Pages: [1]   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Scientologists: Was LRH Stupid?  (Read 896 times)
rockyslammer
Editors
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +19/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 531



« on: December 25, 2008, 07:24:05 AM »

"...That isn't my opinion, that's David Miscavige's opinion. Is
Miscavige right? Was LRH really stupid?

Let me clarify.

LRH declared, in "Keeping Scientology Working", that the technology
was complete and was as perfect as it was ever going to get. He said
don't mess with it, don't change it, and stop others from altering it.

Hubbard, over the years, personally taught many people how to apply
the tech. He trained people on how to audit and supervise. He worked
out all the training methods and content. When he trained the Flag
auditors and supervisors, he declared their training to be "perfect".
He personally developed and approved all the auditor training courses,
checksheets, etc.

Yet, only a few years after Hubbard's death, Miscavige completely
rewrote the technical training - methods and content, and dubbed it
the "Golden Age of Tech". He then canceled all the certificates of
everyone trained under Hubbard's methods. Even those who had been
personally trained by Ron. Personally trained by Ron!

Is this clear enough for you? Miscavige said that L. Ron Hubbard was
wrong! Miscavige said that Hubbard's training methods were wrong! He
said that all those personally trained by Ron were so poorly trained
by Hubbard that they had to retrain from scratch, using the correct,
Miscavige methods.

Was Hubbard so stupid and so unobservant that he couldn't train people
competently? That's what Miscavige claims in no uncertain terms. What
do you think?

How about another example?

For more than thirty years, Hubbard wrote tons of books. The books
were reprinted many, many times. Various people have reported working
with LRH on getting the reprints exactly right, under Ron's strict
guidance. Others have reported seeing copies of the books, marked up
with LRH's notes in preparation for a reprint. LRH took great care
with his books and their many reprints. To Hubbard, his books were the
most important things he had ever produced.

Yet, for the second time after LRH's death, Miscavige has undertaken
an extensive rewrite of Hubbard's books, claiming they were wrong,
wrong, wrong! Today, you are not allowed to own the original books
printed under LRH's directions, you must own the Miscavige versions.

Was Hubbard so stupid and so unobservant that he missed those massive
errors, even as he read his own books and noted down corrections and
changes he wanted, year after year, decade after decade? Was he so
stupid that he allowed significant errors to continue printing after
printing after printing? This is what Miscavige claims. Do you think
he's correct?

You can't have it both ways. You can't think that LRH was brilliant,
but then, at the same time believe that Hubbard was so stupid and so
wrong about his own technology, his own training, and his own
statements about the people he trained. You can't have it both ways.

You can't believe that Hubbard was a careful, thorough, brilliant
writer, but then, at the same time believe that he never, ever checked
his own works as they were being printed. Never cared. Never checked
his books again when they were reprinted. This is something even the
most inexperienced of authors takes pains to do. Was Ron as careless
and stupid as Miscavige claims?

You can't have it both ways. If you believe Miscavige, then you must
agree with him that Hubbard was abysmally stupid and careless about
the things that Ron said were absolutely, vitally, most important: his
all-important tech, and his all-important books.

If you are going to go along with Miscavige's massive alterations then
you obviously agree with him that Ron was really, really stupid.

And that's what Miscavige wants you to believe.

Think about it."

Posted by Just Bill
http://askthescientologist.blogspot.com/2008/05/scientolgists-was-lrh...
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
Print
Jump to: