Saturday, October 4, 2008

Dianetics: The Original Thesis - CHAPTERS THREE AND FOUR

PLEASE NOTICE:

The opinions stated in this blog are that of the author, not that of Scientology, Dianetics, or Anonymous. The words Scientology, Dianetics, and other related terms are trademarked by the Religious Technology Center and are used here under the Fair Use Doctrine.

------------------

Well, after a long hiatus, I'm back, and I feel that I owe you (yes, all one of you reading) an apology for the massive delay. See, I've found myself a victim of two problems:

1) I have a life. This is not expected of most Anons, but it's true in my case, with college exams and everything.
2) I never thought I'd say this, but...it's hard to find faults in the rest of this book. The most I can do is offer a summary, which is really screwy on its own, but believable if you had the gullibility to not look at actual facts.

This does not mean that I have no progress at all in regards to Scientology research; I've been making headway with a psychologist/sociologist/criminologist professor, and I'll be asking him what he thinks about Scientology's criminal history - as presented in the Lawrence Brennan affidavit - sometime in the next few weeks. I've also greatly expanded my collection of Basics books, which is currently filled as follows. (All books I own are checked off with a /. All books I have coming are marked with a x. All others aren't marked at all.)

Dianetics: The Original Thesis /
Dianetics: The Evolution of a Science /
Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health /
Science of Survival /
Self-Analysis /
Advanced Procedures and Axioms
Handbook for Preclears x
A History of Man /
Scientology 8-80
Scientology 8-8008
Creation of Human Ability
Dianetics 55!
Scientology: the Fundamentals of Thought

The Problems of Work x
Scientology: A New Slant on Life
Introduction to Scientology Ethics x
The Way to Happiness / (Currently I have a version older than the newer one by a couple years, but from what I've seen, the illustrations and text should be the same.)
Clear Body, Clear Mind /

I feel a need to emphasize that the entire collection is worth $450 (Over $3000 for books AND lectures, which I' haven't been able to find on their own outside of leaks), and I've spent - so far - $34. Most of the books have been (or are being) purchased for $1. Some of them were even brand new, shrink-wrapped.

I am determined to continue my progress, with a short review of Chapters Three and Four combined in the following section.

------------------

Chapter Three covers "The Dynamics". As we've already learned, the basic dynamic of existence is to "SURVIVE!", but there are four other dynamics that this can be applied to: Personal; Sex; Group; and Mankind. These Dynamics are all equally important and on the same level as the Basic Dynamic.

It's funny how L. Ron talks often on how energy can be understood as a conscious form, despite the allegation that Dianetics is - in no way - a spiritual belief. To seperate it further, he enforces that spirituality is not part of the "Science of the Mind". The first part of Chapter Three is another example of this false supposition.
Energy may be considered to have taken many paths through eternity to arrive intact at the infinite goal. The why of that goal may lie above the finite line.

Meaning, of course, that the non/existence of God means nothing in this study. If this is the case, however, then why have no other religious bodies taken up and recommended Dianetics to their parishioners? Further still, why hasn't it accomplished anything for anyone outside the Church?

I might like to add that the only reason L. ron Hubbard claimed Scientology was a religion at all was so they could garner religious cloaking and earn tax exemption. Just thought I'd bring that up.

Another technicality the church of Scientology has failed to touch up on is the racism of its founder. One can find many quotes from Hubbard based on racist remarks, but it's what he says in his books that gives me the jibblies.
Conflict among species and individuals within the species is additionally a survival factor. Affinity for individuals and groups, races, and the whole of its species and for other species is additionally a survival factor, as strong or stronger than conflict.

This insinuates not only that some races are weaker than others, but having a preference towards a particular race can be a powerful ally in the long run. It can also be interpreted as saying that being a racist in particular can affect your ability to survive, and apparently this was good enough for Ron.

So LRH, in all his glory, shows that the ability to survive also depends on four dynamics on top of the basic one. These are...

1) Personal
Self-survival, neccessity and pleasure

2) Sexual
Procreation

3) Group
All subdivisions of the species, from families to races

4) Mankind
What it says.

He would later outline four more dynamics, which will be outlined in later materials, which will total to the eighth Dynamic, that of 'Infinity' or the 'God Dynamic'.

Each dynamic has its own philosophy, so Hubbard rules that each is of equal importance, and that in an 'unaberrated' society, this is recognized as vaild. However, in an unaberrated person, one or more of the above may be stressed above the other. Any one or more of the dynamics can also work against an individual's survival, which is apparently normal and rational. WTF.

These conflicts can be very difficult for someone without aberrations until it becomes impossible for them to cope; so much so, in fact, that it leads to self-harm and suicide, as a result of his inability to correctly follow the basic command.

That's the bulk of Chapter Three. Chapter Four is even smaller, and regards "The Basic Individual".

------------------

This chapter deals with the idea of the basic individual, which is the basic state of unaberration "...in complete integration and in a state of highest possible rationality". But hubbard also states that, "A Clear is someone who has become the basic individual through therapy."

In the 2007 "Golden Age of Knowledge" Summit, David Miscavige mentioned Chapter Fourteen of this book as being important, as it featured 'the first ever definition of Clear". But Hubbard just told us what a Clear was, and this was in a section that was not removed from the book. Something fishy is going on...as if we didn't know that already.

So the basc personality is comprised of the following: his basic dynamic; his dynamics; his intelligence; his motor skills; his "physiological and glandular condition"; and his environment and education. In my personal opinion, I see this description of an individual as very dehumanizing; there's no mention of likes, dislikes, needs, emotions, etc.

Oh, and here comes another common Hubbard-ism; RESEAAAAAAAAARCH.
It will be found by experience and exhaustive research, as it has been clinically established, that the basic individual is invariably responsive in all the dynamics and is essentially good. There are varying degrees of courage, but in the basic individual, there is no pusillanimity.

I smell pusillanimity. COS, in particular. Hubbard never really shows us any proof of the research, does he? So did he do any?

So the Basic Individual is the ultimate ideal. He is virtuous, and pretty much the best person alive. Well, I don't think we've met one yet that has come out of a Scientology office. Wow, they're sure doing their job!

Oh, yes, more hypocrisy.
Man is not a reactive animal.

If man is not a reactive animal, then why does he have a reactive mind? If he weren't such a thing, then he'd have no reactive mind!

L. Ron also comes up with yet another decent piece of spin in this chapter...
The most desirable state of the individual is self determinism. Such self-determinism may be altered and shaped to some degree by education and environment. But so long as the individual is not aberrated, he is in possession of self-determinism.

So an unaberrated person is self-determined. But everyone is aberrated, so there is no self-determined person in existence until L. Ron Hubbard comes along and gives us this news. He promises that his techniques will remove aberration and are the only way to do so. Those who join him eventually work for him for much of their lives, becoming devoted followers.

Sound self-determined? I don't think so.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

You originally stated: "My intent is to read the books of Dianetics and Scientology in the order that they have been given by the so-called 'Church', giving a thorough analysis each time I complete one."

Problem is, you're not giving a "thorough analysis" at all, you're just picking out random quotes that sound funny when taken out of context and mocking them and heckling LRH, Dianetics, and Scientology in general.

Though you get points for actually obtaining and reading the books (something few anons would ever do) you need to lose the snarkiness and consider that LRH's works are an APPLIED RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY, first and foremost. That means it doesn't have to instantly "make sense" to you. It's not obligated to do that.

Philosophy is not something that can be "debunked", nor is religion, when you get right down to it. It's no different than all those cranks and toilers who devote their lives to nitpicking about Biblical inconsistencies and trying debunk Christianity by pointing out that people do not generally walk on water nor do they turn loaves of bread into fish. Why bother debunking and deconstructing a religion or a philosophy? What does anyone gain from that? You're either going to follow it or you're not. It's not something that you can "talk someone out of" by way of mere glib rationalism.

Dianetics works for a great many people, including myself. So does Scientology. Similarly, much of zen buddhism makes no sense to people who approach it with haste and suspicion. But do keep reading the books, and as you do, try to put yourself in the mindset of people who really DO get something meaningful from them to use in their own day to day lives.

Entheta Dumpster said...

Thank you for taking the time to respond; I appreciate the fact that you were willing to read my comments. Firstly, I will try to be more thorough as the next chapters come along.

I would, however, like to bring up the following point. You stated that Dianetics works for people, and Hubbard states the same. Yet he also says that that Dianetics is not exactly true, either. I quote, from Chapter One, Paragraph One, "Workability, rather than Truth, has been consulted." Could you clarify this for me? It would seem to me that in order for something to work, it would have to be true.