The 'Safe Asks Papers' -- Reasons CoS discontinued 3 Educ. Tapes?
Reasons CoS discontinued 3 Educ. Tapes?

It's Safe to Ask

Copyright © Safe -- <>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 05:27:25 GMT
Subject: Reasons CoS discontinued 3 Educ. Tapes?

It's probably because the CoS does not want Scientologists to think for themselves. These tapes on education promote that idea real strong. Here are a few <fair use> quotes from the tapes ...

"Now, educationally, it is absolutely necessary for the teacher to preserve the power of choice of the student over the data which is taught.

And if it is not in agreement with the experience of the student, and will not be found to be true in the environment of the student to examine this and say so, and operate accordingly. Only in this wise would you have anything used or useful." -- 25 October 1956 titled "Education" Page 120 in transcript

LRH makes very clear the concept of fixed data and unfixed data in the following ...

"We teach people how their minds get fixed and unfixed. We do better than that. Then we show them how they can fix and unfix these various agreements and things and postulates."

"Now, here then is a tremendous field in scientology, and it does appear that all you're doing is not just increasing the learning rate of a person, but increasing his power of choice over what he has learned. And if you can do that, why, then he can lead a much better and more successful life."

In Methods of Education, LRH talks about getting the students to relax with the data and I'll quote ...

"So you have to devaluate the unimportances out of the allness." Ron has a technique of selecting the UNimportances of the data so a new student does think IT'S ALL SUPER IMPORTANT."

I've had twins that didn't know this and expected me to learn all about camera's instead of the study tech because Ron talked about it. I knew enough to star rate it but soon forgot the data. Instead of star rating on the IMPORTANCES of what I had studied, idiot twins would try to catch me if I new some stupid camera part or technique. I think some of you know what I'm talking about.

Well, Methods of Education disabuses anybody of the IMPORTANCE OF IT ALL. Ron was trying to get people to have JUDGEMENT. Now days, I do not see the judgement factor in the courseroom in the CoS. LRH was trying to get people LUCID with the data.

Golden Age of Tech though teaches rote memory so you can robotically real of the data with no evaluation.

"So you have to get him to evaluate, reevaluate it, and assume its various levels of evaluation under his own power of choice. And then he's got a subject in a more useful state than he has ever had it before."

In Education: Point of Agreement, given on 30 October 1956, Ron talks about how typical education works. This is what the CoS does too now.

"Education could have been defined this way (it was not, but everybody would agree with this definition, I'm sure): Education is the process of placing data in the recalls of another."

"Now as long as we get on and maintain this kick of inflow only, we're in trouble. Education does not happen. If education means inflowing ideas, then we're also talking hypnotism. You see, there's no differentiation there. We're talking about beating somebody up and laying an engram in. This then, too, would be education, wouldn't it? So, we had education and aberration very, very closely associated."

"In other words, simply implanting the recall and then pulling back out again, while it has been defined as education, is nothing but a black operation, nothing but. To do this to little kids is to do away with their initiative. Therefore a time for revolution in the field of education is definitely at hand."

"To teach a subject, it would be necessary : one, for the person being taught to be able to receive a nonsignificant, disrelated idea from another." ..... "All right, the next condition that we would have to meet would be making certain that this person could maintain his power of choice over the data given to him.' ... "So we would give him some data which were incorrect, and giving him the data that are incorrect, we'd find out the: one, if he could remember them: and two, if he could reject them. And the idea of being able to reject a datum, and still remember it, to know that it is untrue and nonfactual, and still be able to recall it, is of course bettered by a further action: being able to wipe it out completely and not recall it. And that is a skill, that is a skill."

Can any Scientologiist tell me where in CoS this is taught?

"All right, let's take a look, then, at education and find out why you would do this that way, rather than just place something in somebody's recall, to have him really know it as a datum. Why would you do this? Would there be any sense in this at all? Well, yes, there certainly would be. The individual would be able to use that datum; he would be able to evalutate it's importance; he would be able to handle it, and handle it with many other things; in other words, you have given him something for his utilization."

"Now, of course you can understand that this is just a criticism from me and I'm a very critical person,"

Oh oh. Ron admits he's critical. Ron's critical? Perhaps he has overts? Or do many scientologists have an MU on the idea that being critical is something bad?

Guess what, these tapes teach too much thinking for oneself. Management can't have that. They would get too many roudy students. They want students who don't cause any trouble. So I imagine these 3 tapes are not worth the trouble to risk that.

Theta Member #47

P.S. This is not the stuff CoS is practicing.

Here's another ...

"I am afraid that in the field of knowledge, to me nothing, including scientology, is sacred.

In fact, I'd have to be argued with and shot at awfully long for anybody to convince me that a datum was an unalterable datum which must never again be reviewed." -- 25 October 1956 titled "Education" page 121 in transcript.


The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the author or authors which wrote them and may not reflect the views and opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page. The opinions may or may not be those of the Chairman of The Skeptic Tank.

Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank