Most Exes have heard about the thought-stopping cliches that kept them thinking inside a cult mindset. But do thought-stopping cliches only exist in cultic thinking? Could thought-stopping cliches be keeping you trapped in any mindset at all? Anti-Scientology has its own thought-stopping cliches. Here are the top 5.
Reading others comments here, I agree. I love hearing the wit and wisdom of Alanzo (ideally person to person or in a phone call), that’s easy and fun, as there is a two-way flow, but 15 minutes of anyone talking non-stop? The only person I can listen to like that is Esther Hicks, and that while I am driving. So, if you are going to do audio things, I suggest that you speak very clearly into a mic and find some video software to make it a video instead (even giving it a static image or two) and upload it to youtube. Then youtube will transcribe your audio for you and offer it in captions, you could even then download that and edit. Plus you could chapterize the content. The end result would probably take longer than writing, but…
But I like listening to Alanzo, particularly when he is riffing.
Excellent critique, Dan-o. Thanks.
Another thought stopper might be “Hubbard was a . . . (fill in the blank)”. Many founders of philosophies/religions/cults didn’t and don’t practice what they preach. Debates about the validity of a subject because of the credentials of its founder is a source of continuing debate.
I can squirm out of that debate since I had no knowledge of Hubbard’s (fill in the blank) when I participated in scn and thought he was the bee’s knees. Also, not everything on the lower bridge was entirely Hubbard. Many others contributed and Elron signed his own name to the bottom of everything for copyright protection.
I just thought of another – no scientific research, peer review or proof. The list goes on.
Lastly, attacking the subject itself and the current organization have similarities and differences. This has all been said before and I’m just bring it back to today’s spews . . er . . I mean news.
no clears or ot’s!
Is thought stopping or an invitation to do a due diligence?
Gib – I’m curious if the scn-ists you know have anything to say about the negative publicity about scn. I was thinking if I was a scn-ist heading off to course tonight with the pro scn mindset I had in 1980 how would I feel. If someone said “Rich, don’t you realize what’s going on with that subject?” I might just respond “Well, how would anyone not participating know what’s going on?” It’s not like scn is being attacked from all quarters. Going backwards in time if the internet and cable tv had existed in 1980 doubt it would have busted me off scn while my own experience continued to be positive.
It’s a mixed bag Richard.
One couple is spouse it’s bullshit, the other spouse tech good, DM bad.
Another couple both still in.
Another couple, got divorced and one married a wog. Oh, so much drama with that scene.
As far as other couples, they have kids on staff at orgs. I don’t know where they stand in present time. Could be underground or not, many connections to scientology related business’s so nobody really talks.
As far as negative publicity. Well, I didn’t start researching the internet till the Debbie Cook 2012 email. Prior to that, I didn’t even follow the news on TV or the internet although I was on the internet selling wares, my guess it’s similar to some of OT’s I know.
I didn’t even know Debbie Cook left the Sea Org until 2012.
My guess is some of the OT’s I know are underground and I don’t know, but I do know some are out as I responded to marildi in another tread here on Alanzo’s blog.
All these peeps are people who have done the entire bridge. I can’t tell these peeps no clears or OT’s, why I’m a lower level bridge completion, not clear, so I have no credibility in their minds when it comes to scientology and they will not listen to me, my use of appeals to logos, ethos and pathos is limited, but a crowd of exscientologists is helpful especially those that have done the entire bridge.
It took me two years to get my spouse out. And even that is still a struggle.
Thanks for the reply, Gib. I laughed at the divorce and then scn-ist/wog “drama” you mentioned even though it really isn’t a laughing matter.
I was single when I left and had no family in scn. Even so a longtime friend told me he could no longer “communicate” with me. Even though he didn’t say “disconnect” it still startled me.
In my time I didn’t know anyone who referred to scn as their religion, but the firm belief in past lives puts it in that category as much as Buddhism or Hinduism imo. Add to that the rest of the beliefs and way of thinking and it’s understandable that someone might not be able to just drop out.
Even with the nonsense the COB is putting out some people have compromised or adapted. Hopefully some fence sitters will come across Alanzo’s blog or a similar forum where not everyone is totally hostile to the subject and have some realizations about getting scn in perspective.
One time when I was in Los Angeles I had a chat with a Hare Krishna who was marching around chanting and sort of compared notes. He was somewhat familiar with scn. His viewpoint was “Philosophy without God is empty.” I’m sure the JWs who occasionally show up at my door would love to be invited in and discuss their “principles”. I doubt I’d have anything to say which would immediately change their mind.
P.S. “fence sitters” is not meant to be derogatory. Just people deciding what parts of scn were/are valuable, workable and so on.
I wouldn’t call them “fence-sitters”.
I’d call them “exes who are no longer at war with Scientology”. They’re not a member of either warring tribe.
They reject the deception and hysteria on both sides, and embrace the truth on both sides as well.
They do not recognize that there is a fence there at all.
Anti-polarization
You decided to “test” the people who have been trusting you enough to visit your site? Bend over so I can kick your ass.
LOL!!
It’s just a little critical thinking game, Eileen.
It’s called “Spot where Al contradicted himself!”
It’s fun. And it’s a good game to play after Scientology. I’m sure you don’t need it, since you’ve never joined a cult or did anything without a perfection of rationality. ( :-7 )
Depends on what you want this blog to be. your call.
A place where critical thinking is encouraged?
Yep. That’s what I’ve always wanted this blog to be.
After listening to your talk on Thought Stopping Clichés, I feel I don’t have to think about Thought Stopping Clichés. 🙂
YHA!
So nobody noticed the contradiction in this talk I gave? I put it in there specifically to see if anyone was really listening, and thinking critically, or just swallowing whatever I had to say whole.
I noticed something, but I figured it was one of those Freudian slip things 🙂 when you actually refer to Scientology *as a criminal organization?