How the human mind actually works

jugglingmuggles · Post by **jugglingmuggles** » Wed Jul 25, 2007 2:58 pm

http://www.humanmind.org/

Simple!

Carl44 · Post by **Carl44** » Wed Jul 25, 2007 3:02 pm

sorrymine is not working well enough to watch it all

is that the scientology guy ... hubbard

jugglingmuggles · Post by **jugglingmuggles** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 3:20 pm

jimbo;668029 wrote: sorrymine is not working well enough to watch it all

is that the scientology guy ... hubbard

Yes - he researched and developed the applied religious philosophy of Scientology. Scientology is designed to be used. So you can see if it works or not. It does. That's why I'm a Scientologist.

Post by **spot** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 4:24 pm

There's a thing I never quite understood about the story of events from pre-history. The story is, as far as I understand it, specific down to time periods as short as weeks and months. Is there documentation transmitting the story from then to now, or was the story reconstructed in some other way?

nvalleyvee · Post by **nvalleyvee** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 8:56 pm

I have a firm foothold in science. I don't believe in any religion. I only believe what can be proven through science. The rest of belief is speculation...this applies to science and religion. The problem is..............science has proof and religion does not.

jugglingmuggles · Post by **jugglingmuggles** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:37 pm

spot;668862 wrote: There's a thing I never quite understood about the story of events from pre-history. The story is, as far as I understand it, specific down to time periods as short as weeks and months. Is there documentation transmitting the story from then to now, or was the story reconstructed in some other way?

You're talking about Scientology I guess. It's a general rule that Scientologists don't talk about any events before their current lifetime. That's mainly for the reason that many people get upset and angry about you saying you've lived before etc.

jugglingmuggles · Post by **jugglingmuggles** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:41 pm

nvalleyvee;668942 wrote: I have a firm foothold in science. I don't believe in any religion. I only believe what can be proven through science. The rest of belief is speculation...this applies to science and religion. The problem is..............science has proof and religion does not.

I only believe what can be proven through scientific method too. As someone who has gone to one of the best universities in the world and seen many of the people who would become some of the best scientists I am also a bit wary of only believing a theory because it is accepted by some scientists or in academic circles! First hand observation is my preferred method of determining whether something is true or not.

Post by **spot** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:36 pm

jugglingmuggles;668951 wrote: You're talking about Scientology I guess. It's a general rule that Scientologists don't talk about any events before their current lifetime. That's mainly for the reason that many people get upset and angry about you saying you've lived before etc.

I'm sure that's the case as far as personal recollection is concerned. Is it also the case in regard to queries such as mine which ask nothing about the non-personal facts themselves, merely about their method of transmission? My question was merely whether the story of events from pre-history are recovered by way of documentation or by way of, for example and since you mentioned it, past life recollection. It's a meta-question, a category I'd have thought fell into a different set of rules. I've no interest in discussing the event stories themselves.

It's rather like asking a Christian how the events of the life of Jesus were transmitted to the current era, rather than asking what the gospels contain.

jugglingmuggles · Post by **jugglingmuggles** » Fri Jul 27, 2007 12:18 pm

spot,

Does it answer your question to say that in Scientology you're encouraged not to believe anything that you can't experience for yourself?

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 27, 2007 12:32 pm

It does, thank you.

My experience of mysticism leads me to the opinion that similar spiritual transcendence can be accounted within different traditions as having wildly differing meanings and interpretations. Some of those traditions consider their interpretation to be uniquely correct amid a miasma of misinformed and misleading competitors. Other traditions teach that other external interpretations have a validity and interest no less than that offered within.

Are you uncomfortable with the suggestion that each tradition travels at least some of the same common ground as a premise?

Would you say that Scientology's interpretations of this common ground are the one true interpretation, or one among many valid modes of exploring?

jugglingmuggles · Post by **jugglingmuggles** » Fri Jul 27, 2007 12:35 pm

spot;669389 wrote: It does, thank you.

My experience of mysticism leads me to the opinion that similar spiritual transcendence can be accounted within different traditions as having wildly differing meanings and interpretations. Some of those traditions consider their interpretation to be uniquely correct amid a miasma of misinformed and misleading competitors. Other traditions teach that other external interpretations have a validity and interest no less than that offered within.

Are you uncomfortable with the suggestion that each tradition travels at least some of the same common ground as a premise?

Would you say that Scientology's interpretations of this common ground are the one true interpretation, or one among many valid modes of exploring?

Everything in Scientology is based around what is workable. There are no claims to absolute truth - just that the techniques and tenets are extremely workable and useful.

jugglingmuggles · Post by **jugglingmuggles** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 9:48 pm

The site explains how the mind works and how you can be free from unwanted mental problems (which are basically all problems)!

I'd expect more people to be interested than have shown an interest so far!

Post by **spot** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 12:25 am

jugglingmuggles;672149 wrote: The site explains how the mind works and how you can be free from unwanted mental problems (which are basically all problems)!

I'd expect more people to be interested than have shown an interest so far!

I'd thought we'd concluded earlier that the site was one interpretation out of many alternative modes of exploring the mind (and, I'd suggest though we didn't mention it, possibly the underlying brain - I'm sure you'd disagree with that). The site explains an internally consistent model of how the mind works and how you can be free from unwanted mental problems. Application of those techniques and tenets to this workable model can (I accept your word for it, I have no experience of them myself) free the applier from unwanted mental problems.

What leaves many people puzzled about Scientology is the price leveled for enlightenment. Some religions - the four Abrahamic religions for example - have been open and without secrets, some - Mithraism, perhaps - have been closed and secret. None, to the best of my knowledge, have sold their secrets to their adherents for anything so mundane as cash. Mystery religions undoubtedly have levels of revelation and with good cause, since the journey is in large part the message. I may be being entirely unfair to Scientology and repeating the lies of its detractors, but is money not an important aspect of the church's activity at a personal (as opposed to an understandable corporate) level?

jugglingmuggles · Post by **jugglingmuggles** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 12:52 am

spot;672174 wrote: I'd thought we'd concluded earlier that the site was one interpretation out of many alternative modes of exploring the mind (and, I'd suggest though we didn't mention it, possibly the underlying brain - I'm sure you'd disagree with that). The site explains an internally consistent model of how the mind works and how you can be free from unwanted mental problems. Application of those techniques and tenets to this workable model can (I accept your word for it, I have no experience of them myself) free the applier from unwanted mental problems.
Yes - whilst it's one of many models of the mind it's about the only one that actually works (though similar models can perhaps achieve a degree of the workablity to the degree that they are similar).

What leaves many people puzzled about Scientology is the price leveled for enlightenment. Some religions - the four Abrahamic religions for example - have been open and without secrets, some - Mithraism, perhaps - have been closed and secret. None, to the best of my knowledge, have sold their secrets to their adherents for anything so mundane as cash. Mystery religions undoubtedly have levels of revelation and with good cause, since the journey is in large part the message. I may be being entirely unfair to Scientology and repeating the lies of its detractors, but is money not an important aspect of the church's activity at a personal (as opposed to an understandable corporate) level?
The site is totally free and they were even offering free Dianetics books.

Scientology churches charge for services. An auditor (someone trained in using techniques to free people of mental problems) would most likely help friends and family for free.

Like most churches Scientology exists because of the money it receives from it's members.

Scientology auditing is labor-intensive and providing it for free might work in the short term, but in the long term it won't.

The pricing of Scientology is designed based on the optimum good. And if you've got prices from anti-Scientology sites you can be sure they're vastly inflated.

If you're desperate for Scientology and broke you can become a staff member or you can get free training from someone who is training to be an auditor.

You could compare it to the medical profession - what would happen to that if there were no government grants and all the services were offered for free?

Post by **spot** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 2:19 am

jugglingmuggles;672177 wrote: The pricing of Scientology is designed based on the optimum good. And if you've got prices from anti-Scientology sites you can be sure they're vastly inflated.It's a long while since I googled "scientology", it's not a particular interest of mine. I'll restrict my searches for this thread to a subset of"church of scientology" site:.gov(which gives me 13000 hits) so as to avoid any anti-Scientology sites.

When I said that "None, to the best of my knowledge, have sold their secrets to their adherents for anything so mundane as cash" I had in mind the profit-oriented structure of the church, as indicated by:IRC 501(c)(3) clearly precludes exemption for all organizations (churches and religious organizations too) whose net earnings inure to the benefit of a private shareholder or individual. The Founding Church of Scientology v. U.S., 412 F.2d 1197 (Ct. Cl. 1969).

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicf79.pdf

Rather than "the pricing of Scientology is designed based on the optimum good" it seems to be designed on the basis of shareholding and dividend payments.

jugglingmuggles · Post by **jugglingmuggles** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 2:28 am

Given that the IRS, with all their resources, took the Church of Scientology to court and lost I don't think their arguments are valid.

Your last statement is patently not true and without a shred of evidence.

Post by **spot** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 2:34 am

jugglingmuggles;672195 wrote: Given that the IRS, with all their resources, took the Church of Scientology to court and lost I don't think their arguments are valid.

Your last statement is patently not true and without a shred of evidence.

I must be failing to grasp some key aspect of your thinking here. The Church of Scientology is a corporation, isn't it? It does have shareholders, doesn't it? There's a duty on all corporations to maximize the value of shareholder interests while operating within the law, isn't there? What's "patently not true" about any of that? What evidence would be relevant? Proof that the church is an incorporated trading body?

erica · Post by **erica** » Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:49 pm

spot;668969 wrote: I'm sure that's the case as far as personal recollection is concerned. Is it also the case in regard to queries such as mine which ask nothing about the non-personal facts themselves, merely about their method of transmission? My question was merely whether the story of events from pre-history are recovered by way of documentation or by way of, for example and since you mentioned it, past life recollection. It's a meta-question, a category I'd have thought fell into a different set of rules. I've no interest in discussing the event stories themselves.

It's rather like asking a Christian how the events of the life of Jesus were transmitted to the current era, rather than asking what the gospels contain.

Instinct! They're your ancestors - in your genes.

Post by **spot** » Sun Aug 12, 2007 8:07 am

erica;677033 wrote: Instinct! They're your ancestors - in your genes.

I'm delighted to meet someone who can explain genetic memory to me , I've been seeking an explanation of what it does and how it does it for years. Do please continue.