Scientology's Insidious Influence Revisited in Full

  I left Scientology in 2014 after spending twenty five years in the cult. I explored the techniques used in Scientology indoctrination in the article Insidious Influence: Study Technology. This article has been posted on Quora, the Ex Scientologist Message Board (ESMB), at Mockingbird's Nest blog on Scientology and Facebook.

I think it's time to revisit the topic and see if I can make my initial point any more clear. 

In the past seven years I have read about fifty books, read hundreds of articles and watched thousands of videos.

Hopefully the information is helpful and I can share it in an easily understandable manner.

I want to start by quoting an article by the top Scientology expert in the world, in my opinion, Jon Atack.

This article was published by Tony Ortega at The Underground Bunker blog.

Jon Atack excavates the Scientology mind for L. Ron Hubbard’s most harmful implants

By Tony Ortega | November 29, 2014

"The aim of Scientology is to reduce the free individual to obedience to the orders and policies of Scientology. Quite simply put, it does not bring about “self-determinism” but “Ron-determinism,” where the follower (or Dev-OT) is in complete accord with the fantasies and fabrications of the Founder." Jon Atack

 

"Scientology is a system of procedures that induces euphoria (“very good indicators”) and heightens suggestibility (obedience training or OT) so that the tenets of Scientology will be followed and Hubbard deified. Elsewhere, the same techniques are called hypnosis. Hubbard said of hypnosis: “It reduces self-determinism by interposing the commands of another below the analytical level of an individual’s mind” (Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary, from Science of Survival, Book 2, p.220). It is a good definition and is achieved on a daily basis by Hubbard’s cult.

Here is one of the most relevant statements that Hubbard ever made. I shall quote it at length, because it is the essential truth of Scientology: “In altitude teaching, somebody is a ‘great authority.’ He is probably teaching some subject that is far more complex than it should be [Scientology is the most complex system ever devised by any single ‘great authority’]. 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.” In Keeping Scientology Working, Hubbard asserted that every major tenet in Scientology and Dianetics was his exclusive discovery. This is most certainly “altitude instruction”!

Hubbard continues, “And in order to get people to sit very alertly and do exactly what he says, he has another trick: he gives them examinations [‘star rate checkouts’] … 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.” (my italics; Education and Dianetics, 11 November 1950, Research and Discovery Series, volume 4, 1st edition, pp.324-5)

So, Hubbard’s altitude — the only creator of “Tech” — means that “what he says will still react as hypnotic suggestion.” Not simply “act,” note, but “react,” as in “reactive mind.” Of course the “reactive mind” is that part of the mind which acts below consciousness — the hypnotic mind, in Hubbard’s terms (the reality is rather more complex, but you have to get past the anti-brain implant to approach the unconscious mind in all its glory). Hubbard fashioned the reactive mind, gifted it to his followers and filled it chock full with implants, so that Scientologists have about as much self-determinism as Pavlov’s dogs after their testicles had been removed.

The implanted positive suggestions of Scientology are the beliefs themselves. It is amazing how simply these beliefs come apart, if you can only confront them head on. Raising communication does not raise affinity — or yelling, beating, and brutalising would be useful means for bringing love into the world. In the eight dynamics, it is risible that the individual has the same vote as the entire of humanity, or that God is allowed only one vote. Those who believe in God would surely not go against His (or Her) will, no matter how much it seems to benefit the other seven dynamics. Scientology is a farrago of pseudoscience. Curiously, the word “scientology” was first used to mean exactly that, long before Hubbard redefined it. It is an edifice that crumbles once logic is focused upon it." Jon Atack

"

Alfred Korzybski

 
"The system works using the “two terminal universe” concept. In Science of Survival, Hubbard borrowed Korzybski’s concept of infinity-valued logic. Korzybski is acknowledged in the frontispiece of that book, as one of the thinkers “without whose speculations and observations the creation and construction of Dianetics would not have been possible.” (Though Hubbard would later assert that his were the only contributions of any value in “50,000 years.” But contradiction keeps the marks confused, so that they will do as they are told.)

In Notes on the Lectures, Hubbard asserts: “Primitive logic was one-valued. Everything was assumed to be the product of a divine will, and there was no obligation to decide the rightness or wrongness of anything. Most logic added up eerily to the propitiation of the gods. Aristotle formulated two-valued logic. A thing was either right or wrong. This type of logic is used by the reactive mind. In the present day, engineers are using a sort of three-valued logic which contains the values of right, wrong, and maybe. From three-valued logic we jump to infinity-valued logic — a spectrum which moves from infinite wrongness to infinite rightness.” (cited in the Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary under “logic”).

Scientology does not use infinity-valued logic, rather it uses single-valued logic — not the “will of God” but the will of Hubbard. There is no flexibility in Scientology: You follow the “Technology” to the letter (the “white taped route”). No matter how “OT” you become, you will never reach Hubbard’s level: You will never be able to see how the universe works and discover any “technology” yourself. You might be a god, but he is a god-maker. If you subscribe to his infantile narcissism, that is.

The definition of infinity-valued logic in Science of Survival is: “It is a tenet of Dianetics that absolutes are unobtainable. Terms like good and bad, alive and dead, right and wrong are used only in conjunction with gradient scales. On the scale of right and wrong, everything above zero or centre would be more right, approaching an infinity of rightness, and everything below zero or centre would be more and more wrong, approaching an infinite wrongness. The gradient scale is a way of thinking about the universe which approximates the actual conditions of the universe more closely than any other existing logical method.” Hubbard certainly didn’t waste time on humility! (And it would be interesting to see the “gradient scale” of death as a condition — is Hubbard more or less dead now that he was in 1986?).

Still, this idea was quickly abandoned in favour of the Will of Hubbard. The two-terminal concept pervades Scientology — dual-valued logic (right and wrong) — at best. So, we find “goals problems masses,” which are the basis of Grade 6, the Clearing Course, the original OT I and the current OT II. According to Hubbard this is the foundation of the Reactive Mind or “R6 Bank.” These are the “implants” given during Incident Two of OT III, 75 million years ago.

The notion is that “charge” is generated by two poles, so the individual is held in place by contradictions — such as “to be or not to be.” Scientology itself is a two-terminal structure, where almost every assertion has a contradiction (as we saw in my piece on double binds). This induces cognitive dissonance — confusion — where the individual becomes unable to decide, so must ask for direction from the outside. The implants of Scientology tend to follow this pattern. Confusion technique is the most basic method of hypnosis. In the blank, while the mind hunts for sense, a positive suggestion (or command) can be quickly inserted." Jon Atack

 

"Scientology can be stripped down into a series of implants. These are patterns of behaviour that will persist even after auditing is abandoned. " Jon Atack

"As Hubbard said, in his Propaganda by Redefinition of Words: “WORDS ARE REDEFINED TO MEAN SOMETHING ELSE TO THE ADVANTAGE OF THE PROPAGANDIST.” (emphasis in original, see more about this subject in my essay at Jonny Jacobson’s website, Infinite Complacency.) Hubbard tells us that we can be controlled by the redefinition of words, and then proceeds to pour forth more redefinitions than anyone in history — two 500 page dictionaries. So, start with “open-minded,” which according to one online dictionary means “Willing to consider new ideas; unprejudiced.” In Keeping Scientology Working, we find, “When somebody enrols, consider he or she has joined up for the duration of the universe — never permit an ‘open-minded’ approach.” Now, I can feel the grind of cognitive dissonance in the minds of the true believers, so let’s put this simply: To be a Scientologist you must be unwilling to consider new ideas (ie, non-Scientology ideas) and you must adopt Hubbard’s prejudices wholesale and without additional thought." Jon Atack

"Now for the “misunderstood word implant” — “the only reason a student gives up a study,” we are told (apart from “too steep a gradient” or “suppressive rendition” and various other notions). This diverts the student from the wood — which can no longer be seen — to the trees. What Hubbard says isn’t contradictory nonsense: The fault lies with the student, who has failed to understand the brilliance of Hubbard’s ideas." Jon Atack

Now, you might be wondering what an "implant" is.

Wikipedia can help us out.

"In Scientology, an implant is similar to an engram in that it is believed to condition the mind in a certain way. The difference is that an implant is done deliberately and with evil intent. It is similar to Thought insertion. It is "an intentional installation of fixed ideas, contra-survival to the thetan". [ Hubbard, L. Ron "Scientology Definitions II", 6612C06, SH Spec 83, 1966. ]" end quote Wikipedia ( the number "6612C06, SH Spec 83, 1966" refers to the quote coming from from a particular taped lecture of Ronald Hubbard, he recorded thousands of taped lectures, the number is a way to catalogue them, the 66 refers, for example, to 1966 as the year the lecture was given and the SH Spec refers to the Saint Hill special briefing course, which the lecture was a part of. The Saint Hill special briefing course was a Scientology course delivered in Saint Hill England originally. The 83 lets you know the tape was the 83rd tape in the lecture series.)

Just explaining the abbreviation of one Scientology term takes a bit of an education. 

For comparison, here is a regular English definition from the Cambridge Dictionary:

implant verb [T] (IDEA)

 

to fix ideas, feelings, or opinions in someone else's mind:

He implanted some very strange attitudes in his children.

There is much debate on the issue of "therapists" implanting false memories of sexual abuse in adults."End quote

Just examining these two we can see that Scientology has the idea of an implant as a noun, in other words what gets implanted is an implant. 

Now, you might wonder how this works, in other words, how does Scientology put implants into the minds of people? 

Jon Atack quoted Hubbard claiming that altitude instruction is akin to hypnosis and that Hubbard presented confusion via contradiction to instill cognitive dissonance and then "In the blank, while the mind hunts for sense, a positive suggestion (or command) can be quickly inserted." Jon Atack

Here is a bit more on that.

I have been communicating with Jon Atack and want to give him credit for pointing out something to me. I got close to seeing and stating this, but not quite right.

I will quote directly from an email: "I realized that throughout DMSMH he contradicts himself. I'd read it three times and never noticed. Presumably because the 'blank' that he relates to the mu actually occurs during the cognitive dissonance. Once you have confused someone, you insert the suggestions that will put them under your control ('if you knew what was wrong with your mind it, it wouldn't be wrong' is a favorite). Jon Atack

(DMSHMH is Dianetics the Modern Science of Mental Health and obviously "himself" and "he" refer to the author of Dianetics, Ronald Hubbard)

But what exactly happens? And how?

To get to that we have to know two or three things.

We need to have a little information on cognitive dissonance theory, we have to understand a bit about hypnosis, particularly the use of confusion and contradictions, and last of all we need to examine what happens to a Scientologist involving these ideas. Easy peasy!

This is where we look at cognitive dissonance theory a bit. Cognitive dissonance theory is a subject and not just a definition or paragraph. It's a part of psychology.

I am going to quote several excerpts from a series of blog posts at Mockingbird's Nest blog on Scientology regarding cognitive dissonance theory. They use quotes from the book A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance by Leon Festinger. 

Scientology Building The Prison Of The Mind Part 1 Cognitive Dissonance

I will start with some quotes from chapter one An Introduction to the Theory of Dissonance.

First I will replace the word "inconsistency" with a term which has less of a logical connotation, namely, dissonance. I will likewise replace the word "consistency" with a more neutral term, namely, consonance. (Page 2)

The basic hypothesis I wish to state are as follows:

1. The existence of dissonance, being psychologically uncomfortable, will motivate the person to try to reduce the dissonance and achieve consonance.

2. When dissonance is present, in addition to trying to reduce it, the person will likely avoid situations and information which would likely increase the dissonance.  (Page 3)

Festinger here explained that he considered inconsistencies (dissonance) in beliefs, behaviors or knowledge within a person to be a motivating factor in its own right.

He uses the term cognition to mean any knowledge, opinion, or belief about the environment, about oneself or one's behavior. The fact that Hubbard used the term is interesting and worth comparing to see if he stole it from Festinger or psychology in my opinion. 

Festinger goes on to describe dissonance as being caused by experiencing new events or gaining new information that creates a particular phenomena.

He describes "dissonance" and "consonance" as being relations between pairs of "elements". His use of elements means just pieces of information or knowledge. He describes elements as irrelevant to each other if they don't affect each other. Like if you like ice cream and think Scooby Doo is cool. Neither supports or contradicts the other. 

Now based on other ideas two ideas can be or become relevant. If you had the two irrelevant ideas I just listed and then discovered Scooby Doo fans aren't supposed to like ice cream, that could become a dissonance. 

Relevant elements can support or contradict each other. If they are inconsistent or contradictory, or culture or group standards dictate they don't fit then dissonance occurs. 

I am going to use a series of excerpts to show how dissonance can be created. 

1. Dissonance could arise from logical inconsistency...because of cultural mores...because one specific opinion is sometimes included, by definition, in a more general opinion...because of past experience. (Page 14)

All these ideas bear extensive examination in Scientology.

Obviously in Hubbard's doctrine logical inconsistency occurs, he defined terms at different times with contradictory definitions and contradicted his own methods numerous times. 

If two elements are dissonant with one another, the magnitude of the dissonance will be a function of the importance of the elements. (Page 16)

This is a fancy way to say the effect or degree of strength of dissonance is established by how important the ideas, behavior, opinions or emotions the dissonance is connected to is. In other words if something of low importance is related to dissonance it makes the dissonance low. Say you don't care at all who won a baseball game and hear from one person the Cubs won and another that they lost. The dissonance will be low, as you don't care. But say you happen to place paramount importance on the Cubs winning. It is literally the most important thing in your life. You could be extremely subject to dissonance over what to even feel or believe, whether to panic and seek answers elsewhere or remain where you are and wait to find out.

Importance sets or limits magnitude of dissonance. In Scientology this is notable as Hubbard goes for broke with certain ideas on which to sell both himself and Scientology. Namely his own infallible authority, perfect character, and the miraculous workability he claimed for his technology. In Keeping Scientology Working, the 1965 policy which is the most studied and essential reference to understand Scientology, this is permanently established as the core belief in Scientology doctrine, and it is in virtually every major course in Scientology to be studied hundreds of times in a Scientology career.

So every idea in Scientology is labeled as from Hubbard and as equally important. And as all always being right. So immense importance is placed on the ideas being correct, proportional to the importance that the beliefs, behaviors and efforts committed to Scientology are in the mind of an individual Scientologist.

So this sets up Scientologists to suffer immense dissonance if any experience, information or reality contradicts the ideas of Hubbard's unique genius - really messianic status as Humanity's savior -  and his workable - really God making - technology.  This idea of being entirely all in for Scientology and Hubbard cannot be overstated. For many Scientologists going against these core beliefs is unthinkable.

Regarding magnitude Festinger goes on to say:

The total amount of dissonance between this element and the remainder of the person's cognition will depend on the proportion of relevant elements that are dissonant with the one in question.  (Page 17)

Relax, that translates easily. It means the element which is one idea, belief, opinion, emotion or behavior has how much dissonance it can inspire existing in a person in a relationship with the number of other ideas, opinions etc. within the person that are relevant, meaning agreeing or disagreeing with the idea in question.

That can mean a behavior, for example, can have dissonance to the degree other ideas, behaviors, etc.  disagree as a portion of the other ideas, etc. a person holds that either agree or disagree happen to disagree.

So the more your idea on a subject, for example, will generate dissonance is to the degree it contradicts your beliefs, ideas etc. that can support or contradict it in your mind.

The magnitude is set by if an idea has many ideas agreeing in your mind and few disagreeing, then dissonance is low. If an idea disagrees with many elements in your mind it creates immense dissonance.

This has tremendous relevance to Scientology as despite Hubbard often contradicting his own statements and even definitions the need for consonance, or agreement, within his doctrine and the perception of reality is overwhelming.

Hubbard sets many, many elements within a Scientologist's mind. Scientology isn't a few ideas. It has thousands and thousands of terms and hundreds of phrases and behaviors to learn. Even public Scientologists are expected to learn thousands of definitions, dozens of phrases, and hundreds of behaviors.

The above statement can of course be easily generalized to deal with the magnitude of dissonance which exists between two clusters of cognitive elements. This magnitude would depend on the proportion of the relevant relations between elements in the two clusters that were dissonant and, of course, on the importance of the elements. (Page 17)

These clusters are just groups of ideas that are connected in a person's mind. You can have for example a group of ideas, opinions, etc. that support the subject of human rights then run into a bunch of ideas that you could call Scientology policies and practices that are relevant to human rights.

If you saw many elements as being inconsistent that could create dissonance but if you saw little or no contradiction dissonance would be low.

To summarize his ideas on the magnitude of dissonance:

1. If two cognitive elements are relevant, the relation between them is either dissonant or consonant.
2. The magnitude of the dissonance ( or consonance ) increases as the importance or value of the elements increases.
3. The total amount of dissonance that exists between two clusters of cognitive elements is a function of the weighted proportion of all relevant relations between the two clusters that are dissonant. The term "weighted proportion" is used because each relevant relation would be weighted according to the importance of the elements involved in that relation. (Page 18)

That's just saying that if two ideas, behaviors, opinions or knowledges ( all of which are called "elements" ) can affect each other within a person's mind it is either as agreeing and being "consonant" or in disagreement or contradiction and being "dissonant". The size or strength of the resulting agreement as consonance or disagreement as dissonance is determined by how important the elements are to the person. More important elements can have accompanying higher dissonance or consonance.

Regarding the reduction of dissonance Festinger has definite ideas.

The presence of dissonance gives rise to pressures to reduce or eliminate the dissonance. The strength of the pressures to reduce the dissonance is a function of the magnitude of the dissonance. (Page 18)

Also, similar to the action of a drive, the greater the dissonance, the greater will be the intensity of the action to reduce the dissonance and the greater the avoidance of situations that would increase the dissonance. (Page 18)

So that just means stronger or more serious conflict of ideas, behaviors, etc. within a person leads to stronger desire to reduce the disagreement aka dissonance. And with a stronger desire to reduce dissonance comes two crucial ideas. Stronger dissonance brings stronger action to reduce it and accompanying greater efforts to avoid the sources of dissonance.

Scientology Building The Prison Of The Mind 

I want to use a few more quotes to describe cognitive dissonance and recommend reading my entire series on cognitive dissonance and the book A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance by Leon Festinger for everyone. 

I will also include a quote I found in a book online that I think is relevant:

"I saw the confusion on some faces and blankness on others. My ed psych professor in grad school would have called this cognitive dissonance. "
Fixed for Life: The True Saga of How Tom Became Sally

To zero in a bit more on exactly what cognitive dissonance is and what it feels like and how it is created I want to quote an article.

Unreality Check: Cognitive Dissonance in Narcissistic Abuse

October 7, 2014 • Contributed by Andrea Schneider, LCSW

WHAT IS COGNITIVE DISSONANCE IN TOXIC RELATIONSHIPS?

Narcissistic abuse is an insidious, covert form of emotional abuse that can happen to unsuspecting individuals who are entangled in a relationship with a person with narcissistic qualities.

One of the key methods of emotional abuse employed by people with narcissistic tendencies is the generalized concept called cognitive dissonance. What this abuse tactic does is create in the target a sense of unreality, confusion, and a mind-set of not trusting their own perception of the situation. Leon Festinger (1957) was one researcher who studied the theory of cognitive dissonance. Essentially, cognitive dissonance occurs when humans experience a state of holding two or more contradictory thoughts or beliefs in their cognition at one time. The result is a state of anxious confusion and a desire to reduce the resultant overwhelm and unbalanced perception.

COGNITIVE DISSONANCE IN NARCISSISTIC ABUSE: A SNAPSHOT

A simplistic, condensed example in a toxic relationship: an abuser professes love and divines a marriage date with their partner. The partner is courted, romanced, and ultimately falls in love with the abuser, not knowing that the abuser has ulterior motives (i.e., not staying in the relationship). The partner envisions wedding details and enjoys the courtship, flowers, and being placed on a pedestal. The abuser then suddenly makes a comment denying they said anything about getting married. They go on to say the partner is “crazy” for thinking that. Blame is then projected upon the partner, and the partner is dizzy with confusion, recalling that, indeed, their significant other did discuss wedding bells and a future together.

The partner then experiences a state of cognitive dissonance—a hazy unreality of confusion. Such emotional abuse renders the target confused and reeling with heartache that the pace of the relationship has slammed to an abrupt halt, in addition to feelings of betrayal and being blamed.

End quote Andrea Schneider LCSW

Okay, let's hang onto a few ideas from the article: "a sense of unreality, confusion, and a mind-set of not trusting their own perception of the situation" and "Essentially, cognitive dissonance occurs when humans experience a state of holding two or more contradictory thoughts or beliefs in their cognition at one time. The result is a state of anxious confusion and a desire to reduce the resultant overwhelm and unbalanced perception." and " a state of cognitive dissonance—a hazy unreality of confusion...confused and reeling". The earlier quote also described "blankness" and "confusion".

Now, we have a good very basic understanding of cognitive dissonance.

In the beginning of this I noted that "we have to understand a bit about hypnosis, particularly the use of confusion and contradictions," and had quoted Jon Atack writing "Scientology itself is a two-terminal structure, where almost every assertion has a contradiction (as we saw in my piece on double binds). This induces cognitive dissonance — confusion — where the individual becomes unable to decide, so must ask for direction from the outside. The implants of Scientology tend to follow this pattern. Confusion technique is the most basic method of hypnosis. In the blank, while the mind hunts for sense, a positive suggestion (or command) can be quickly inserted." Jon Atack

And I will quote directly from an email: "I realized that throughout DMSMH he contradicts himself. I'd read it three times and never noticed. Presumably because the 'blank' that he relates to the mu actually occurs during the cognitive dissonance. Once you have confused someone, you insert the suggestions that will put them under your control ('if you knew what was wrong with your mind it, it wouldn't be wrong' is a favorite). Jon Atack

(DMSHMH is Dianetics the Modern Science of Mental Health and obviously "himself" and "he" refer to the author of Dianetics, Ronald Hubbard)

Okay, now we turn to the topic of hypnosis and what exactly is the confusion technique in hypnosis?

Here is a quote from cult expert Margaret Singer. Professor Singer interviewed over four thousand ex cult members and in my opinion along with Robert Jay Lifton described cults extremely well.

Hypnosis is classed as a psychological rather than a physiological method because it is essentially a form of highly focused mental concentration in which one person allows another to structure the object of the concentration and simultaneously suspends critical judgment and peripheral awareness. When this method is used in a cultic environment, it becomes a form of psychological manipulation and coercion because the cult leader implants suggestions aimed at his own agenda while the person is in a vulnerable state.  (page 151 Cults In Our Midst by Margaret Singer)

I am going to use some excerpts from my article Basic Introduction to Hypnosis in Scientology to look at hypnosis and the confusion technique itself.

First I want to bring up one of the most basic and to me truest ideas about hypnosis: HOW to cause it.

First I'll use a basic:
hyp·no·sis
hipˈnōsis/
noun
noun: hypnosis

the induction of a state of consciousness in which a person apparently loses the power of voluntary action and is highly responsive to suggestion or direction. Its use in therapy, typically to recover suppressed memories or to allow modification of behavior by suggestion, has been revived but is still controversial.

• the state of consciousness produced by hypnosis.
  
  Okay, that's from Google and seems simple enough. Induction just means causes, in the case of hypnosis. It's this state and has very, very little to do with will, intention or anything like that. THOSE ideas are distractions and have so little bearing on this that you should just say they, if they exist at all, do so in other contexts of analyzing thought.
  
  Now causing hypnotic states does not require willingness, cooperation or even any understanding of what hypnosis is. I cannot state that strongly enough. It also does not require enormous charisma or personal power or charm.
  Those things can help in some situations but are not mandatory.
  
  Altitude, or transference can help tremendously in some cases and applications but also are not always needed, at least not to be acknowledged by that name. Altitude can be called rapport or authority or prestige and is a fundamental for hypnosis to work. It has been said that hypnosis is suggestion plus imagination. But authority is the key. Lots of people suggest things to you which you imagine. But when they have authority then they can command and that makes it possible for hypnosis to occur. 

• BUT I cannot stress strongly enough that the shutting down or off of the critical factor (which I extensively discuss in it's own thread) is paramount to understanding the EFFECT of ANY hypnosis.
• 
  
•  Regarding trance logic here is a quote from Psychweb on trance logic: "Words, in trance logic, are interpreted much more literally, communication being conveyed by focusing on words themselves rather than ideas. There is also an associated decrease in critical judgement of language being processed, and an increased tolerance for incongruity."
  
  Trance logic is a state in hypnosis in which a person has their attention absorbed or focused so strongly that they don't exercise critical and independent thinking, they lose judgment regarding the information they take in and do not CONSCIOUSLY notice contradictions. They experience age regression and like a young child submit to authority and are willing to engage in magical thinking.
  
  This has tremendous importance in Scientology regarding cognitive dissonance as noticing contradiction is a way cognitive dissonance is created, but by making cognitive dissonance serve to create confusion which he uses to create hypnotic trances, Hubbard inspires dissonance then "solves" it by negating the contradiction inspired dissonance by knocking out the critical factor (the capacity for critical and independent thinking, including noticing contradiction) !!
  
  Now for confusion, probably Hubbard's true love in tech and his own mind:
• 
  I will start with a quote from Mark Tyrrell at the website Uncommon Knowledge:
  
  Using confusion for hypnosis may sound like a strange idea – even a confusing one! But the notion of pur-posefully and knowingly using confu-sion as a tool to elicit hypnotic re-sponses from the unconscious mind has a good pedigree.
• 
  No less an authority then Dr Milton Erickson, perhaps the greatest hypnotist who ever lived, believed that few things could capture the attention so well as confusion. And he was right. Think about it for a moment.
  
  If someone whose opinion you respect usually makes sense when they’re talking, then you’ll pay attention to them.  When on occasion they seem to be saying something important to you, but the meaning isn’t immediately clear, you’ll assume you need to pay more attention in order to grasp what they are saying.
  
  
  And if a point is not logically clear, you’ll focus more and more of your at-tention in the hope of understanding it eventually. And remember, focusing the attention is a key component of hypnosis. We are all dependent on our ability to decipher meaning from what happens to us and from what people say. When people are confused, their awareness turns inwards in a search for understanding – or escape.
• 
  It’s ironic in a way that so many people work on their communication in an attempt to make it more clear, yet the best hypnotists work on making (at least some of) their communication more confusing.If you look at people when they are confused, you’ll see they are highly focused. And strong focus is akin to hypnotic trance. When you can’t quite figure something out, but it seems really important that you do figure it out, you have an activated expectation.
  
  Focus and expectation are at the heart of the confusional technique. But why should being confused make you more suggestible?Being confused is like drowning in a sea of communication. You will grab onto anything that will keep you afloat. Any words or phrases that you can make sense of in the maelstrom are likely to affect you more strongly than usual – so if these words can be inter-preted as suggestions, this is probably how you will respond to them.
  
  This is a rule of human nature. If something is scarce we value it more highly and when we get it, we grab hold of it and we use it. When water is scarce it becomes more valuable to us and we don’t waste a drop when we get it. It’s the same with clear meaning if it sud-denly becomes scarce. Consider the confusion elicited when a stage show hypnotist tips back a subject unexpectedly.Confusion is followed by clarity when the unequivocal command to ‘sleep’ is uttered.We like puzzles and riddles because we expect clarity to eventually emerge from the confusion. People watch and read mystery thrillers for the same reason. This confusion as entertainment is an excellent tool for locking people’s attention.
  
  Okay, That is from a regular old hypnotist; who does not have my experiences as a Scientologist OR my status as a critic.
  
  Simple enough right ? Things that confuse CAN cause hypnosis, vague statements, unclear commands and many other things we'll go into soon.

 (note: I examined several hypnotic techniques used in the article Basic Introduction to Hypnosis in Scientology and recommend that anyone interested read the full article to read about mimicry, attention fixation, and repetition and repetition-with-variation, in addition to the confusion technique)

• 
  First up confusion: this has as many variations as there are ways to confuse or become confused ! That is a lot, but we can break it up into BROAD categories that pertain to Scientology, and hopefully chop this monster down to size.
• 
  Now it is also known as paradox or contradiction for good reason: if something seems paradoxical or to contradict itself in a way you can not quite figure out or get right then that is CONFUSION. I once read an interview with a class XII auditor who remarked that Hubbard's writings can appear "paradoxical and contrary" to people !
  
  See, she studied IT ALL and bought into the idea that buried in that HYPNOTIC, ATTENTION HOLDING mess was some DEEP profound wisdom - just UNDER the surface needing an insightful mind to plumb the depths !
  
  I will let you in on a little secret...confidentially...HE FOOLED HER !!
  
  Yeah, I am sure, yeah sucks to be her and waste fifteen or so years studying and slaving for him, BUT that does not change the FACTS as I see them in the slightest. See, data or info comes in PATTERNS and when it comes from a trusted source we expect it to align or agree, far more often than not with old or similar patterns or ESPECIALLY data from the exact same source !
  
  When it does not agree we can be confused, and try to grab onto data to REALIGN our confused mind. WE want uncertainty and doubt to go away, by our nature.
  
  It is a weakness that Hubbard  was only too happy to magnify and exploit MERCILESSLY. He gave patterns that very frequently contradicted one another BUT - BRILLIANTLY had many of the contradictions SPREAD OUT to not make it too obvious, Scientology is often spread out over decades, so you don't easily see that terms and concepts get redefined to be quite different and in fact at times the exact OPPOSITE ! He claimed this was due to high level research and other BS, but it was INTENTIONAL from the start !
  
  Alright, another variation on the confusion method that Hubbard  had so deeply ingrained as to be first nature was the offensive defensive technique. I have covered it in other threads but cannot overstate that to understand Hubbard or his tech you must understand that he was COMPELLED by his nature as a megalomaniacal, narcissistic pathological liar to think, write and speak in this technique WHENEVER possible. PERIOD. case closed.
  
  Of course he pioneered confusion in indoctrination as he has a student CONFUSE their own mind with contradictory info, as they can understand what they read - BUT convince THEMSELF they must have "MUs", as he taught them the "phenomena ALWAYS show" ! When really they are the symptoms of hypnosis and the STRESS of forced covert cognitive restructuring !
  
  Plainly it screws up your mind to have it broken down and rebuilt without your knowledge or consent ! So, when you sense or display signs from a subconscious level - he had to come up with excuses - and so the barriers to study were born !
  
  The names are just anything YOU could believe sounded studious, the PHENOMENA and more importantly YOUR new beliefs and behavior when encountering them are the key to understanding Scientology "Study Technology" ! YOU become a self-hypnotizer ! Doing HIS work for him, like a good slave.
• 
  He divides your mind against itself by misinforming you about its nature AND how to "help", er CONFUSE it.

I will close with another quote with several informative definitions of hypnosis from the online artic; Hypnotic Advancements by Dr Frank Valente:

In Krasner’s “The Wizard Within”, pg. 2, 1999, he states:
“I believe hypnosis to be a process which produces relaxation, distraction of the conscious mind, heightened suggestibility, and increased awareness, allowing access to the subconscious mind through the imagination. It also produces the ability to experience thoughts and images as real.”

In Ormond McGill’s, “The New Encyclopedia of Stage Hypnotism”, pg. 12, 1996, one finds:
“Basically, hypnosis can be regarded as a state of mind produced by the transference from one level of consciousness to another; a state with capacities for mental activities distinctly its own directly keyed to the automatic nervous system rather than the sympathetic (central nervous system) productive of the state of mind of somnambulism, i.e. subconscious behavior.”

And we couldn’t possibly leave out Dave Elman’s, “Hypnotherapy”, pg. 26, 1964:
“Hypnosis is a state of mind in which the critical faculty of the human is bypassed, and selective thinking established.” Continuing that, “the critical faculty of your mind is that part which passes judgment.”
Personally I must add that I far prefer Topher Morrison’s (Instructor for the Accelerated Hypnotherapy Certification Weekend Seminar put on by APU) interpretation of the critical faculty as “the part of you that cares to distinguish between reality and fantasy.”

In Stephen Gilligan’s “Therapeutic Trances” he states:
“Hypnosis is conceptualized as an experientially absorbing interactional sequence that produces an altered state of consciousness wherein self-expressions begin to happen automatically, without conscious mediation." (Gilligan, Stephen, G., 1987)

And finally from our dearly beloved Dr. Milton H. Erickson
In “The Collected Papers of Milton H. Erickson, Volume I" page 113, Dr. Erickson is quoted as stating:
“The hypnotic state is an experience that belongs to the subject, derives from the subject’s own accumulated learning's and memories, not necessarily consciously recognized, but possible of manifestations in a special state of non waking awareness”. And one of my favorite explanations can be found within The Collected Papers of Milton H. Erickson, Volume IV of the same series, page 224, “It is a state of consciousness – not unconsciousness or sleep – a state of consciousness or awareness in which there is a marked receptiveness to ideas and understandings and an increased willingness to respond either positively or negatively to those ideas. It derives from processes and functioning within the subject. And is not some mystical procedure, but rather a systematic utilization of experiential learning's– that is, the extensive learning's acquired through the process of living itself.”End quote

Here, I want to look at what a Scientologist does and believes during their indoctrination. I want to focus on a very particular part of the indoctrination. 

Hubbard lecturing Scientologists in the late 1950s (Channel 4 Television, “Secret Lives – L. Ron Hubbard”)

I am going to offer a little information on the general methods used in Scientology indoctrination for context, so you can see what is in the mind of an individual Scientologist and what they are doing while being indoctrinated.

This is not meant to describe everything that occurs in Scientology or everything that occurs in the indoctrination or even everything that happens to a person in a Scientology course room. Far, far more is involved in the entire range of techniques used in Scientology in general and in the course room in particular. 

I am going to try to cover just enough to make the information understandable in context. 

First off in Scientology a person can take courses and staff members are required to take courses and the public are strongly encouraged. Sea Org members are also required to take courses.

But in Scientology indoctrination one cannot study materials like in a high school or college. No. In those places one can disagree with teachers or references. That's not acceptable in Scientology indoctrination.

In Scientology one must use a series of techniques called "Study Technology". In study technology or study tech, one is assumed to only disagree with the materials if one has a "misunderstood word", meaning a word or symbol you don't fully understand. 

Now, to even begin learning about Scientology one is required to use the techniques in Scientology to examine Scientology. If you buy a course you are required to act as if Scientology principles are true and use study tech methods to examine the methods themselves. 

Study tech is extremely different than the methods used in schools or in independent study or in merely reading things, taking tests, and writing papers and reports. 

This is vital to understanding Scientology. 

If you just imagine people reading in a Scientology course room you are missing the crucial difference between study tech and actual study. 

Here's a series of quotes from Hubbard that outline some basic concepts in study technology:

The First Barrier – Lack of Mass

A student who encounters this barrier will tend to feel squashed, bent, sort of spinny, sort of dead, bored and exasperated. He can wind up with his face feeling squashed, with headaches, and with his stomach feeling funny. He can feel dizzy from time to time and very often his eyes can hurt.

The Second Barrier – Too Steep a Gradient

There is a different set of physiological reactions which occur as a result of this barrier. When one hits too steep a gradient, a sort of confusion or reelingness is experienced.

The Third Barrier – the Misunderstood Word

Going past a word or symbol for which one does not have a proper definition gives one a distinctly blank or washed-out feeling. The person will get a "not there" feeling and will begin to feel a nervous hysteria. These are manifestations distinct from either of the other two barriers.

Have you ever come to the bottom of a page only to realize you didn’t remember what you had just read? That is the phenomenon of a misunderstood word, and one will always be found just before the material became blank in your mind.

HCO Bulletin of 25 June 1971 (revised 25 November 1974),

"Barriers to Study" Ron Hubbard

In the Scientology Handbook a simple version of Hubbard's study tech is presented with his method 3 word clearing presented as Basic Word Clearing. It's a foundation of how a Scientologist approaches indoctrination and the materials he studies.

Basic Word Clearing

Basic Word Clearing is the method of finding a misunderstood word by looking earlier in the text for a misunderstood word than where one is having trouble. This is the most basic method of Word Clearing used in Scientology.

A student must know how to keep himself tearing along successfully in his studies. He should be able to handle anything that slows or interferes with his progress. He applies the Study Technology to assist himself.

A student who uses Study Technology will look up each word he comes to that he doesn’t understand and will never leave a word behind him that he doesn’t know the meaning of.

If he runs into trouble, the student himself, his study partner or his instructor (in Scientology called a Supervisor) uses Basic Word Clearing to handle anything that slowed or interfered with his progress.

Waiting to become groggy or to “dope off” (feel tired, sleepy or foggy as though doped or drugged) as the only detection of misunderstood words before handling is waiting too long. If you have ever seen a student falling asleep over his book, then you have seen dope-off. Long before that point, someone should have made the student look for a misunderstood word. The time to look for the misunderstood word is as soon as the student slows down or isn’t quite as “bright” as he was fifteen minutes before. It is not a misunderstood phrase or idea or concept but a misunderstood WORD. This always occurs before the subject itself is not understood.

Basic Word Clearing is done as follows:

1. The student is not flying along and is not so “bright” as he was or he may exhibit just plain lack of enthusiasm or be taking too long on the course or be yawning or disinterested or doodling or daydreaming, etc.

2. The student must then look earlier in the text for a misunderstood word. There is one always; there are no exceptions. It may be that the misunderstood word is two pages or more back, but it is always earlier in the text than where the student is now.

3. The word is found. The student recognizes it in looking back for it. Or, if the student can’t find it, one can take words from the text that could be the misunderstood word and ask, “What does _____ mean?” to see if the student gives the correct definition.

4. The student looks up the word found in a dictionary and clears it per the steps of clearing a misunderstood word described above. He uses it verbally several times in sentences of his own composition until he has obviously demonstrated he understands the word by the composition of his sentences.

5. The student now reads the text that contained the misunderstood word. If he is not now “bright,” eager to get on with it, feeling happier, etc., then there is another misunderstood word earlier in the text. This is found by repeating steps 2–5.

6. When the student is bright and feeling happier, he comes forward, studying the text from where the misunderstood word was to the area of the subject he did not understand (where step 1 began).

The student will now be enthusiastic about his study of the subject, and that is the end result of Basic Word Clearing. (The result won’t be achieved if a misunderstood word was missed or if there is an earlier misunderstood word in the text. If so, repeat steps 2–5.) If the student is now enthusiastic, have him continue studying.

Good Word Clearing is a system of backtracking. You have to look earlier than the point where the student became dull or confused and you’ll find that there’s a word that he doesn’t understand somewhere before the trouble started. If he doesn’t brighten up when the word is found and cleared, there will be a misunderstood word even before that one.

This will be very clear to you if you understand that if it is not resolving, the thing the student is apparently having trouble with is not the thing the student is having trouble with. Otherwise, it would resolve, wouldn’t it? If he knew what he didn’t understand, he could resolve it himself. So to talk to him about what he thinks he doesn’t understand just gets nowhere. The trouble is earlier.

Zeroing In on the Word

The formula is to find out where the student wasn’t having any trouble and find out where the student is now having trouble and the misunderstood word will be in between. It will be at the tag end—the last part—of where he wasn’t having trouble.

Basic Word Clearing is tremendously effective when done as described here. From the Scientology Handbook based on the works of Ron Hubbard

I will now present a brief quote from Ronald Hubbard in which he states that:

CONFUSED IDEAS

"Whenever a person has a confused idea of something or believes there is some conflict of ideas it is always true that a misunderstood word exists at the bottom of that confusion."

End quote Ronald  Hubbard

That quote is from a bulletin entitled Confused Ideas written on 31 August, 1971.

Here are several more excerpts from it:

"Every green body of students will argue and fuss about ideas or confusions in the directions or material they are given to read.

They will generate weird ideas and erroneous concepts of what the text says. They do wrong things and say the text said to. They ask strange ideas of their instructors. They clamor for “clarifications”.

And at the bottom of all this is simply misunderstood words.

There is not also misunderstood ideas. There is only the misunderstood word which breeds, then, huge towering wrong ideas.

A misunderstood word breeds strange ideas.

end quote, Ronald Hubbard

 

You can see that the materials are not open to discussion or criticism or anything like that. You are to accept and agree with them and remember every definition of every term used, whether a regular English term or one of the thousands and thousands of Scientology terms, no exceptions.

 

 So, Hubbard claimed "misunderstood words" are responsible for confusion and a misunderstood word will always be found before one became blank or "Going past a word or symbol for which one does not have a proper definition gives one a distinctly blank or washed-out feeling. The person will get a "not there" feeling and will begin to feel a nervous hysteria." and "Have you ever come to the bottom of a page only to realize you didn’t remember what you had just read? That is the phenomenon of a misunderstood word, and one will always be found just before the material became blank in your mind."

So, this is a lot to take in. Hubbard has a student believing in his three "barriers to study" and looking for signs of them constantly while on course. 

I want to point this out so it is clear that if a person in Scientology indoctrination, a "student" is looking for feeling "squashed, bent, sort of spinny, sort of dead, bored and exasperated. He can wind up with his face feeling squashed, with headaches, and with his stomach feeling funny. He can feel dizzy from time to time and very often his eyes can hurt." and to see if "a sort of confusion or reelingness is experienced." and "a distinctly blank or washed-out feeling. The person will get a "not there" feeling and will begin to feel a nervous hysteria."

I also want to point out that in Scientology indoctrination a person is not only constantly looking for these phenomena but trying to remember which are associated with which of the three barriers because the techniques to handle each one are different! 

It can take a long time to memorize which phenomena are allegedly caused by which alleged barrier!

So, the person in a Scientology course room is not a normal person reading books and course packs and listening to taped lectures. No, they are a nervous wreck hunting for misunderstood words and a lack of mass and skipped gradients. 

So, they have extreme anxiety as they try to avoid getting a checkout or a spot check in which they are asked to define a term and fail! It is a disaster!

In addition, the person must act as if any confusion or disagreement with the materials studied in Scientology is because they must not understand the materials. Always. 

Now, acting as if you believe something and behaving as if it was true is something that has been studied.

I am again going to quote Leon Festinger from his book A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance: "There is evidence in our data that once a change in behavior has occurred, a change in beliefs is likely to follow. (Page 121)"

Margaret Singer in her book Cults In Our Midst provides a tremendous amount of essential information regarding cults.

First a quote that struck me instantly. It reminded me of an analysis of Scientology written by a class XII auditor. She said Hubbard's writings can seem contradictory and paradoxical. That is actually intentional.

"The more complicated and filled with contradictions the new system is and the more difficult it is to learn, the more effective the conversion process will be." (page 67) Margaret Singer

The contradictions serve to thoroughly confuse Hubbard's victims and help to increase their suggestibility. With hundreds or thousands of contradictions in millions of words of doctrine the effect is compounded by unimaginably immense repetition.

 "In cultic groups, the individual member is always wrong, and the system is always right." (page 68) Margaret Singer

This is a key component of cults - the individual always must submit to a position as an intellectual subordinate to the group, doctrine or leader. A relationship based on mutual respect and human rights has no place in a cult. The leader is always above any accountability and without humility or compassion. The system is always totalistic and without means of reform and progress. If it lacks these qualities it fails to be cultic.

"You affirm that you accept and understand the ideology by beginning to talk in the simple catchphrases particular to the group. This "communication" has no foundation since, in reality, you have little understanding of the system beyond the catchphrases." (page 69) Margaret Singer

This is particularly relevant to Scientology as Hubbard used many thousands of new words. Many of which are the opposite of their original meaning or used to state something the exact opposite of the truth to hide Hubbard's intentions and crimes. He used phrases twisted and turned to fool people. Many of his terms lack clear meaning because he uses far too many new terms with reference to one another and multiple contradictory definitions. The amount of terms and definitions to attempt to learn and coordinate is simply overwhelming and often absorbs so much of the cult member's attention that clear understanding and thought are severely inhibited.

 "Loading the language. As members continue to formulate their ideas in the group's jargon, this language serves the purpose of constricting members' thinking and shutting down critical thinking abilities. At first, translating from their native tongue into "groupspeak" forces members to censor, edit, and slow down spontaneous bursts of criticism or oppositional ideas." (page 70) Margaret Singer

Of all cult methods this may be the one Hubbard focused on the most. With his extensive new language drummed into his victims' minds through extreme repetition. The beliefs within the language replace the Scientologists' own. And often nearly entirely replace critical thinking.

Getting almost complete control over cultists' minds is one of the main intentions Hubbard had in his chosen methods.

By continuosly adding new terms and concepts and redefining old ones with explicitly contradictory definitions Hubbard tried to perpetually maintain the overwhelming confusion cult members usually experience when first joining a cult. This is compounded by Scientology's extensive decades long indoctrination process. It keeps the translation process ongoing rather than temporary. This helps to heighten confusion, anxiety, and suggestibility.

 "One international group, for example, has dictionaries for members to use. In one of these dictionaries, criticism is defined as "justification for having done an overt." Then one looks up overt and the dictionary states: "overt act: an overt act is not just injuring someone or something; an overt act is an act of omission or commission which does the least good for the least number of dynamics or the most harm to the greatest number of dynamics." Then the definition of dynamics says: There could be said to be eight urges in life...." And so, one can search from term to term trying to learn this new language." (page 70) Margaret Singer

Obviously to any veteran Scientologist this refers to Scientology and Hubbard's methods of defining new terms with mountains of others in never ending chains of words to look up.

 "Now, when you engage in cooperative activity with peers in an environment that you do not realize is artificially constructed, you do not perceive your interactions to be coerced." (page 76) Margaret Singer

Hubbard knew this and used the already loyal group members habits to persuade new members that Scientology was reasonable and normal for people to participate in.

 "In other words, you will think that you came upon the belief and behaviors yourself." (page 76) Margaret Singer

And as a key element to covert persuasion Hubbard made sure Scientologists consider the conclusions he wants drawn to be their own and to then base further and further ideas that agree with his to be independently and objectively decided.

 This helps to make the victims highly unwilling to examine these ideas.  And the behaviors he ruthlessly demands through his doctrine are very clearly accepted or rewarded for compliance and entirely condemned for noncomformity. 

But in Scientology the cult member cannot admit this and so habitually denies the totalitarian nature of the cult and is caught in an almost inescapable bind of progressive submission and further behavior in compliance with Hubbard's doctrine.

"Peer pressure is very important to this process:

If you say it in front of others, you'll do it.

Once you do it, you'll think it.

Once you think it (in an environment you do not perceive to be coercive), you'll believe that you thought it yourself." (page 76) Margaret Singer

Now, this is a lot to take in. The idea that a person, Ronald Hubbard, could convince people to look at his words as infallible and see any disagreement or confusion they have or any criticism and recognition of contradiction in his materials, particularly contradiction between the ideas he expressed and other ideas he himself expressed, as due to a lack of understanding in the people themselves is an extraordinary claim.  

But, everything we have seen so far supports it.  

We saw in cognitive dissonance theory how contradiction can create anxiety and confusion and mental discomfort.

We saw how confusion can be used in hypnosis.

We saw that hypnosis is a state of heightened suggestibility and that people who are confused can seek information to grab onto to end the confusion and mental discomfort, and importantly in trance logic, a hypnotic state, one has increased tolerance for contradiction and is more suggestible.

We also saw that the people who "study" Scientology are required to act as if the doctrine is infallible and any difficulty is due to "barriers to study", meaning flaws in the student, never the materials.

Leon Festinger and Margaret Singer noted that behaving as though something is true can lead to believing it and thinking you reached that conclusion independently. 

But there is one more thing to address: did Ronald Hubbard intend to use his study tech and misunderstood word idea to confuse and control people? Did he try to implant ideas in their minds? 

Fortunately for us, I believe he left ample evidence in that regard. 

After everything else we have examined we have the astounding question:

But there is one more thing to address: did Ronald Hubbard intend to use his study tech and misunderstood word idea to confuse and control people? Did he try to implant ideas in their minds? 

To answer this we have a wealth of resources in the form of his own words.

I was able to realize that the confusion on study in Scientology is from contradictions and cognitive dissonance it instills and the relief of this in word clearing comes from setting aside the confusion and accepting the ideas and definitions Hubbard guides you to. 

Hubbard wrote: "Waiting to become groggy or to “dope off” (feel tired, sleepy or foggy as though doped or drugged) as the only detection of misunderstood words before handling is waiting too long. If you have ever seen a student falling asleep over his book, then you have seen dope-off." Ronald Hubbard 

He described a student feeling tired or groggy as being due to misunderstood words. Okay. 

But he also said something else:

These quotes are from the Philadelphia Doctorate Course tapes, a series of lectures delivered by Hubbard in the early fifties. PDC stands for Philadelphia Doctorate Course lectures and the number next to it indicates which lecture a particular quote is from, so for example "31" in "PDC-31" represents the thirty-first tape in the series. "pg" is "page" abbreviated. 

Originally Posted by PDC-31 pg 16
BASIC AGREEMENT AND PROVE IT!

"So, in order to _____ you have to desire it.

Now, this mechanism is, incidently, one of the interesting points of hypnotism.

When a person gets very groggy in hypnosis, he’s been put down to a point where he’s very obedient." Ron Hubbard

So a groggy student is told to stop and look up a word, but a hypnotist can have a groggy person be hypnotized and obedient, according to Hubbard. Hmm.

What else did Hubbard say about this ? 

Back to the Philadelphia Doctorate Course (PDC) tapes

Originally Posted by PDC-05 pg 7 SCALES OF HANDLING 2.12.52

"Well, that’s… that’s very interesting because we have hypnotism which can be demonstrated as a phenomenon,

and we show that the greater and greater agreement,

all you do to hypnotize somebody is just make him agree… agree… agree 

and after that he’ll see anything.

He’ll do anything,

he’ll see anything.

He agrees, agrees, agrees." Ron Hubbard

Originally Posted by PDC-15 pg 4 THE LOGICS:

"he has volunteered.

And the next thing you know, you’ll find out he has agreed.

How is all this done?

It’s done by hypnosis; it’s done in various other ways.

Hypnosis is just a sudden agreement. 

And uh… it’s done in various ways

and then he comes down this whole long scale of agreement 

and things get more and more in agreement 

and they are probably more and more actually to his personal discredit

and uh…

antipathetic to his best beingness, habit he’s still going down the line,

and goes down the line further, ...and further, ...and further, ...and further.

And this fellow goes into apathy and he goes further and further

and further. And of course, he goes more and more under control." Ron Hubbard

So, way back in 1952 Hubbard said hypnosis is agreement and a groggy person is obedient.

But Could this really apply to a student reading or listening to a tape?

Hubbard had definite ideas on this:


"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…if the operator can heighten his own altitude with regard to the subject…he doesn’t have to put the subject to sleep. What he says will still react as a hypnotic suggestion….With parity, such as occurs between acquaintances, friends, fellow students and so on, there is no hypnotic suggestion” (Education and Dianetics, 11 November 1950, Research and Discovery, volume 4). Ron Hubbard Source Jon Atack 

Here's a longer excerpt:

ALTITUDE INSTRUCTION

“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 … It keeps people in a state of confusion, and when their minds are slightly confused they are in a hypnotic trance. Anytime 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.” (Hubbard, Research & Discovery, volume 4, p.324)

"One error, however, must be remarked upon. The examination system employed is not much different from a certain hypnotic technique. One induces a state of confusion in the subject by raising his anxieties of what may happen if he does not pass. One then "teaches" at a mind which is anxious and confused. That mind does not then rationalize, it merely records and makes a pattern. If the pattern is sufficiently strong to be regurgitated verbatim on an examination paper, the student is then given a good grade and passed"

[End Quote]

Ron Hubbard lecture 29 August 1950, "Educational Dianetics." Source Arnie Lerma

Remember how Hubbard described nervous hysteria as coming from misunderstood words? Isn't that a mind that's confused and anxious? 

So, back in 1950 Hubbard saw altitude, also called authority or prestige or transference, as the key to hypnosis and NOT formal induction.  Interesting. So the student could take in what a source provides as hypnotic suggestions and be obedient if groggy, according to Hubbard if altitude has been achieved. 

Hubbard had other specific ideas:

"Good Word Clearing is a system of backtracking. You have to look earlier than the point where the student became dull or confused and you’ll find that there’s a word that he doesn’t understand somewhere before the trouble started. If he doesn’t brighten up when the word is found and cleared, there will be a misunderstood word even before that one.

This will be very clear to you if you understand that if it is not resolving, the thing the student is apparently having trouble with is not the thing the student is having trouble with. Otherwise, it would resolve, wouldn’t it? If he knew what he didn’t understand, he could resolve it himself. So to talk to him about what he thinks he doesn’t understand just gets nowhere. The trouble is earlier." Ron Hubbard

So Hubbard had directed a student to look earlier and look up words, sometimes English words and sometimes Scientology words to clear as a response to blankness or the not there feeling or washed out feeling or a nervous hysteria. He directed the student to go earlier and that what the student is having trouble with isn't what they are having trouble with. A very confusing statement. Why confuse a student about what they don't get ? Check this out:


Quotes from  Ron Hubbard on the Confusion Technique: 
[Quote] 
"Now, if it comes to a pass where it's very important whether or not this person acts or inacts as you wish, in interpersonal relations one of the dirtier tricks is to hang the person up on a maybe and create a confusion. And then create the confusion to the degree that your decision actually is implanted hypnotically.

The way you do this is very simple. When the person advances an argument against your decision, you never confront his argument but confront the premise on which his argument is based. That is the rule. He says, "But my professor always said that water boiled at 212 degrees."
You say, "Your professor of what?"
"My professor of physics."

"What school? How did he know?" Completely off track! You're no longer arguing about whether or not water boils at 212 degrees, but you're arguing about professors. And he will become very annoyed, but he won't know quite what he is annoyed about. You can do this so adroitly and so artfully that you can actually produce a confusion of the depth of hypnosis. The person simply goes down tone scale to a point where they're not sure of their own name.

And at that point you say, "Now, you do agree to go out and draw the water out of the well, don't you?"

"Yes-anything!" And he'll go out and draw the water out of the well."
[End Quote] 
 Ron Hubbard Lecture, 20 May 1952 "Decision."
source Lermanet.com

"If you can produce enough chaos — it says in a textbook on this subject — if you can produce enough chaos you can assume the total management of a psyche — if you can produce enough chaos.

The way you hypnotize people is to misalign them in their own control and realign them under your control, which necessitates a certain amount of chaos, don’t you see?

Now, the way to win through all of this is simply to let the guy have his stable data, if they are stable data and if they aren’t, let him have some more that are stable data and he’ll win and you’ll win.

In other words, you can take any sphere — any sphere which is relatively chaotic and throw almost any stable datum into it with enough of a statement and you will get an alignment of data on that stable datum. You see this clearly?

The whole society is liable to seize upon some stupid stable datum and thereafter this becomes a custom of some sort and you have the whole field of morals and mores and so forth stretching out before your view."

Ronald Hubbard (1955, 23 August). Axiom 53: The Axiom Of The Stable Datum. Academy Lecture Series/Conquest of Chaos,   (CofC-2). Lecture conducted from Washington, DC.

"Another way to hypnotize somebody would be to put him in the middle of chaos, everything going in all directions, everybody shooting at him and suddenly throw him a stable datum, and make it a successful stable datum so that it’s all called off once — the moment he grabs this.

 And this gives you the entire formula of brainwashing: interrogate, question, lights, pain, upset, accusation, duress, fear, privation and we throw him the stable datum.

 We say, “If you’ll just adopt ‘Ughism’ which is the most wonderful thing in the world, all this will cease,” and finally the fellow says, “All right, I’m an ‘Ugh.’ ” Immediately you stop torturing him and pat him on the head and he’s all set.

Ever after he would believe that the moment he deserted “Ughism,” he would be drowned in chaos and that “Ughism” alone was the thing which kept the world stable; and he would sell his life or his grandmother to keep “Ughism” going.

 And there we have to do with the whole subject of loyalty, except — except that we haven’t dealt with loyalty at all on an analytical level but the whole subject of loyalty is a reactive subject we have dealt with. "

Author: Ronald Hubbard

Document date: 1955, 21 September, 1955, 21 September

Document title: Postulates 1,2,3,4 In Processing - New Understanding of Axiom 36, Postulates 1,2,3,4 In Processing - New Understanding of Axiom 36

So, according to Hubbard redirection of attention can confuse someone enough to achieve the depth of hypnosis. But that's what his having the student always look for something to resolve that isn't what he's having trouble with does. He's utterly confused. Hubbard had more to say on confusion and hypnosis:

“A confusion can be defined as any set of factors or circumstances which do not seem to have any immediate solution. More broadly, a confusion is random motion.” 
“Until one selects one datum, one factor, one particular in a confusion of particles, the confusion continues. The one thing selected and used becomes the stable datum for the remainder.“Any body of knowledge, more particularly and exactly, is built fromone datum. That is its stable datum. Invalidate it and the entire body of knowledge falls apart. A stable datum does not have to be the correct one. It is simply the one that keeps things from being in a confusion and on which others are aligned.” – Ron Hubbard  [excerpts from the article, Confusion and the Stable Datum, Scientology Handbook]



Below are quotes from a tape lecture entitled Structure/Function.

RON THE HYPNOTIST

Structure/Function: 11 December 1952 page 1

"All processes are based upon the original observation

that an individual could have implanted in him by hypnosis

and removed at will any obsession or aberration,

compulsion, desire, inhibition which you could think of – by hypnosis.“ 

"Hypnosis, then, was the wild variable;

sometimes it worked,

sometimes it didn’t work.

It worked on some people; it didn’t work on other people.

Any time you have a variable that is as wild as this, study it.

Well, I had a high certainty already –

I had survival. Got that in 1938 or before that. And uh…" Ron Hubbard

So he was trying to confuse a student, get them obedient and accepting his altitude and then his definitions for Scientology terms along with English words and his doctrine through tapes and writings.

All this was to get people under his influence ? To overcome the limits hypnosis had of sometimes working and to also be applied remotely. Remember Hubbard described hypnosis as requiring confusion, which his method creates and altitude.

So Hubbard was creating a confusion then with altitude trying to suggest his words as the answer to the confusion. A confusion from contradictions can create mental discomfort and cognitive dissonance. Cognitive Dissonance has a moment of blankness and hesitation.

That's where Hubbard inserted the suggestion. The confused person is meant to accept the suggestion without question. What is the suggestion ? Hubbard's reality through his doctrine.

Hubbard inserted his stable datum to relieve confusion, really to have it taken in on a hypnotic level. Hubbard knew his information didn't need to be correct. It just needed to align information to relieve confusion and control a student.

Here's something else Hubbard said:

From the PDC tapes, lecture entitled How To Handle Them

Originally Posted by PDC-04 pg6
HOW TO HANDLE THEM

"The hypnotist is only interested in one thing, really.

The hypnotist is interested in taking the control of this individual."  Ron Hubbard

Originally Posted by STRUCTURE/FUNCTION:11.12.52

"I turned around and I had hypnotism. 

I had a little advantage there because I was using hypnotism that I had learned in India.

And that doesn’t bear too much resemblance to Western hypnotism.

You’ve got variety of hypnotism there. There are ninety thousand ways of putting a guy out – I swear there must be that many ways.

I mean, you can just run on and on and on.

There’s various things you do;

you treat the perceptic lines in certain ways

and guys go Ka- boom!“ Ronald Hubbard

I dug deep into the issue in the blog post Insidious Enslavement: Study Technology. Here are a few quotes:

Quotes from  Ron Hubbard on the Confusion Technique: 
[Quote] 
Now, if it comes to a pass where it's very important whether or not this person acts or inacts as you wish, in interpersonal relations one of the dirtier tricks is to hang the person up on a maybe and create a confusion. And then create the confusion to the degree that your decision actually is implanted hypnotically.
The way you do this is very simple. When the person advances an argument against your decision, you never confront his argument but confront the premise on which his argument is based. That is the rule. He says, "But my professor always said that water boiled at 212 degrees."
You say, "Your professor of what?"
"My professor of physics."
"What school? How did he know?" Completely off track! You're no longer arguing about whether or not water boils at 212 degrees, but you're arguing about professors. And he will become very annoyed, but he won't know quite what he is annoyed about. You can do this so adroitly and so artfully that you can actually produce a confusion of the depth of hypnosis. The person simply goes down tone scale to a point where they're not sure of their own name.
And at that point you say, "Now, you do agree to go out and draw the water out of the well, don't you?"
"Yes-anything!" And he'll go out and draw the water out of the well. 
[End Quote] 
 Ron Hubbard Lecture, 20 May 1952 "Decision."
source Lermanet.com

---

Also, even earlier, in 1950: 
[Quote] 
One error, however, must be remarked upon. The examination system employed is not much different from a certain hypnotic technique. One induces a state of confusion in the subject by raising his anxieties of what may happen if he does not pass. One then "teaches" at a mind which is anxious and confused. That mind does not then rationalize, it merely records and makes a pattern. If the pattern is sufficiently strong to be regurgitated verbatim on an examination paper, the student is then given a good grade and passed. 
[End Quote] 
 Ron Hubbard lecture 29 August 1950, "Educational Dianetics."
 source Lermanet.com 

---

 He also knew that when one is confused they can feel relief (i.e. brighter TEMPORARILY) when they get an "answer", even if it doesn't address the confusion!

“A confusion can be defined as any set of factors or circumstances which do not seem to have any immediate solution. More broadly, a confusion is random motion.” 

“Until one selects one datum, one factor, one particular in a confusion of particles, the confusion continues. The one thing selected and used becomes the stable datum for the remainder."

“Any body of knowledge, more particularly and exactly, is built from one datum. That is its stable datum. Invalidate it and the entire body of knowledge falls apart. A stable datum does not have to be the correct one. It is simply the one that keeps things from being in a confusion and on which others are aligned.” – Ron Hubbard [excerpts from the article, Confusion and the Stable Datum, Scientology Handbook]

“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…if the operator can heighten his own altitude with regard to the subject…he doesn’t have to put the subject to sleep. What he says will still react as a hypnotic suggestion….With parity, such as occurs between acquaintances, friends, fellow students and so on, there is no hypnotic suggestion”  Ronald Hubbard (Education and Dianetics, 11 November 1950, Research and Discovery, volume 4).  Source Jon Atack

Remember the statements from Jon Atack we started with?

"Scientology itself is a two-terminal structure, where almost every assertion has a contradiction (as we saw in my piece on double binds). This induces cognitive dissonance — confusion — where the individual becomes unable to decide, so must ask for direction from the outside. The implants of Scientology tend to follow this pattern. Confusion technique is the most basic method of hypnosis. In the blank, while the mind hunts for sense, a positive suggestion (or command) can be quickly inserted." Jon Atack

 

"Scientology can be stripped down into a series of implants. These are patterns of behaviour that will persist even after auditing is abandoned. " Jon Atack

And

 "I realized that throughout DMSMH he contradicts himself. I'd read it three times and never noticed. Presumably because the 'blank' that he relates to the mu actually occurs during the cognitive dissonance. Once you have confused someone, you insert the suggestions that will put them under your control ('if you knew what was wrong with your mind it, it wouldn't be wrong' is a favorite). Jon Atack

(DMSHMH is Dianetics the Modern Science of Mental Health and obviously "himself" and "he" refer to the author of Dianetics, Ronald Hubbard)

I hope that I have explained that Scientology founder through the use of his misunderstood word doctrine and method described in the Scientology Handbook as Basic Word Clearing intended to confuse people. 

He intended to create anxiety in people and to overwhelm them with far too much information, far too complex in form and to use new definitions for thousands of terms to create a state of heightened anxiety and to use tremendous amounts of contradictions to increase suggestibility in people and to then implant his ideas found in his definitions in their vulnerable minds, minds that are in a state of diminished independent and critical thinking.

I will conclude this with a collection of statements from Hubbard to Hubbard, his private writings intended only for himself. 

Hubbard made statements in his affirmations (private self-hypnosis commands intended for himself and no one else)  that I call the Rosetta Stone of Scientology because they help ex Scientologists decipher the information in Scientology.

I have them posted at Mockingbird's Nest as 

A Psychiatric View With Comments On The Admissions By Lafayette Ronald Hubbard (1947)

I will put a few excerpts here to highlight Hubbard's intention regarding hypnosis and in general. To understand Scientology I absolutely recommend reading the post in full. These excerpts are just for this post on his intentions.

LRH is obviously L Ron Hubbard

LRH:Your psychology is good. You worked to darken your own children. This failure, with them, was only apparent. The evident lack of effectiveness was "ordered." The same psychology works perfectly on everyone else. You use it with great confidence. 

LRH: Material things are yours for the asking. Men are your slaves. Elemental spirits are your slaves. You are power among powers, light in the darkness, beauty in all. 

LRH : Your psychology is advanced and true and wonderful. It hypnotizes people. It predicts their emotions, for you are their ruler. 

LRH: No matter what lies you may tell others they have no physical effect on you of any kind.

LRH: Lord help women when you begin to fondle them. You are master of their bodies, master of their souls as you may consciously wish. You have no karma to pay for these acts. 

LRH: You can tell all the romantic tales you wish. You will remember them, you do remember them. But you know which ones were lies. You are so logical you will tell nothing which cannot be believed. 

LRH: You use the minds of men. They do not use your mind or affect it in any way. 

So, Hubbard in his private affirmations clearly described his "psychology" as such that it "hypnotizes" people and that men are his slaves and regarding women that he was master of their bodies and souls. He described himself as being able to lie and be both believed and he was immune to physical effects from his lies. He described himself as the ruler of people who uses the minds of men but they do not use or affect his mind. 

Imagine having these goals and using self-hypnosis commands repeatedly for years to bring these things into your mind. 

I hope that I have been thorough and covered all the points I started with to concisely support and demonstrate each one.