From ao579@yfn.ysu.edu Sun Jun 18 12:37:22 BST 1995 A recent thread frequently mentioned "Keeping Scientology Working," a policy of obvious importance to the cult. Because of its importance, I've decided to post the policy letter here, along with my own comments and criticism on it. This is taken from "The Volunteer Minister's Handbook," (c1976, Church of Scientology of California). _______________________________________________________________ HCO PL 7 Feb 1965 KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING We have some time since passed the point of achieving uniformly workable technology. The only thing now is getting the technology applied. If you can't get the technology applied then you can't deliver what's promised. It's as simple as that. If you can get the technology applied, you *can* deliver what's promised. The only thing you can be upbraided for by students or pcs is "no results." Trouble spots occur only where there are "no results." Attacks from governments or monopolies occur only where there are "no results" or "bad results." Therefore the road before Scientology is clear and its ultimate success is assured *if* the technology is applied. So it is the task of all members of the Church of Scientology, Volunteer Ministers and field staff members to get the correct technology applied. _________________________________________________________________ Hubbard sets the tone of the piece here. I'm struck by the *mechanical* nature of his tech -- there's only one way of doing it right (Hubbard's way) and it always works it it's done his way. Do *all* human minds really operate so uniformly? Is there no diversity in human mental processes? _________________________________________________________________ Getting the correct technology applied consists of: One: Having the correct technology. Two: Knowing the technology. Three: Knowing it is correct. Four: Teaching correctly the correct technology. Five: Applying the technology. Six: Seeing that the technology is correctly applied. Seven: Hammering out of existence incorrect technology. Eight: Knocking out incorrect applications. Nine: Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology. Ten: Closing the door on incorrect technology. _________________________________________________________________ These 10 points are the essentials of this policy, although it's actually the last four points that are discussed. It seems to me that "Three: Knowing it is correct" is given short shrift here, since without "belief" in the tech, none of the rest applies. Note the "power verbs" in the last four points. _________________________________________________________________ One above has been done. Two has been achieved by many. Three is achieved by the individual applying the correct technology in a proper manner and observing that it works that way. Four is being done daily successfully in most parts of the world. Five is consistently accomplished daily. Six is achieved by instructors and supervisors consistently. Seven is done by a few but is a weak point. Eight is not worked on hard enough. Nine is impeded by the "reasonable" attitude of the not quite bright. Ten is seldom done with enough ferocity. Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten are the only places Scientology can bog down in any areas. The reasons for this are not hard to find. (1) A weak certainty that it works in Three above can lead to weakness in Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. (b) [sic--!] further, the not-too-bright have a bad point on the button self-importance [sic--hunh?] (c) The lower the I.Q., the more the individual is shut off from the fruits of observation. (d) The aberrated computations people make them defend themselves against anything they confront good or bad and seek to make it wrong. (e) The bank seeks to knock out the good and perpetrate the bad. Thus, we as Scientologists and as an organization must be very alert to Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. ____________________________________________________________ I have no idea what Hubbard's trying to say in (b) above. Anybody got any clues? In fact, nothing beyond (1) above seems to make much sense. This is a continuation of my analysis of HCO PL 7 February 1965, "Keeping Scientology Working": _________________________________________________________________ In all the years I have been engaged in research I have kept my communication lines wide open for research data. I once had the idea that a group could evolve truth. A third of a century has thoroughly disabused me of that idea. Willing as I was to accept suggestions and data, only a handful of suggestions (less than twenty) had long run value and *none* were major or basic; and when I did accept major or basic suggestions and used them, we went astray and I repented and eventually had to "eat crow." On the other hand there have been thousands and thousands of suggestions and writings which, if accepted and acted upon, would have resulted in the complete destruction of all our work as well as the sanity of pcs. So I know what a group of people will do and how insane they will go in accepting unworkable "technology." By actual record the percentages are about twenty to 100,000 that a group of human beings will dream up bad technology to destroy good technology. As we could have gotten along without suggestions, then, we had better steel ourselves to continue to do so now that we have made it. This point will, of course, be attacked as "unpopular," "egotistical," and "undemocratic." It very well may be. But it is also a survival point. And I don't see that popular measures, self-abnegation and democracy have done anything for Man but push him further into the mud. Currently, popularity endorses degraded novels, self-abnegation has filled the South East Asian jungles with stone idols and corpses, and democracy has given us inflation and income tax. ______________________________________________________________ These two paragraphs lucidly reveal Hubbard's mindset. He invented the tech -- it's all his doing. He invented a fact ("by actual record the percentages...") to validate his stance. Hubbard's statement about democracy, that it has done nothing for man "but push him further into the mud" is probably the most direct evidence I've seen to date to show his obvious totalitarian viewpoint. Of course, that viewpoint has been made flesh in his organization--the "Church" . _________________________________________________________________ Our technology has not been discovered by a group. True, if the group had not supported me in many ways I could not have discovered it either. But it remains that if in its formative stages it was not discovered by a group, then group efforts, one can safely assume, will not add to it or successfully alter it in the future. I can only say this now that it is done. There remains, of course, group tabulation or coordination of what has been done, which will be valuable--only so long as it does not seek to alter basic principles and successful applications. The contributions that were worthwhile in this period of forming the technology were help in the form of friendship, of defense, of organization, of dissemination, of application, of advices on results and of finance. These were great contributions and were, are are, appreciated. Many thousands contributed in this way and made us what we are. Discovery contribution was not however part of the broad picture. We will not speculate here on why this was so or how I came to rise above the bank. We are dealing only in facts and the above is a fact--the group left to its own devices would not have evolved Scientology but with wild dramatization of the bank called "new ideas" would have wiped it out. Supporting this is the fact that Man has never before evolved workable mental technology and emphasizing it is the vicious technology he *did* evolve--psychiatry, psychology, surgery, shock treatment, whips, duress, punishment, etc., ad infinitum. So far, while keeping myself in complete communication with all suggestions, I have not failed on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten in areas I could supervise closely. But it's not good enough for just myself and a few others to work at this. Whenever this control as per Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten has been relaxed the whole organizational area has failed. Witness Elizabeth, N.J., Wichita, the early organizations and groups. They crashed only because I no longer did Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. Then, when they were all messed up, you saw the obvious "reasons" for failure. But ahead of that they ceased to deliver and *that* involved them in other reasons. _________________________________________________________________ This is a perfect example of Hubbard's muddled, meandering literary style, which makes him so hard to read and comprehend. He does tell us loud and clear, however, that the technology is *his* and *his* alone. Any contributions to the tech other than his were merely assistance in getting *his* tech out to others. I find it interesting that Hubbard was taking upon himself the mantle of deity all the way back in 1965. He tells us straight out that his ability to "rise above the bank" is what allowed him to "discover" the technology and save mankind. And, of course, he manages to let us know that it wasn't *his* fault that his early enterprises in Elizabeth, NJ, and Wichita, KS, went bankrupt. Rather, it was because he allowed others to lead him astray. Interesting....