You mean the argument that the Harvard dude gets paid to make on behalf of Scientology in the book? I thought that was pretty stupid.
― Burt Stuntin (Hurting 2), Friday, 7 February 2014 20:24 (ten years ago) link
Like as though there's some victorian science style "THE PHASES OF RELIGION" chart where you can point to the "VIOLENT FUCKED UP ABUSIVE INFANCY" stage on the chart.
― Burt Stuntin (Hurting 2), Friday, 7 February 2014 20:26 (ten years ago) link
I mean (1) no, not EVERY religion goes through that stage, and (2) this is a religion that developed in the 20th and 21st century, i.e. in the modern world. We have different standards now. You don't get a fucking pass because you're an infant-stage religion or whatever.
― Burt Stuntin (Hurting 2), Friday, 7 February 2014 20:27 (ten years ago) link
Yeah, and not every religion has a paper trail like this one. Hence: faith. But this stuff transcends faith into the realm of outright obfuscation, blackmail and lies. I can't think of any religion as outright vindictive or litigious toward dissenters. Talk about the banality of evil: CoS will kidnap your family and sue you into submission.
― Josh in Chicago, Friday, 7 February 2014 20:40 (ten years ago) link
I got this from the library Monday, finished it Wednesday. Probably caused me to swear out loud while reading more than any book in recent memory. So many horrific things that the book doesn't even have time to explore in depth, like the 18 yo girl who tried to leave and instead was held on a ship for the next 12 years.
For all the things that get called Orwellian, the things done to language by Scientologists seem above and beyond, it kind of terrifies me to read these passionate invocations of "tech" and "enturbulation" and "confront."
― The Wisdom of Gafflers (JoeStork), Friday, 7 February 2014 20:53 (ten years ago) link
Naziism had its violent infancy stage like every other religion, etc.
― Burt Stuntin (Hurting 2), Friday, 7 February 2014 20:57 (ten years ago) link
Wright circles back to this POV at the conclusion and generally validates it
― How dare you tarnish the reputation of Turturro's yodel (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 7 February 2014 21:03 (ten years ago) link
this is a religion that developed in the 20th and 21st century, i.e. in the modern world. We have different standards now. You don't get a fucking pass because you're an infant-stage religion or whatever.
and fwiw I think this is legit, and Wright doesn't give them a pass either.
― How dare you tarnish the reputation of Turturro's yodel (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 7 February 2014 21:04 (ten years ago) link
like sure Xtianity and Mormonism were basically insane in their infancy, but their claims didn't have to withstand scientific rigor etc
― How dare you tarnish the reputation of Turturro's yodel (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 7 February 2014 21:05 (ten years ago) link
what makes scientology unique afaik is that they treat some of their fundamental religious beliefs as copyrighted secrets and outright lie about them.
― Matt Armstrong, Friday, 7 February 2014 21:14 (ten years ago) link
but yes, doing that isn't as bad as the inquisition or whatever
― Matt Armstrong, Friday, 7 February 2014 21:15 (ten years ago) link
The original e-meters were Campbells soup cans! Soup Cans! With wires attached!
― Josh in Chicago, Friday, 7 February 2014 21:19 (ten years ago) link
― How dare you tarnish the reputation of Turturro's yodel (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, February 7, 2014 4:03 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
I feel like you have to turn part of your brain off to validate this conclusion
― Burt Stuntin (Hurting 2), Friday, 7 February 2014 21:27 (ten years ago) link
FWIW I'm basically fine with any religious "truth claim" that operates purely in the world of faith. If you want to believe that thetans inhabit your body, that the world is 73 trillion years old, etc., that's fine with me, as long as you're not allowing that belief to override scientific truth, to operate in the material world, etc. I don't mind people believing in the bible, so long as they aren't using young-earth-creationism to deny basic scientific facts that have actual real-world consequences. I don't mind people believing in the power of unblocking their impedences or whatever to heal themselves, so long as the church isn't denying its members actual medical care.
― Burt Stuntin (Hurting 2), Friday, 7 February 2014 21:29 (ten years ago) link
In other words I don't have a problem with "crazy" beliefs, only with harmful ones. Scientology has its share of harmful beliefs, even putting aside how terrible the actual organization is.
― Burt Stuntin (Hurting 2), Friday, 7 February 2014 21:31 (ten years ago) link
I'm not sure where you're drawing the distinction there
― How dare you tarnish the reputation of Turturro's yodel (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 7 February 2014 21:34 (ten years ago) link
ie between harmful and crazy
I think it's pretty clear
― Burt Stuntin (Hurting 2), Friday, 7 February 2014 21:36 (ten years ago) link
e.g. "Prayer will help me heal" vs. "Prayer is preferable to surgery as a way to treat my son's cancer"
― Burt Stuntin (Hurting 2), Friday, 7 February 2014 21:37 (ten years ago) link
Scientology will "clear" me versus psychotherapy will heal me is probably the big point of contention
The fact that a great number of people are pulled into their church as a life-organizing entity, and that it decries psychology for using the same methodologies that Scientology bastardizes and adds placebos to, is probably one of the more important but harder to prove bits
The majority of people lured in aren't there for the religious bits -- if they're not there as a career-booster in hollywood, they're there for auditing, a community, and the self-help stuff.
― mh, Friday, 7 February 2014 22:20 (ten years ago) link
That isn't to say that psychiatry and the modern state of prescribing psychological drugs don't have placebos, only that it's incredibly disingenuous for Scientology to place itself in opposition to therapy
― mh, Friday, 7 February 2014 22:22 (ten years ago) link
Key to the book is the LRH epiphany that there can be no end to the treatment. It's self-help that's totally beholden to someone else. You never get better, because you're never done. You're never "clear." And all the while you are accruing debts - personal and monetary - you cannot pay. I was fascinated by all the machinations involving secret next level instructions or whatever, claims of lost chapters or new courses.
― Josh in Chicago, Friday, 7 February 2014 22:43 (ten years ago) link
idk christianity has this debt you can never repay called original sin, right
― mh, Friday, 7 February 2014 22:50 (ten years ago) link
Yeah, but that's made up.
― Josh in Chicago, Friday, 7 February 2014 22:52 (ten years ago) link
loads of religions have extorted money from their followers over the years, let's be real
― How dare you tarnish the reputation of Turturro's yodel (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 7 February 2014 23:00 (ten years ago) link
would anyone like to purchase some indulgences etc
― How dare you tarnish the reputation of Turturro's yodel (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 7 February 2014 23:01 (ten years ago) link
But they literally hand you an itemized bill at the end, sometimes in the six figures. What other religion does that?
― Josh in Chicago, Friday, 7 February 2014 23:08 (ten years ago) link
u go to hell if you don't tithe 10% iirc
― mh, Friday, 7 February 2014 23:15 (ten years ago) link
every Christian denomination, even the Catholic church at this point, acknowledges that salvation is possible outside of its particular sect (except maybe not the JWs). comparing scientology to other faiths on an "eh, they all pull the same hokum" level is really simplistic thinking - all religions are interested in persuading their congregants to remain in the fold & to donate their money, no doubt. and all are interested in insisting on the veracity of their truth-claims. not all charge outright for access to higher levels of truth on a cash-for-truth basis, and almost none will actively make your life miserable if you speak out against them publicly. Catholics did this centuries ago, yes, in a very different way. the comparison is really, really surface-level though
― joe perry has been dead for years (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Friday, 7 February 2014 23:33 (ten years ago) link
let's not pretend churches/religions are static things. I wasn't saying they are all the same at this current point in time.
― How dare you tarnish the reputation of Turturro's yodel (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 7 February 2014 23:56 (ten years ago) link
almost none will actively make your life miserable if you speak out against them publicly
Romans just fed you to the lions iirc
― How dare you tarnish the reputation of Turturro's yodel (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 7 February 2014 23:57 (ten years ago) link
if anything this stuff makes Scientologists look really archaic, resorting to outdated tactics and acting like modernity never happened
― How dare you tarnish the reputation of Turturro's yodel (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 7 February 2014 23:58 (ten years ago) link
I in no way intended that to be serious, I feel that scientology's economic and social debt scale isn't in any way comparable to any major world religion currently extant, at least to my limited knowledge.
I think the "eh, most religions are vicious and angry at the start, or are even vicious and angry" is a pretty poor lens for viewing Scientology. Yes, religious institutions have their abuses but it's generally seen as a good to route them out, for the most part.
― mh, Saturday, 8 February 2014 00:57 (ten years ago) link
tl;dr I meant that as a lazy zing against the idea, not as an endorsement of it
― mh, Saturday, 8 February 2014 01:04 (ten years ago) link
I read Going Clear and I thought it was great. I had a friend who (before I knew her) was involved with Scientology. She spent about $80,000 and was still on the very lower levels. She doesn't like to talk about it much because she's embarrassed about getting suckered. It's really expensive! And it did not turn her into a famous Hollywood rock star.
― DonkeyTeeth, Saturday, 8 February 2014 02:25 (ten years ago) link
Famous, like Kirstie Alley and Jenna Elfman!
― Josh in Chicago, Saturday, 8 February 2014 02:57 (ten years ago) link
Yeah, what exactly is the track record of Scientologists actually getting famous? I don't count Beck, because he only went back to the faith later in life. Do we just not know of them?
― DonkeyTeeth, Saturday, 8 February 2014 03:39 (ten years ago) link
umm the Romans fed Christians to the lions dude. (except that didn't actually happen, either. Not sure where you got the "Christians feeding ppl to lions" bit tbrr
― joe perry has been dead for years (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Saturday, 8 February 2014 04:10 (ten years ago) link
oh wait nm I don't know why I thought u said otherwise my bad
― joe perry has been dead for years (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Saturday, 8 February 2014 04:11 (ten years ago) link
I wonder what the deal was with Giovanni Ribisi and Cat Power, i.e. to what extent she got pulled into Scientology too when they were a couple. (She's always seemed somewhat psychologically unstable/ fragile, hence possibly susceptible to this kind of thing. Like other such religious/ cultic/ psycho-philosophical-lifestyle systems, maybe it even "helps" for a while. With addiction, etc.)
Don't Scientos usually mate-- pair up with-- each other? They may date outside the religion, but do they ever marry (or get into long-term relationships) with those outside it?
― drash, Saturday, 8 February 2014 09:06 (ten years ago) link
He's now married to Agyness Deyn and she's deflecting all the Sci questions people throw at her.
― baked beings on toast (suzy), Saturday, 8 February 2014 09:16 (ten years ago) link
learned today that william s burroughs went clear in the 60s before being excommunicated for "treason"
― i want to say one word to you, just one word:buzzfeed (difficult listening hour), Saturday, 8 February 2014 09:42 (ten years ago) link
didn't he and someone else (gysin maybe?) go around disrupting scientology meetings in london by playing back prerecorded tapes of some kind while in the audience? guessing that was post-treason. i remember in ed sanders revised-revised edition of his manson book (grain of salt) there being some totally O_o connections drawn between some of the family and the disappearance of numerous scientologists.
― no lime tangier, Saturday, 8 February 2014 10:05 (ten years ago) link
as someone mentioned above one of the most fascinating details to me was the fact that top-level scientologists, even now, still speak in '50s slang because thats what hubbard did.
how crazy is that. its just the best.
― socki (s1ocki), Saturday, 8 February 2014 16:20 (ten years ago) link
that's swell
― kinder, Saturday, 8 February 2014 16:24 (ten years ago) link
― baked beings on toast (suzy), Saturday, February 8, 2014 3:16 AM (8 hours ago) Bookmark
i was just wondering whatever happened to her and now i know. speaking of scientology & celebrities, i caught maybe 10 min of "can't hardly wait" the other week and saw the part where jenna elfman is this beleaguered smoking angel who tells that blonde dude about some opportunity she missed and then i stopped watching, but it reminded me that all of these people are actors too. i wonder how much faking it they do when they're talking with the sea org muckity mucks.
― we slowly invented brains (La Lechera), Saturday, 8 February 2014 17:30 (ten years ago) link
this is pretty trashy
― mustread guy (schlump), Saturday, 8 February 2014 17:39 (ten years ago) link
Trashy on my part? I like Cat Power, and I'm hardly an emblem of mental health/ stability myself (on the contrary), kind of identify with that. Just extrapolating from the Ribisi relationship, which always seemed strange to me.
On the other hand, won't deny that I sometimes take an interest in trashy celebrity gossip. Guilty as charged.
― drash, Saturday, 8 February 2014 17:50 (ten years ago) link
Finished Going Clear. What a ride, eh?
― Burt Stuntin (Hurting 2), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 02:12 (ten years ago) link
― joe perry has been dead for years (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Friday, February 7, 2014 6:33 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
After finishing the book and reading his epilogue, I don't think he was being as, er, eccumenical? even-handed? as Shakey suggested. He seems to more be comparing and contrasting different "new" religious movements. He notes that some share specific elements with Scientology but he doesn't make any of them out to be an exact fit. You've got mormonism, which goes full-on legit/mainstream, drops some of its more unpopular practices (bigamy) and fields presidential candidates, and then you've also got Jim Jones and mass suicide. And then there's the Amish, who are very cloistered and easily shun but otherwise seem relatively harmless, and the Branch Davidians who he seems a little more uncertain about. I think he reasonably calls psychotherapy Scientology's more respectable cousin or something, but he doesn't imply that psychotherapy is "just as bad" as scientology as an institution, as opposed to as a philosophy.
― Burt Stuntin (Hurting 2), Tuesday, 11 February 2014 02:34 (ten years ago) link