I usually have long detailed explanations why and how Scientology is debunked.

So Scientologists respond with a guess about hidden emotions or facts not in evidence to derail the conversation. Hidden emotions can't be proven or disproven. How to show you don't have hidden evil purposes ? Or do ?

It's a red herring and stops thought.

So the affirmations found their way into these many online exchanges. A few independent Scientologists will sidestep dozens of remarks criticizing Scientology and Hubbard, which by themselves should make it clear that I am quite familiar with both, and the Scientologists ask questions like, "have you read anything by LRH ?, I recommend Fundamentals of Thought, it really helped me."

So, I got frustrated at the endless ability of Scientologists to sidestep issues and questions and said " I actually have read that, but my favorite thing by Hubbard is his affirmations, I feel that really should be read by every Scientologist to understand him."

All of a sudden the Scientologists turn silent. But isn't communication the universal solvent and the solution to every problem ?

Funny how the right sentence or phrase makes that stable datum evaporate !