I've heard a lot about Scientology being a cult and being pretty bad. But just because the actions of a group is bad...

>But just because the actions of a group is bad, doesn't necessarily mean associated content is bad.

this is true.

however, just because the associated content was created by an autistic pulp science fiction writer, you should at least consider the source material:

...

MUH XENU is not an argument and it's not a refutation of the philosophy. Why are Scientology critics so dull?

What is Scientology's philosophy user?

It starts with the 8 dynamics.

scientology.org/what-is-scientology/basic-principles-of-scientology/eight-dynamics.html

Because it's hard the philosophy seriously when the foundational mythology is absolutely comical.

First of all, if you're going to criticize something you ought to learn what it is you're criticizing. It is no way a "foundational mythology" and the version of it that the public has heard has been greatly altered by critics of Scientology who also have no idea what they're talking about.

What role does the eighth dynamic God play, Is Hubbard the prophet of this being?

How do you go about proving or disproving ideas like the 8 dynamics?

No Hubbard is not a prophet of god. Have you ever walked up to a Thomist and asked him what Aquina's philosophy was? I would hope not because its a stupid question. I can't summarize the entire philosophy for you. Do your own homework.

>and the version of it that the public has heard has been greatly altered by critics of Scientology who also have no idea what they're talking about.
Is that why I haven't died of pneumonia? It was in Hubbard's own handwriting and voice.
>It is no way a "foundational mythology"
It contains information about the creation of man and the nature of the soul. In any other religion such information is considered foundational, and I see no reason why it isn't the case for Scientology.

So if Hubbard is not a prophet by what means can you prove whether the system of 8 dynamics is true or false?

I have asked Thomists on Veeky Forums + Veeky Forums and they were very helpful, through them I have gained a much greater respect for him as a thinker.

Do you personally worship the being in the 8th dynamic?

>Is that why I haven't died of pneumonia?
Why would you die of pneumonia
>It was in Hubbard's own handwriting and voice.
Prove it
>It contains information about the creation of man
HAHAHA no
>and the nature of the soul.
Again, no
>In any other religion such information is considered foundational,
This is not like other religions, you fucking fedora
>and I see no reason why it isn't the case for Scientology.
Because you're blind

Do you see how obnoxious this style of writing is?

Maybe you should learn what they are before you try to find a way to dismiss them. I don't know anything about physics so I don't require physicists to tell me how to refute their theories for a few reasons. 1) because it would be obnoxious of me, and 2) I wouldn't understand the answer. The fact that you're asking whether or not I worship the 8th dynamic demonstrates your complete ignorance. You couldn't even take the time to read the link I gave.

I did read the link, the reason why I asked whether you worship it is because the one of the goals it talked about was coming to know and learn of the God in the eighth dynamic it. I was just curious as to the current understanding you have reached on that dynamic - because as it says it perfects knowledge rather than just giving it.

With the physicists they wouldnt mind, indeed proving their theories is part of their job. They can show through objective experiments and through their theories derived from axioms.

What are the good ones? He wrote a shitload of fiction so I'm curious.

Fear
Typewriter in the Sky
Final Blackout

>must learn ideas by a literal pedo bear pulp writer in order to dismiss them
This argument in it's simplest form has always been retarded. But as someone willing to actually entertain a meme religion, I can't imagine you'd understand why.

literally a rip-off of the Leary 8 circuit model

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-circuit_model_of_consciousness

Does the Leary model predate the hubbard one?

It's not literally the same but even if it was, so what? Truth is truth. Do you shit on schools because they don't come up with the things they teach others?

oh shit apparently not

It is literally a cult that seeks to control your life, and uses mass litigation and criminal activity to fuck with the lives of its enemies. Stay as far away as possible.

This user speaks the truth

>Buy some Scientology books on Amazon
>Start reading them
>All of sudden I'm being served court summons
>I can't take a piss without a Scientologist holding my dick

Don't make the same mistake I did. It's all about control and litigation.

>After Wollersheim left the organization Scientology leaders initiated a "fair game" campaign which among other things was calculated to destroy Wollersheim's photography enterprise. They instructed some Scientology members to leave Wollersheim's employ, told others not to place any new orders with him and to renege on bills they owed on previous purchases from the business. This strategy shortly drove Wollersheim's photography business into bankruptcy. His mental condition deteriorated further and he ended up under psychiatric care.

>1b] There is substantial evidence to support the jury's finding on this theory. First, the Church's conduct was manifestly outrageous. Using its position as his religious leader, the Church and its agents coerced Wollersheim into continuing "auditing" although his sanity was repeatedly threatened by this practice. (See pp. 892-894, post.) Wollersheim was compelled to abandon his wife and his family through the policy of disconnect. When his mental illness reached such a level he actively planned his suicide, he was [212 Cal. App. 3d 882] forbidden to seek professional help. Finally, when Wollersheim was able to leave the Church, it subjected him to financial ruin through its policy of "fair game."

law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/3d/212/872.html

All because she bought some Scientology books from Amazon. What a shame. Cool source by the way. I know whenever I want to learn about an organization I make sure to only listen to that organizations critics. Independent third parties aren't real.

As is the case for pretty much all new age stuff or new religions, your time would be better spent on reading up on Buddhism.

>.Cool source by the way. I know whenever I want to learn about an organization I make sure to only listen to that organizations critics. Independent third parties aren't real.
So you are saying that the literal court documents that outline a judgement against the Church aren't third party? Or are you saying that the Californian Courts are just biased critics?

I could go to court right now and make statements about how I live on the moon and that would be put into court records. Being in a court document doesn't make it true.

>I could go to court right now and make statements about how I live on the moon and that would be put into court records. Being in a court document doesn't make it true.
Which just shows you rejected this out of hand because that document is a judgement which is the decision based on the the evidence which has been admitted as accurate and deemed relevant. It is *not* a transcript of everything said in the trial.

Or do you think the judge(s) made mistakes when it came to admitting evidence?

You got me there because we all know that courts have never been wrong about anything ever and they certainly haven't been biased against the Church of Scientology. I'm not exactly sure what this is supposed to prove because the worst case scenario is that somebody within the Church did something stupid, which means what exactly?

>Do you see how obnoxious this style of writing is?
You haven't spent a lot of time on here, have you?
>This is not like other religions, you fucking fedora
Other than the violent secrecy, I really can't see how it is.
>Again, no
>HAHAHA no
The creation and nature of thetans seems to have a major impact on the practices of the church, does it not?
>Prove it
The voice and handwriting match his. I have no reason to believe they're fake unless you have some evidence to the contrary.
>Why would you die of pneumonia
Cause I haven't given the organization enough money to live after hearing the tale.

It looks like we have a handwriting expert here. There is nothing in any version of the story that deals with the creation of thetans, get your shit straight. You're as retarded as you write.

>You got me there because we all know that courts have never been wrong about anything ever and they certainly haven't been biased against the Church of Scientology.

So what third party would meet your requirement to comment then? Right now despite not reading the case you are content to reject the numerous judges (there were appeals) as ALL being biased and incompetent or corrupt.

>I'm not exactly sure what this is supposed to prove because the worst case scenario
Its not the worst case scenario, there are other and more damaging cases.

>is that somebody within the Church did something stupid

What this case found that there was a co-coordinated action carried out to intentionally infliction of emotional injury on a member who left the group and that it was not the result of rouge agents but Church policy.

You retards need to learn how to type. I couldn't possibly read everything that every sends me. You're the one that brought it up, you ought to summarize it. I'm not interested in reading the case you linked it because from what I've seen in the worst case scenario where its even worse than you say it is, it's merely some individuals doing something stupid. It means nothing to me. Individuals within organizations do stupid things all the time. It says nothing to the philosophy or even the organization itself. You haven't even attempted to connect these things yet you're making demands on my time. Get fucked.

Ok Ill play it your way.

Given your extremely high standards of proof what third party's evidence on Scientolgies organisation or philosophical issues would you accept?

As for the court case I did partially summarise it in that previous post but to quotes yourself "Do your own homework". What cases like this and others show is that the organisational principles created and implemented by Hubbard are extremely controlling, anti social and destructive.

And guess what the clear cognition is "I created my own reactive mind" If you dont believe me now just wait until you spend the hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars to hit it.

As for your last sentence it looks like you are slipping on the tone scale mr 1.5. Is it acute or chronic?

Bumping for

If you want to refute a philosophy you have to actually engage with it. Court cases showing individuals doing wrong don't prove the philosophy is wrong. This is absurd, and what is it with you people asking me to tell you how to disprove Scientology? If I knew I wouldn't be a Scientologist.

Nice job watching the Aaron Levin Smith video. You know he never attained clear right? So how the hell would he know what the actual clear cognition is? I'll give you a hint: it involves more than a single sentence.

Do you understand the difference between knowing how to disprove something and disproving it? Take the example of Islam, the Koran is the word of God therefore to disprove the Islamic faith you would need to find just one error in the text. With Scientology one can do a similar thing with engrams - namely if an unconscious person cannot through auditing recall what was said then hubbards theory is false.

As for the cognition its based on Chris Shelton's work and he did reach the state of clear.

Just to make it perfectly clear a devout Muslim can know through that method of how to prove Islam false without actually having to find such a fault.

What's Chris selling these days? Books, T-shirts, how's his Patreon? I don't really care what a soft-bellied charlatan has to say about Scientology because he's not a reliable source of data.

A person not being able to recall an engram wouldn't prove shit beyond the fact that person isn't applying the tech correctly. I can't tell you how to disprove Scientology because I don't think it can be proved wrong. Do you understand this? I've had this conversation so many times on here and you people are too thick headed to get it. You can't disprove something that's correct so asking me how it might be disproved is pointless, and you're being dishonest because you thought you knew how to disprove Scientology yet you asked me anyways. You're just trying to play games.

This is the Chris Shelton most people don't see. I decided to have some fun and challenge one of the points he made in a video and he got emotional and blocked me.

I'm going to bed. I'm only telling you guys because I know you wait on my replies with bated breath. Give my regards to the "critical thinker at large" lol

The reason it is so hard to accept is because your dogmatic approach is at odds with the Church's claims. Take a look at your reasoning here you have created a bubble for yourself - you take Scientology being true as an axiom instead of as a conclusion based on reason which by default means its "impossible" to disprove. This can be done with any belief for instance it would be like me saying that phrenology is 100% accurate in all cases it only fails when incorrectly applied. Therefore no matter how many skulls dont match up with the character diagnosis I am still correct its just me who is messing up the methods.

Not trying to play games as much as figure out what your underlying reasoning is. All I was doing was positing just one of the possible ways it could be disproven just as I did with the Islamic example. There is a bit of discord between your words and thoughts. You claim you want or accept evidence from "Independent third parties" () but not only can you not name one you would accept you rule them out as all being wrong by default unless they agree with you/

As for money influencing things. Every Scientologist who signs a person up for a course gets a 10% cut, should I therefore should I distrust their accounts when they are telling me to take a course? Do you not see how its hypocritical to chide others for making hollow attacks instead of dealing with their arguments and beliefs and then doing the same to any source that does not agree with the Church?

Sleep tight, dont let the entheta bite

t. Steven Spielberg

why are scientology shills so obvious?

as hubbard said, "Make Money. Make More Money."

/thread

can you tell us something about Hubbard's Messengers? when he was living on that ship... the teenaged girls who wore tight shorts and halter tops who started lying about the crew's activities so anyone they didn't like would get thrown overboard, and who rose to a position of almost complete power onboard?

All misinformation spread by ex-Scientologists getting rich by selling lies about the church.

Because they have a very forumalic method of dealing with opposing views -

>Spot who is attacking us. Start investigating them promptly for felonies or worse using our own professionals, not outside agencies. Double curve our reply by saying we welcome an investigation of them. Start feeding lurid, blood sex crime actual evidence on the attackers to the press. Don't ever tamely submit to an investigation of us. Make it rough, rough on attackers all the way. You can get "reasonable about it" and lose. Sure we break no laws. Sure we have nothing to hide. BUT attackers are simply an anti-Scientology propaganda agency so far as we are concerned. They have proven they want no facts and will only lie no matter what they discover. So BANISH all ideas that any fair hearing is intended and start our attack with their first breath. Never wait. Never talk about us—only them. Use their blood, sex, crime to get headlines. Don't use us. I speak from 15 years of experience in this. There has never yet been an attacker who was not reeking with crime. All we had to do was look for it and murder would come out.

>L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, 25 February 1966

>There's some decent ideas or works of poetry in all religious texts
Give one example of a decent idea or work of poetry in the Quran. Just one.

Inb4 "I haven't read the Quran". You made the claim, now please justify it.

No OP, the associated content is bad. Its filler to provide a religious veneer to a pyramid scheme. Is filler based on bad space opera.

Is that what you see happening here?

You're wrong but I'm not going to humor your armchair psychology bullshit anymore. In Scientology it's whatever is true for you. It's not a system that can be proven wrong like Islam. If it works it works, if it doesn't it doesn't. End of story.

or Hinduism desu

It's a pay to win religion (they actually use the term "wins" btw).

Funnily enough, the most useful courses are the beginner and early ones. This convinces people that it "works", so they keep chasing it until they need to take out a second mortgage.

You speak as if you have a lot of experience with Scientology. What exactly did you find useful about the beginner courses?

ure we have nothing to hide. BUT attackers are simply an anti-Scientology propaganda agency so far as we are concerned. They have proven they want no facts and will only lie no matter what they discover. So BANISH all ideas that any fair hearing is intended and start our attack with their first breath. Never wait. Never talk about us—only them.
This part isn't very far off.
The formulaic posts and hostility towards site norms gives it away,

It's just some basic study techniques, like word clearing etc. Some people have what they perceive to be out of body experiences and things like that.

That's it? You haven't actually taken any courses have you?

You're going to have to rewrite that if you want anyone to understand what you're saying.

>whenever I want to learn about an organization I make sure to only listen to that organizations critics. Independent third parties aren't real.
A lot of the critics are independent third parties. You're just dismissing them on the grounds that they're critical of the church. The only people who aren't critical of the church are, surprise, members of the church.

I have close friends who have. I don't want to get tangled up in that. But I don't believe it's completely useless.

Also these guys do a pretty good review: ohnopodcast.com/investigations/2016/2/1/ross-and-carrie-audit-scientology-part-1-going-preclear

How about James R. Lewis? Oh look a non Scientologist who supports the church.

So you have no experience with the church yet you present yourself as an authority figure. Typical. You have no friends that took any courses either, just stop bullshitting. You listened to a stupid podcast and now you think you know something.

Believe what you want, and I don't blame you for defending your faith. I do the same.

Your first mistake was commenting on youtube. Also, how the fuck are we supposed to read your whole stupid argument when you haven't opened the entire comment?

Chris is right though, even if he's being an asshole about it. It's a nuanced issue and you are being a retard. Also, you're probably trying to say that because he acts like an asshole on the internet his critiques of scientology aren't valid, right?

You the guy that said it can cure Arthritis?

You can't see the argument but Chris is right. Yeah okay dude. I'll post the whole conversion just for you. I'm not saying that his criticisms aren't valid because he's an emotional midget, I'm simply saying he's an emotional midget who is incapable of the "critical thinking" he likes to jerk himself off over.

If you are the guy that has only taken some low level classes and spent 2k in the last year you seriously need to rethink your priorities if you're here on Veeky Forums trying to convince yourself its a good investment

...

Is Scientology fun? Will it give me a sense of purpose and a feeling of belonging to a group?

Having read the thread, I think you and Chris are both assholes, but you're more condescending. Here's my last (You).

You have to condescend to lowly people, otherwise they won't understand you. I speak the language of emotion because that's the only language certain people know.

Sure, though ISIS attracts more millennials these days

>you have to condescend lowly people
I gave you a fucking stupid criticism and you still fucked it up. Yes, lets talk down to everyone who isn't on MY intelligence level. Chris is right, get your head out of your ass.

He's only supporting the church to get rich from the notoriety money.

Take your anti-Scientology bigotry elsewhere friend

Yeah that makes sense

What exactly is Chris "the critical thinker at large" Shelton right about? My attitude? That's not an argument.

Maybe last year, but their heyday is over. The alt-right seems to be the new hip club for troubled youth.