This week, a deep look at “love bombing,” a summary of how the E-meter works, the cognitive dissonance of being a Scientology Clear and a lot more. Enjoy!
(1) I was briefly involved with the Landmark Forum (I call it Scientology-lite: previously EST and lots stolen from LRH). When you start into the cult there’s a lot of love bombing and encouragement, but the more I got into it the more I saw the man behind the curtain and after volunteering for a Forum, I had a “lightbulb” moment and realized that it was all a sham. My critical thinking had finally kicked in and I started to question it all.
I’m curious about your thoughts on how “love bombing” can disengage a person’s critical thinking skills, especially when they’re enticed by a cult or coercive relationship.
(2) Does the person being audited ever see the E-meter move or is it only the auditor who sees it? And do they actually see movement or are they making it up? What do you think is going on with the hand contact on the ‘cans’ and any movement of an E-meter needle?
(3) Given the many times you had read Dianetics, how did you handle the dissonance between you being acknowledged as reaching the state of Clear while not having the powers or attributes of a Clear like perfect recall?
(4) Leah was at least the third biggest celebrity in the cult. Do you know if there was more to the situation than simply asking where Shelley was? Do you know any other celebrities that were treated as harshly? What did the organization hope to gain by pursuing this course of action with someone who had given so much money?
(5) We have heard of many examples of “Fair Game” by the CoS against former members, public officials, journalists and critics. The stories tell of a church that is intend on “destroying” people. In extreme cases it seems like the Church is intent on going so far as to induce their targets to commit suicide, and that the death of such SPs would be almost be celebrated in the church. However you have mentioned that, as far as you know, Scientology has never had anyone killed or inflicted serious physical violence upon someone. I believe you talked about even when you were in the Sea Org you would have not considered doing that to another person, SP or not. We know that violence can be part of Scientology, from the stories of LRH throwing people overboard in the 70s to Miscavige assaulting people on the Int Base. But these seem more acts of anger in the moment against people who wouldn’t fight back, as opposed to a campaign of terror against external enemies. I remember a discussion you had with Aaron Smith-Levin saying you wouldn’t even hurt a pet of an SP. I believe it was in discussion about a critic of the church who was being targeted by PIs found their dog had died. While there may have been speculation that the Church did it, you both agreed it was unlikely. So my question is, where does Scientology draw the line with how they go after their perceived enemies? Life destroying harassment is ok but direct violence is out? Is this a moral/ethical distinction or more about what they feel they can get away with?
(6) After the release of the Batman trailer, how excited for the release are you and Mel on a scale of 1-10? 10 meaning you’re very excited, 1-9 Meaning you’re wrong!
(7) What is worse, The Power of Source, the jazz album Hubbard made on the Apollo, or Hubbard’s training films? (It is really hard to describe what makes a truly terrible movie a bad one, but it just kills me that these films have not been leaked.)
(8) If Hubbard was able to navigate the universe, go back and forward in time, how come he didn’t see the Internet coming?
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS