Scientology Conditions - Their Purpose and Practice
Back in 2016, I wrote a post describing how a Scientology operative attempted to upset an ex Scientologist (Lori Hodgson) and quoted another ex Scientologist (Vistaril) who pointed out the Hubbard references on this. I realized the same exact technique was used on myself.
I recently reflected on the techniques used in Scientology and the fact that many, possibly most, are hypnotic in origin and nature.
I believe that if I look at the way Hubbard described brainwashing and hypnosis and the lower ethics conditions in Scientology a very different view of the ethics conditions, their purpose and results may come to light.
Many people have said the ethics conditions are meant as a system of control, or a way to get one to abandon their own ethics and submit to the authority of Scientology and this is certainly true enough but I believe I have uncovered more evidence that this is true and how it was intended to be accomplished than has been revealed before.
Note: here is a link to my blog archive by topic which has almost all my older posts at the blog sorted into categories for your convenience.
From: Brainwashing: Standard Tech in Scientology
Several days ago Lori Hodgson was harassed by someone from the Scientology cult. I copied and examined the comments by Vistaril at the Underground Bunker blog by Tony Ortega on this. I realized that the brainwashing techniques of Scientology which Vistaril quoted Ron Hubbard on (described as introversion) were also the exact same method that was used on me in an attempt to drive me to madness or death.
I had spent hundreds of hours trying to understand exactly what had been done and how. I believe the same method has been used on Bob Minton and many others over the years. I will quote Vistaril and some Hubbard references that relate to his methods. I had written about my experience in A Million Years In Hell but feel the exact methods used sheds new light on what Scientology attempted to do to me and has done to ruin utterly several others.
Vistaril to Lori Hodgson
Stay strong, Lori!
That comment from Scientology is a particularly nasty one. It is a classic use of KSW Standard L Ron Hubbard Scientology "Shattering Suppression" Tech™ in that it is a full-on attempt to "introvert". Note the wording . . .
(below is the comment from a Scientology operative intended to introvert Lori Hodgson )
YOU won’t, Lori. Every action I have seen YOU doing in the past years has further alienated YOUR kids from YOU. I would think YOU know that but YOU do it anyway. But maybe YOU don’t see it. So I am telling YOU. YOU can’t force them to love YOU again.
. . . is designed to focus the subject's attention in on themselves. It also employs the use of "Enemy Tactics" in its attempt to stir up "aberrative" wog HE&R concepts like love and attachment to family. And then there's the threat aspect as pointed out below with Cash Bolt's connection to weapons. Cruel, nasty, critical, intimidating and vindictive, just as L Ron Hubbard would have liked it. Wouldn't surprise me in the least if the comment was the work of David Miscavige himself. It takes a special kind of arsehole to come up with that sort of mind fuckery.
From an academic point of view, it is interesting to show just how duplicitous L Ron Hubbard was in his advocacy of such practises. Of all the words used to describe Scientology, perhaps the one which Scientologists rail against most is "brainwashing". But look how the term is defined in L Ron Hubbard's Administrative Dictionary . . .
BRAINWASHING, 1. brainwashing is a very simple mechanism. One gets a person to agree that something might be a certain way and then drives him by introverting him and through self-criticism to the possibility that it is that way. Only then does a man believe that the erroneous fact was a truth . . .
. . . now, contrast and compare L Ron Hubbard's "Shattering Supression" Tech™. One will find it is littered with instructions on how to introvert people and organizations. A stark example can be found in L Ron Hubbard's HCO Policy Letter of 15 August 1960 Dept. Of Government Affairs . . .
. . . The goal of the Department is to bring the government and hostile philosophies or societies into a state of complete compliance with the goals of Scientology. This is done by high level ability to control and in its absence by low level ability to overwhelm. Introvert such agencies. Control such agencies. Scientology is the only game on Earth where everybody wins. There is no overt in bringing good order . . .
. . . that HCOPL is compulsory reading for all Scientologists involved in Scientology's public relations and "special affairs". Yet how many Scientologists reading it realise that what L Ron Hubbard is telling them to do is to apply what he also defines as "brainwashing"? Not only that, L Ron Hubbard tells his Scientologists that applying such practices against people and organizations, regardless of the effects on individuals and their families, is not a sin (overt). Watta guy. Note also, that the general practice of Scientology is all about control and overwhelming a person and getting them so introverted they come to believe material which is demonstrably false - from the existence of Engrams right through to Xenu.
Perhaps if Lori was an isolated Scientologist stuck in L Ron Hubbard's weirdo world such tech may have an effect. But, in this particular case, the attempt is entirely futile. Well, perhaps not "entirely" because there will be an effect, but it will be the exact opposite of what was intended. First of all, Lori knows all about these pernicious Scientology teachings and can recognize them from a mile off. Also, she has far too much love and support around her for them to have any effect other than to reinforce the need to expose Scientology and make more strenuous efforts to reach out to her children.
EDIT: Typos, grammar, wording. Usual end quote by Vistaril.
Now there are some things in Scientology that have links and relationships that are often not obvious. But one thing that you get if you are indoctrinated in Scientology doctrine for decades and then leave is time. Time to reflect on your experience and sort out your feelings and beliefs and not face penalties for your actions.
While one is in Scientology it's very rare to get a chance to discuss this and take time to sort out what makes sense to you and what doesn't. And Scientology definitely forbids open discussion of these things and using ideas and models from other subjects to look at your own experience.
It also forbids looking at criticism and negative accounts of Scientology experiences from other people to make sense of it, but real people have been through similar experiences very often in Scientology and looking at their experiences and criticism should be no threat to Scientology if it is a legitimate subject and organization.
I ended up studying hypnosis in 2014 after I left Scientology after twenty five years (1989-2014) and read a couple of books, looked at quite a few others and read many articles and watched many, many videos from people who claimed to be experts on hypnosis. I also read numerous books on cults and psychology to understand the subject.
I am not a person who would give classes or hypnotize people but I certainly understand more than most laymen who don't study it as a profession.
I ended up finding out all kinds of things along the way and it was a very long way.
One thing worth noting is that lots of people who practice hypnosis or similar practices believe in hypnotic writing and things that go by various names like hypnotic language patterns and so on.
If you pick up a few books on hypnosis or NLP or the power of attraction and similar concepts you rapidly realize the authors of these books all seem to have the same techniques.
Many, maybe most of them, claim that by using their powerful communication system that you can persuade individuals to do almost anything including buying things. They usually, it seems, claim you can get a man to buy a car that he neither needs or wants. A lot of them openly claim you can get a woman to sleep with you if she is not remotely attracted to you without protest. That's rape in case it's not clear enough and some of these guys in their books are very open about it.
So, I am generally one to say that if a guy loves NLP or conversational hypnosis or some other type of covert persuasion method, by any name, that's a huge red flag and I would probably never get in business with him and especially would never be vulnerable to him in my personal life if possible. I give this as a very serious warning.
If they are not conflicted about using these covert techniques to make car sales or sell hypnosis courses or books, it's disturbing they use the methods that are marketed for getting women who want to say "no" to say "yes," even though the women don't want to.
One thing that is central to their efforts is their belief that a person can be manipulated by using the terms "you" and "your" quite frequently. The idea that using these terms over and over in speech and writing is persuasive is one I have seen in articles on hypnosis and powerful words. The degree to which they are effective is debatable, but the fact that lots of people who believe in the power of rhetoric or hypnosis to persuade people both believe in these words and use them to attempt to persuade people, is in my opinion well established by their own words and actions.
A lot of books on hypnosis and persuasion feature sections that are jam packed with the words "you" and "your," over and over again. In some cases "you" appears both at the beginning and end of a sentence and the words are used dozens and dozens of times in a few paragraphs.
I have seen it time and time again. When I first started looking at these books I would get annoyed that the author was trying to use covert hypnosis on me as the reader of their book!
I would go to a bookstore that carried such books and look at one after another and realized they were all chocked full of the unethical techniques they promised to teach!
Often a book would describe a technique, then I would see that that very book had it used within that very book, then the next and the next.
When you have a few of these things fresh in your mind with examples it is very easy to see them in the books. Sometimes an author would describe some techniques but use others, but the thing is once you have seen a few you recognize them in any variation.
It is kind of annoying to learn the technique and have the author think you won't recognize it or one that is similar right in front of you. But perhaps they think that anyone who studies the material that much is a good customer or avid wannabe hypnotist like themselves.
And I found ample evidence that Scientology founder Ronald Hubbard was a very knowledgeable hypnotist. He was a poor student in many other ways and a pathological liar and notorious plagiarist but in my opinion he studied and practiced hypnosis for many years.
I do not believe this because he said he did, but because I have found a tremendous amount of evidence that he did. Many of his contemporaries have given accounts of him using hypnosis effectively. In addition he has made hundreds and hundreds of statements about the subject.
I am not going to say that every single one is accurate, because they are not all true, but the degree to which a very, very high number of these statements are in agreement with ideas that appear in various schools of hypnosis is far too great to be coincidence.
Plainly he had to know a lot about hypnosis to be able to make these statements. Imagine if a doctor made hundreds of statements about very specific medical issues and another doctor said "well, he has some unusual ideas, but he has a very thorough education on medicine, despite those ideas." You can assume the person somehow got the knowledge, any other facts about them being as they may.
The work of Jon Atack in my opinion has well established this fact in his excellent articles on Hubbard such as Never Believe a Hypnotist and The Scientology Mythbusting series at The Underground Bunker blog by Tony Ortega.
The Affirmations of Ronald Hubbard shed even more light on this in several ways. For one thing they show his belief in and persistent reliance on hypnosis to be the foundation of his "psychology" as he called it.
For another they show he used the words "you" and "your" in several sections of his self hypnosis scripts. He could have either read these to himself aloud, thought these to himself, or played a recording of them over and over, either while awake or asleep, over and over again every day for decades.
Additionally, a Scientology critic at The Ex Scientologist Message Board (ESMB) ran the transcripts of several taped lectures by Ronald Hubbard through a program that gave number counts for the words used and he found that Hubbard very frequently used the words "you" and "your."
The critic known as Jachs claimed that Hubbard on The Philadelphia Doctorate Course lectures in 1952 (a very frequently studied series of taped lectures that are part of the foundation of Scientology) used the term "you" 20,878 TIMES IN 62 HOURS!
This was described in the blog post: Hubbard Hypnotist Part One: Now And You
It took me a very long time to really understand the techniques Hubbard was using and just how widespread they are in Scientology. I had to actually look at the conditions years later and take them step by step, one by one to see that they are used covertly even in the conditions.
I recommend that anyone who wants to understand the mind of a cult leader, or to understand the underlying foundation of Dianetics and Scientology read the affirmations and understand they were private self hypnosis commands intended to influence the mind of Ronald Hubbard and written by Hubbard himself. He likely used them many, many hundreds or thousands of times.
He quite likely bought into the idea that the words "you" and "your" used over and over again are especially persuasive, otherwise it would have made no sense to use them as he did. It's almost an absolute certainty that he knew that hypnotists saw these words as particularly potent in influencing people.
Young Ronald Hubbard
In Scientology Hubbard had many policies and procedures for people to follow.
Among them are Scientology ethics conditions. They are formulas to describe the conditions a person or organization or just about anything can be in and further step by step instructions on what to do when you are in one of these conditions.
Many people believe they are true and accurate. But if you allow a skeptical person to question them it becomes apparent they are not really accurate or workable.
It requires quite a bit of faith and setting aside critical and independent thinking to take them as legitimate and never find flaws and weaknesses in them, quite plainly they don't really describe reality and the steps they have aren't really adequate to improve absolutely every situation in real life.
In particular a number of conditions require a person to do something.
We can look at the condition formulas and see they are intended to control the behavior of people as individuals, in groups, and in organizations.
I am going to quote the book Understanding Scientology, by Margery Wakefield. She provides an excellent concise and accurate description of the Scientology ethics conditions and their formulas. Her quotes are verbatim from The Scientology Handbook, The Introduction to Scientology Ethics Course and several policy letters in the Scientology reference materials. Virtually ALL, Scientologists study and apply the ethics conditions in Scientology, routinely.
Here's a quote by Margery Wakefield:
"Ethics" is defined in Scientology as rationality toward the highest level of survival along the dynamics. But in Scientology, ethics has to do primarily with the group -- the group being Scientology. Anything that promotes Scientology or benefits Scientology is therefore defined as "ethical," whereas anything which is contra-survival for Scientology becomes, by definition, "unethical."
Similarly, there is a phrase frequently heard in Scientology, "the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics," meaning that which is good for the group (Scientology) and for mankind is more important and takes precedence over that which is good for the individual. A dangerous philosophy.
The chart of "ethics conditions" in Scientology is as follows, in descending sequence:
- Power
- Power Change
- Affluence
- Normal Operation
- Emergency
- Danger
- Nonexistence
- Liability
- Doubt
- Enemy
- Treason
- Confusion
The theory in Scientology is that a person will always be in one of these conditions with regard to any area of life. So a person could be in a condition of Affluence at his job, a condition of Emergency in his marriage, a condition of Nonexistence in his finances, a condition of Normal Operation with his health, etc.
And for each of the conditions, Hubbard devised a formula which, if applied, is supposed to cause the person to progress to the next higher condition. That some of these formulas may not make much sense does not matter. Because Ron (Hubbard) has said this is what they are, they must be right. Right?
The formula for the condition of Confusion is, simply: FIND OUT WHERE YOU ARE.
Once that has been done, the person will move "up" to Treason, for which the formula is: FIND OUT THAT YOU ARE.
In Enemy, the formula is: FIND OUT WHO YOU REALLY ARE.
The formula for Doubt is a bit more complex.
When one cannot make up one's mind as to an individual, a group, organization or project a condition of Doubt exists. The formula is:
- Inform oneself honestly of the actual intentions and activities of that individual, group, project or organization brushing aside all bias and rumor.
- Examine the statistics of the individual, group, project or organization.
- Decide on the basis of "the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics" whether or not it should be attacked, harmed or suppressed or helped.
- Evaluate oneself or one's own group, project or organization as to intentions and objectives.
- Evaluate one's own or one's group, project or organization's statistics.
- Join or remain in or befriend the one which progresses toward the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics and announce the fact publicly to both sides.
- Do everything possible to improve the actions and statistics of the person, group, project or organization one has remained in or joined.
- Suffer on up through the conditions in the new group if one has changed sides, or the conditions of the group one has remained in if wavering from it has lowered one's status.
Now "upgraded" by the Ethics Officer to a condition of Liability, the formula is:
- Decide who are one's friends
- Deliver an effective blow to the enemies of the group one has been pretending to be part of despite personal danger.
- Make up the damage one has done by personal contribution far beyond the ordinary demands of a group member.
- Apply for re-entry to the group by asking the permission of each member of it to rejoin and rejoining only by majority permission, and if refused, repeating steps 2-4 until one is allowed to be a group member again.
When a person first begins a job in Scientology, he starts off in a condition of Non-existence, for which the formula is:
- Find a comm (communication) line.
- Make yourself known.
- Discover what is needed and wanted.
- Do, produce and/or present it.
In other words, find out what needs to be done and do it.
Having done that, one is now in a condition of Danger. This condition applies when an activity is in trouble. The formula is:
- Bypass (ignore the junior in charge of the activity and handle it personally).
- Handle the situation and any danger in it.
- Assign the area where it had to be handled a danger condition.
- Handle the personnel by ethics investigation.
- Reorganize the activity so that the situation will not repeat.
- Recommend any firm policy that will hereafter detect and/or prevent the condition from recurring.
When the person has gotten his activity out of danger, he or she is then in a condition of Emergency, for which the formula is:
- Promote and produce.
- Change your operating basis.
- Economize.
- Then prepare to deliver.
- Stiffen discipline or stiffen ethics.
If the person has successfully applied the Emergency formula, the condition of Normal Operation now applies and its formula is:
- Don't change anything.
- Ethics are mild.
- If a statistic betters, look it over carefully and find out what bettered it and then do that without abandoning what you were doing before.
- Every time a statistic worsens slightly, quickly find out why and remedy it.
If things are going well and the formula for Normal Operation has been applied for a period of time, then the person could be said to be in a condition of Affluence, for which the formula is:
- Economize. Be sure you don't buy anything with a future commitment to it.
- Pay every bill.
- Invest the remainder in service facilities, make it more possible to deliver.
- Discover what caused the condition of affluence and strengthen it.
If things are going really well, the person may make a Power Change into another area of endeavor. If not, the person is in a condition of Power for which the only rule is: Don't Disconnect. Take ownership and responsibility for your connections.
These are the Ethics Conditions in Scientology and they are taken very seriously. Each week, each person working for the organization (i.e, "on staff") will turn in his or her "stats" to the Ethics Officer. The person will be assigned a condition by the Ethics Officer, and will be required to apply the appropriate formula for that condition to their job. In addition, the Ethics Officer can assign a person a condition in any area of his personal life, and the person must apply the appropriate formula and submit a written application to the Ethics Officer for "upgrading" to the next higher condition. For the Scientologist, the ethics conditions and their formulas is a way of life.
End quote by Margery Wakefield from Understanding Scientology
Now that is a pretty good description of the conditions and their formulas. When one is in Scientology some knowledge about statistics and the corresponding conditions they are assigned to is also required.
I want to point out that in my opinion Hubbard wanted a person who uses the condition formulas to look at one thing deeply, over and over, and even to blame one thing for the negative things that the conditions describe or imply; themselves.
In Scientology introversion has a particular definition: "Introversion is a simple thing. It means looking in too closely." Hubbard defined this in the book, The Problems of Work.
From the above quotes about Hubbard's definition of brainwashing and shattering suppression technology we see that he saw introversion as key to confusing someone enough to destabilize them and control them.
So, after a lot of looking at how Hubbard tried to control people through many efforts and his numerous statements about his techniques and intentions, I realized he was trying to get the individual Scientologist to be introverted and confused about themselves by his ethics conditions.
For anyone unfamiliar I will include a brief review of some of his statements on his methods and his intentions. I have been writing on the methods used in Scientology, their origins, and their intended effects for several years.
Here's a recap of some of the most relevant points, but far, far more is available in my blog if anyone needs it.
Below is an excerpt from The Big Empty part 1, at this blog.
Let's look at some of the things Hubbard said:
In Scientology, for example, Ronald Hubbard intentionally included confusing and contradictory language and messages because he studied methods of persuasion including psychology, hypnosis, rhetoric and methods used by other cults.
He intended to overwhelm and confuse his victims then provide a relief from the confusion and discomfort he caused in the form of one thing they could consistently count on: his own authority.
He was quite clear about this and it was intentional.
How can I be so certain? He told us in his own words!
Older Ron Hubbard below
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]
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
"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."
"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. "
RON THE HYPNOTIST
- Lecture: "Off the Time Track" (June 1952) as quoted in Journal of Scientology issue 18-G, reprinted in Technical Volumes of Dianetics & Scientology Vol. 1, p. 418. Ron Hubbard
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)
In
I described how Hubbard in a taped lecture from The Philadelphia Doctorate Course Lectures, tape number 39 in the series, described how to make a game and more precisely how he would go on to make Dianetics and Scientology and use them to enslave people. End excerpt
Hubbard clearly used this technique to try to be persuasive.
In his conditions he had certain assumptions built into the formulas that the individual Scientology cult member must follow. In Scientology indoctrination disagreement is generally treated as misunderstanding which is interpreted as ignorance, ignorance on the part of the Scientologist about the words and symbols in Scientology doctrine.
It is the ultimate expression of the "you will agree with this if you understand, you don't agree, therefore you don't understand!" philosophy. Of course the problem with this philosophy is it's simply wrong.
Lots of ideas in Scientology are ones that you can understand and simply not believe. You can understand that in Scientology you are supposed to have been a God eons ago and have forgotten over a billion lifetimes and you can simply say, "I do not see any credible scientific evidence for this, so I don't take it as a fact." Scientology has thousands and thousands of such ideas.
But my point is that the Scientology student is taught that the ethics conditions formulas ARE true and they reflect REALITY. So, if a Scientologist is assigned a condition (by themselves or someone else) and they accept the condition as valid for the part of life it concerns they are obligated to believe everything stated in the formula.
To make it clear, let's look at some of the conditions and their formulas.
Let's start with confusion:
The formula for the condition of Confusion is, simply: FIND OUT WHERE YOU ARE.
Here's a bit more on it from The Scientology Handbook:
Condition of Confusion
The lowest condition is a Condition of Confusion.
In a Condition of Confusion, the person or area will be in a state of random motion. (When something is random it is uncontrolled and unplanned.) In a Condition of Confusion, there will be no real production, only disorder or confusion.
In order to get out of Confusion, a person has to find out where he is.
The formula for Confusion is:
Find out where you are.
Note: It is important that the person who is in Confusion be cleared up on the definition of confusion. (This is done before the formula itself is started.)
Definitions:
Any circumstances which do not seem to have any immediate solution.
More broadly:
A confusion is random motion.
If you were to stand in heavy traffic, you would be likely to feel confused by all the motion whizzing around you. If you were to stand in a heavy storm with leaves and papers flying by, you would be likely to feel confused. A confusion is only a confusion so long as all the pieces are in motion. A confusion is only a confusion so long as no part of it is clearly defined or understood.
People who can control “randomness” can handle confusion. People who cannot control things actually create more confusion.
All a confusion is, is a flow which has no pattern (orderly way that it is arranged). The parts involved in a confusion crash into each other, bounce off each other and stay in the area. There is no product, as to have a product something must flow out.
For example, take a car repairman who is in the Condition of Confusion. He can’t find any of the new car parts because his workshop is not in order, can’t find his tool kit or even his hammer because he doesn’t know where he put them down. He spilled oil all over his paperwork, so he doesn’t know what needs to be done with the cars in his shop. No cars are being repaired and returned to the customers.
As another example, an office worker who is in the Condition of Confusion makes the action of writing a letter take two days instead of fifteen minutes. He breaks his computer, can’t find paper, has no ink in the printer, loses the person’s address and has to buy more stamps. Meanwhile, none of his other letters are going out as he is still trying to send out the first one.
The additional formula for the Condition of Confusion is:
Receive a Locational in the place where you are.
Comparing where you are to other areas where you used to be.
Repeat step 1. End quote
(A Locational is done by walking around with the person, both indoors and out-of-doors, and saying: “Look at that [object].” When the person has done so, acknowledge him with “Thank you” or “Okay” or “Good.” Use objects such as a chair, a tree, a car, the floor, the ceiling, a house, etc. The person running the Locational would point at the object each time. It is simply done until the person brightens up and realizes something or has a new understanding about his life.)
So, this requires a bit of context to make sense.
Here's a quote from the Scientology Handbook on assists (a locational is a type of assist)
Theory
The theory of why assists work includes three factors. The first is control and direction of attention. The second is location. The third is time. The injured or ill person remains ill or injured because there is something wrong with each of these three factors. His attention is not under any control, he is located thoughtwise elsewhere and he is not in present time. He is in the past. The problem of someone who wishes to help with an assist is how to control the person’s attention, get the person located here and into present time. By having the unconscious person touch nearby things like a pillow, the floor or his body (without hurting an injured body part), you can help bring his attention under control and bring him into present time. The process is feather-light, but it can reach a long way down. End quote
So, in Scientology there's an implied assumption that someone in the condition of confusion has their mind on a moment that is not present time. You could say stuck in a moment. The assumption is about the person. You note that the situation is not the fault of others, or the organization or ever the methods or ideas used in Scientology.
By using the techniques in the confusion condition you are buying into the idea that you are not in a correct state of mind. And the techniques used in the assists are hypnotic but not identified as such.
Another notable thing about the confusion condition is it doesn't seem like a lot to ask to just look around and follow simple commands, but you are buying into the idea that YOU are not in present time and can be brought into it by Scientology techniques. This sets you up to follow further commands. The brightening up described is actually meant to be a euphoric trance one enters in hypnosis, so the assist seems to help you. Euphoric trances feel pleasant, so it's easy to see why one might think they actually got a real benefit from the assist.
I can tell you from personal experience that you can think that you are experiencing transcendent miracles and increasing your awareness if you are hypnotised and enter a euphoric trance and don't understand that is what is happening. It is defined by Robert Jay Lifton in his eight criteria for thought reform as Mystical Manipulation, a presentation of a mundane experience that is described as a miracle to the uneducated.
Hubbard understood he was hypnotizing people and labeled it as his technology. He got his followers to do this to each other and be unaware that it was hypnosis which was disguised as spiritual techniques that elevated them beyond human beings.
The next condition is treason.
Here it is from The Scientology Handbook
Condition of Treason
Treason is defined as betrayal after trust. (Betrayal is intentionally acting in a way that breaks a promise or agreement after you have been trusted to do it.)
A person is in the Condition of Treason when he has gone against the activities and purposes he was trusted with.
It will be found that a person who is a part of a group (his family, friends, the people he works with or any group he is a part of) and who then breaks their trust will upset or destroy some part of that group.
By not knowing that he is the _______ (position name), he is committing treason.
The results of this can be found in history. A failure to be what a person has the job or position name of will result in a betrayal of the group.
Almost all upsets in a group come from this one fact:
A person in a group who, having accepted a position, does not know that he is that position is in Treason against the group.
For example, a bus driver who goes out for the day and does not show up for work is in Treason. He has people, young and old, around the town waiting for him to pick them up. Finally, the owner of the company drives the bus himself and handles the upset passengers. He had trusted the bus driver to do his job and the bus driver broke that trust.
The formula for the Condition of Treason is:
Find out that you are. End quote
Now the words "know" and "not-know" have special meaning in Scientology, of course.
Hubbard defined these in an article in The Fundamentals of Thought book.
Here's an excerpt.
Chapter Nine
Know and Not-Know
IT IS A MECHANISM of thinkingness, whether one is postulating or receiving information, that one retains one’s ability to know. It is equally important that one retains one’s ability to not-know.
Thought consists entirely of KNOWING and NOT-KNOWING and the shades of gray between.
You will discover that most people are trying not to remember. In other words, they are trying to not-know. Education can only become burdensome when one is unable to not-know it. It is necessary that one be able to create, to receive, to know and to not-know information, data and thoughts. Lacking any one of these skills—for they are skills, no matter how native they are to the individual—one is apt to get into a chaos of thinkingness, or creatingness, or livingness.
You can look at any eccentric or aberrated person and discover rapidly, by an inspection of him, which one of these four factors he is violating. He either is unable to know or not-know his own created thoughts, or he is unable to know or not-know the thoughts of others. Somewhere, for some reason best known to him, in his anxiety to be part of the game, he has shelved (lost) one of these abilities.
Time is a process of knowing in the present and not-knowing in the future or the past.
Remembering is the process of knowing the past.
Prediction is the process of knowing the future.
Forgetting is the process of not-knowing the past.
And living “only for today” is the process of not-knowing the future.
Exercises in these various items rehabilitate not only the sanity or ability of the individual, but his general capability in living and playing the game.
End quote
So, we can see that you are supposed to think you "not-knew" some position you were. Once again you are treated as though you don't know the information necessary to handle the condition.
It seems like an easier condition than others in some ways.
Again we quote the Scientology Handbook
Condition of Enemy
When a person has openly stated he will harm a person or group or when he is doing destructive acts against a person, group, project or organization, a Condition of Enemy exists.
Take for example, a student who intentionally and openly throws stones and breaks windows to disrupt classes. He would be in a Condition of Enemy to his high school.
The formula for the Condition of Enemy is just one step:
Find out who you really are.
end quote
So, all of these conditions address you in odd ways. But a Scientologist has a particular answer from Hubbard they are likely to adopt. They see the mind as constructed as Hubbard described and he described it as containing different identities people assume, which he called "valences," so they see Scientology techniques such as a locational as helping one to be themselves instead of a valence.
Here's an excerpt from the book, Fundamentals of Thought:
"Valences - The whole study of valences is a fascinating one. A valence is defined as "a false identity assumed unwittingly." An identity is modified by valences. People who can be nobody may try to be everybody. People who are seeking a way out of scarcity of identity may become fixed in false valences. Nations can become fixed in valences of countries they have conquered in war, etc etc.
A rule is that a person assumes the identity of that which gets attention. Another rule is that the person assumes the identity of that which makes him fail (for he gave it his attention, didn't he?)
There is a basic personality, a person's own identity. He colors or drowns this with valences as he loses or wins in life. He can be dug up." Ron Hubbard end quote
So, it is obvious that Scientologists see these conditions as valid and the source of problems is often attributed to the character of a person if they are assigned one of the lowest conditions (confusion, treason, enemy, doubt, and liability), these are often called the conditions below non-existence and people assigned them are often looked down on by Scientologists, particularly if they are seen as remaining in them for many weeks or months or longer.
Ultimately Scientologists see these conditions as being caused by the flaws in character and the minds of people.
So, when a Scientologist is assigned these conditions they often see themselves as mentally flawed and as having deficiencies in character that are the result of their own behavior.
In essence they blame themselves for behavior that they see as freely chosen by themselves that resulted in their own conditions.
If they don't understand how or why they are in the condition assigned, they may see themselves as having been confused or in one of the other conditions as described by Scientology which may include "not-knowing" or being in a different "valence" (personality or identity) or not being "in present time" (experiencing the current environment, as opposed to the past) as an explanation of why they are unaware of how they did something wrong.
Notably they are taught that Scientology has the only effective methods to spot and understand how and why they did these alleged deeds.
I must stress that Scientology tells people to see themselves as absolutely responsible for everything they do and experience, with no exceptions, so they have a responsibility to make everything right, whether they understand how they created it or not.
At this point I think it's apparent to me what exactly Hubbard was doing with his ethics conditions. He was eroding the reality perceived by his followers/victims. He was using a systemic method to do this. He was setting people up to think that they had flawed minds and they were in need of Scientology to rehabilitate their minds and remedy "aberration" (a lack of sanity) which he claimed needed "clearing" (a removal of the aberated content in a mind).
After studying the behavior of human predators I realized this method used by Hubbard fits the description for gaslighting exactly.
Here's a brief description from The Empathy Trap Book by Dr Jane McGregor and Tim McGregor:
"When one cannot make up one's mind as to an individual, a group, organization or project a condition of Doubt exists. The formula is:
- Inform oneself honestly of the actual intentions and activities of that individual, group, project or organization brushing aside all bias and rumor.
- Examine the statistics of the individual, group, project or organization.
- Decide on the basis of "the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics" whether or not it should be attacked, harmed or suppressed or helped.
- Evaluate oneself or one's own group, project or organization as to intentions and objectives.
- Evaluate one's own or one's group, project or organization's statistics.
- Join or remain in or befriend the one which progresses toward the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics and announce the fact publicly to both sides.
- Do everything possible to improve the actions and statistics of the person, group, project or organization one has remained in or joined.
- Suffer on up through the conditions in the new group if one has changed sides, or the conditions of the group one has remained in if wavering from it has lowered one's status."
Now we need to understand that in Scientology "the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics" means whatever benefits Scientology. Scientology has a long and complex series of definitions for the dynamics but the bottom line ends up being that what benefits Scientology ends up benefiting the greatest number of dynamics. This is a conclusion baked into the way the dynamics and Scientology are defined.
So, a Scientologist doing a doubt formula about doing something for Scientology or being in a Scientology group is ALWAYS going to conclude that Scientology is the correct group to join or befriend or remain in from step 6 of the doubt formula. If they accept the definitions and concepts in Scientology doctrine as true and accurate they have no choice.
But it looks like they have a choice and it looks like they freely made the choice using their own judgment.
The loaded language in Scientology has conclusions in the definitions of terms like Scientology and the individual Scientologist is extremely unlikely to realize this. It is well hidden in the dynamics and various complex terms that have their own lengthy definitions and contradictions in the materials on them.
Hubbard in numerous references describes the Scientology organization as the most ethical group on planet earth, he describes Scientology as the only group that can save earth and Scientologists as the only beings that will survive the end of the earth. With that perspective, Scientology has rigged the condition formulas so Scientology is to always be supported and chosen when a doubt formula is done involving Scientology.
- Decide who are one's friends
- Deliver an effective blow to the enemies of the group one has been pretending to be part of despite personal danger.
- Make up the damage one has done by personal contribution far beyond the ordinary demands of a group member.
- Apply for re-entry to the group by asking the permission of each member of it to rejoin and rejoining only by majority permission, and if refused, repeating steps 2-4 until one is allowed to be a group member again."
We can note that Liability contains the conclusion that a person assigned this condition in the phrase "the group one has been pretending to be part of." The conclusion is that the person pretended to be a part of a group!
This is an odd thing to just uncritically accept with no evidence but Scientologists do this routinely!
They accept that they have somehow not really been friends to other people in Scientology and further only pretended to be part of the group!
That's got to be gaslighting to tell someone they were only pretending to be a member of the group and were not really a member!
Then they have to somehow deliver an effective blow.
When I was in Scientology I saw that we didn't question if we were pretending to be part of the group, we usually got our attention stuck on figuring out how to deliver that effective blow!
We didn't question if we had genuinely done damage but instead tried to figure out how we could make up the damage!
This goes back to Hubbard's approach of introverting someone, getting them looking too closely at themselves and then giving them a stable datum on what to do at that moment. That stable datum is to do something, it can be delivering an effective blow or making up damage or something else that requires their focused attention and they accept that they did whatever Hubbard said without evaluating it for themselves.
I believe this ultimately comes back down to this quote we already examined from Hubbard on 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." Ronald Hubbard
The conditions are definitely overly complex and confusing. A Scientologist has to do them and try to understand the things not said, that come from other Scientology references and they have to uncritically accept the ideas in the conditions and try to look up definitions for Scientology terms.
The many thousands of definitions for Scientology terms are confusing in their own right. Lots of the terms are regular words that are used to mean the exact opposite of their usual meaning. That's confusing and hides this reversal of meaning. Many Scientology terms have multiple contradictory definitions. That makes them confusing and foggy in the minds of Scientologists.
Additionally, Scientology terms are defined by other Scientology terms, so one has to look up a Scientology term, then in the Scientology reference that has definitions they routinely find a half dozen more Scientology terms to look up in four or more definitions and these definitions contradict each other and this process continues for dozens and dozens of terms just to look up one word.
As if that's not bad enough, to further confuse people Hubbard made hundreds of abbreviations and piled them up to the sky and additionally he took several words and changed their part of speech, meaning he converted adjectives and adverbs to nouns, just to confuse people a bit more.
This leaves a Scientologist utterly confused and struggling to somehow comply with these conditions and forget about any independent or critical thinking.
We can see the options they have are joining Scientology or helping Scientology or harming the enemies of Scientology or contributing to Scientology.
I knew a Scientologist many years ago who told me, "No matter how you slice it, the answer comes up Scientology!"
He had been in Scientology for several years and realized that his ethics conditions were always going to "conclude" that he needed to give more and commit more to Scientology, no matter what actual situation he was in!
It didn't matter that he had been on staff for several years and never got paid or that he was broke and needed some way to buy food and pay bills, the formulas simply are rigged to get one to turn to Scientology and the authority of Scientology no matter what!
He was trying to leave staff and get a regular job and it was difficult to put it mildly.
I could go over the remaining conditions and analyze each one but I think it's sufficient for now to remark that they fit a description from Margaret Singer in the book, Cults In Our Midst, in which see commented on cults using a system of penalties and rewards. The other conditions definitely reflect this.
I am going to include links to several articles at Mockingbird's Nest blog on Scientology that have either been quoted in this post, or that expand on the topics introduced here.
Brainwashing: Standard Tech In Scientology
Scientology Conditions - Their Purpose and Practice
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.