Print

[News Thetan]

Scientology Agree/Disagree
10 May 2009, 10:40 pm

In the Philadelphia Doctorate Courses, L. Ron Hubbard spoke quite a bit about agree and disagree. Agreement is effect and disagreement is cause.  If you agree with someone, you are the effect of what they say.  If you disagree with someone, you are at cause. According to Hubbard.

He also stated that the basis for controlling people is agreement. The basic principle of hypnotism is agreement.  If you enforce agree-agree-agree on someone, you will, eventually, completely control them.

Well, guess what is not allowed in the Church of Scientology?  You may not disagree with anything Hubbard or David Miscavige has ever said.  Period.

In Scientology, if you say you disagree with Miscavige or Hubbard, it means you are wrong, you "have misunderstoods" (words you do not understand), you must be handled until you agree.  Everything stops for you until "your misunderstoods are handled" -- meaning, until you agree.

You cannot say, "Oh, I don't agree with that, but this seems OK."  No, you are required to agree with everything in Scientology.

Scientologists are very fond of saying "In Scientology, what is true is what you, yourself have found to be true."  And they are quite adamant that they "didn't agree" until after they studied and tried some bit of Scientology.

And this is true.  They studied something, they tried it, and they agreed that "it worked."

But understand this very, very clearly.  That agreement is not a decision or a choice.  That is a specific, required sequence.  After the Scientologist tries something from Scientology, he or she must agree that "it works".

If the Scientologist finds that something from Scientology doesn't work, it means, according to Scientology, that the Scientologist is wrong and must be corrected and corrected, until the Scientologist "finds it works".

An Instructor or Supervisor or Executive must challenge with ferocity instances of "unworkability".  They must uncover what did happen, what was run and what was done or not done.

L. Ron Hubbard - Keeping Scientology Working

As a Scientologist travels deeper into Scientology, further "up The Bridge", their agreement becomes more set.  They are more and more at effect.  No disagreement, no cause -- just agreement.  How odd for a methodology that is supposed to be making people more at cause.

For a Scientologist to try something from Scientology and find it doesn't work is forbidden.

For a Scientologist to disagree with anything Hubbard or Miscavige has said is forbidden.

With Scientology, you do have enforced agreement.

In Scientology, you very specifically have agree-agree-agree.

Every Scientologist, then, agrees with every other Scientologist about Scientology.  They are all in perfect agreement on every little thing that Miscavige or Hubbard ever said.  No matter what, they all agree.

Isn't that amazing?

Here is a quote from Hubbard on that subject:

The common denominator of a group is the reactive bank.  Thetans [people] without banks have different responses.  They only have their banks in common.  They agree then only on bank principles.

L. Ron Hubbard - Keeping Scientology Working

Ah, the irony!  A group that is in total and complete agreement is a group agreeing only on bank (bad, unevaluated) principles.  And a group that suppresses disagreement and enforces agree-agree-agree is working very hard to hypnotically control its members.

According to L. Ron Hubbard.

-



Source: Ask the Scientologist

[Raven]

I like this atricle.  I thinks it has good info for those just discovering what sci preaches.

[mefree]

"We all agree. No one questions. That is true"

I couldn't help but think of Stepford Wives or robots............

[Lorelei]

This is Salesmanship 101. You get the person to say "yes" to innocuous statements, and it softens them up for continued "yesses." This is why telemarketers who don't give a crap about your wellbeing ask how you are today, and why car salesmen or successful department store salespeople do NOT start off with "can I help you?" but with statements like, "that's good gas mileage for a car this powerful, isn't it?" or "I really like the fabric the designer chose for this shirt, it's soft, isn't it?"

I've always been pretty good at sales, but not good enough to do it for a living or to live off commissions, as it exhausts me to deal with the public so directly, and I don't believe in selling people stuff they do not need. Eventually it bothers me and depresses me to have to do it to get a paycheck. Part of that is not wasting my time and prolonging contact with customers by asking stupid questions about whether I can help them or not. I would just start helping, in a friendly fashion. It works. Get them saying "yes," and you are more likely to get the sale, and be able to go escape to the backroom for two minutes of well-earned solitude and a soda.

Persuasion is actually fairly simple, especially if you lack the conscience enough to care about the people you are trying to persuade.