snatchbalance

jp


Well, I am a firm believer in the objective world. But, one's perseptions, no matter what one might do, are colored, in one way or another, by one's internal world. So, what does that mean? Are there really techniques (auditing, meditation, drug use, hypnosis, psychotherapy, etc.), that can eliminate such bias in perseption?

Have you done much or any auditing?

SB

jpbrooks

Nope. I'm a newcomer to Scientology and I freely admit my lack of knowledge about it. I'm somewhere near the bottom of the bridge chart. I haven't even done any of the "rundowns" yet. Hey, I only recently got over my fear that Scientology was simply a brainwashing technique employed by the Church of Scientology to recruit new members into their "cult". Most of what I know about Scientology is the result of studying the texts that were recommended by members of the Church of Scientology with whom I have become acquainted. Now that I know a little more about Scientology, I have come to view it as more of a religion than a "cult". I haven't become a Scientologist. I'm only attempting to learn more about the theory and practice of Scientology.

I see your point. But I don't see why perceptual bias has to be a problem if we can apply reason to assess our perceptual data and correct errors that arise because of bias. A possible example/analogy of this would be viewing a round coin from various angles. The coin, depending on one's orientation to it, looks like it might have an elliptical shape. By using reason, we can assess the data from various views of the coin to arrive at the conclusion that the coin is not really elliptical and doesn't change its shape, but only appears to have those characteristics because we are viewing it from various angles.

I haven't audited anyone in an actual auditing session because I never knew enough about how to conduct an auditing session to get started. It did help, however, to see and hear other people get audited. Now I, at least, have some idea about how an auditing session should proceed.

As far as auditing on myself is concerned, I have had no auditing beyond "self analysis" auditing.

(I have to leave soon.)

[ June 13, 2002: Message edited by: jpbrooks ]</p>

Ierrellus

snatchbalance!

IMO, introspection is a late product of evolution, i.e., an advantage to those organisms with enlarged cerebral cortexes. Self-identification seems necessary for us creatures who have not developed the talents of supersight, supersmell, etc.


Really, my screen name is simply a Latinization of my real name, since I don't operate with aliases. The I is a J; the "us" ending is a masculine denomination.

Thanks for asking,

Ierrellus

[ June 13, 2002: Message edited by: Ierrellus ]</p>

snatchbalance

jp, Ierrellus(Jerrell),

Thanks for answering me. I guess what I'm looking for is some input on actuall psychological techniques that people may have heard of that aid in the process of introspection.

I think that psychology and sociology color our perception more than most would like to admit.

For example, the simple process of looking at a coin; if one can look at a coin no problem. But what if something prevents you from even looking at a coin?(Most people couldn't relate to this example, who "can't" look at a coin?)

jp,

I have found it very easy to dispose of thetan, IMHO - no such thing.

sb

jpbrooks

No problem. I'm glad to be able to provide some input. I enjoy reading and discussing philosophical issues and I'm looking forward to being able to devote more time to that activity.

From my limited experience with meditation and similar techniques, I don't feel qualified to make recommendations in this area. But if I were pressed to make a recommendation, it would be Scientology's techniques.

I agree. However, I don't view the problem of bias as exclusively perceptual in nature and origin. In fact, from my perspective (of course), perceptual bias seems to be more of a consequence of bias in our sets of assumptions about the world than a cause of such bias. When we perceive objects in the world, we have already "strung together" sense data into patterns that represent what we believe are objects. This kind of "structuring" of sense data into patterns that represent objects must take place before any conclusions based on assessments of the data of the perceived "objects" are drawn, and must (therefore) occur according to our assumptions about what the sensed data is supposed to represent.

If my observations above are correct, then the problem of bias (perceptual or otherwise) is probably best dealt with by examining (and altering if necessary) our assumptions about the world, rather than focusing exclusively on perception itself.

You're probably right. The "thetan" is a "construct" of Scientology that quite likely has no meaning or value outside of the Scientology worldview.
However, Scientology's auditing processes seem pointless outside of the assumption that the "thetan" exists. Positing a "thetan" allows Scientology to focus on and control a certain aspect of reality.

[ June 14, 2002: Message edited by: jpbrooks ]</p>

snatchbalance

jp,

Yes, You said it better than I could. One's aberations(to again borrow from Sct.)or glitches in one's psychology(as I prefer to think of them) bias one's perceptions. So, the problem becomes how to straighten out glitches to ensure one's perseptions are accurate.

Well:

1. One needs to know that there are such things.(of course, the glitches themselves can prevent one from ackowledgeing the existance of such things.)

2. One needs to find the glitches. (How?)

3. One needs to do something about them. (Again how?)

The one large advantage that Scientology has, is that it has a system. Personnally, I could not continue to work within that system. The dogma, pressure to conform to the dogma, the blatant hagiography of LRH, were all to much for me.

In other words, particularly when one enters the academy, in my opinion, there is a large effort to simply replace one set of biases for another, consisting primarily of Scientology dogma.

So, I'm looking on my own.

sb

[ June 14, 2002: Message edited by: snatchbalance ]</p>

brighid

Snatchbalance,

One of the question tools I use is how would I feel in the other person’s shoes in any given situation? I try to do my best to see things from the point of view of many other people and how I think my actions will affect others. I also try to put myself in situations and interact with people from diverse backgrounds, listen to what they say and attempt to apply their experience to my own line of reasoning. After “walking a mile in their shoes” I then examine what my perceptions are and should they change?

THEE major turning point in my life was when I became pregnant with my son. It caused me to view the world much differently then I previously had. I had some pretty opinionated views about females who found themselves pregnant out of wedlock and lets just say they were highly prejudicial. I was also told to fear black people and be suspicious of them. Even though I had dated a few black men and the father of my child was black I still had a lot of ingrained prejudices to confront and overcome. Those prejudices (as taught to me by my family and community) became very clear and very painful. Here I was, breaking the rules, disappointing myself with my own carelessness and putting myself in a position to be a social outcast. Talk about throwing yourself directly into the fire! OUCH! If I wanted to be happy I had to choose to confront and change these perceptions I had. I had to choose happiness and that meant I had a lot of self-reflection to do and then a lot of mental rebuilding to do. I have changed A LOT since getting pregnant and racing my child in a race conscious world. I have changed for the better I think. That experience allowed me the opportunity to step into another world. A world I was taught to hate, fear and look down upon and by embracing that experience I learned how to see things from different perspectives and appreciate the different experiences of other people. I also acquired a lot of patience along the way.

I frequently do a self-check – or audit I guess in regards to my feelings, perceptions and prejudices. I have a mental list of things I aspire to and I check my actions against it to see if I am living up to my own standards. I really try not to fall short of those aspirations, but alas I am not perfect and sometimes I have to admit I really screwed up, eat a piece of humble pie and work towards not repeating that mistake in the future. I also practice self-acceptance and forgiveness, not only of my transgressions against other people but their transgressions against me. It is one of the only things that have kept me from having an anger-induced aneurysm at times.

I think introspection is about evaluating how ones actions affect the world around them and the goal of the moral and examined life is to do the most good for the most people. I think the main ingredient of introspection is walking that mile in another persons shoes and being that person, examining how things affect that person and seeing if ones actions are beneficial or harmful to that situation. If they are harmful one must be honest and take corrective action. Introspection is worthless if one fails to take action to enhance or correct the actions that affect oneself and others. That takes a bit of courage, but self-respect should know no boundaries and when this is our priority introspective, corrective action becomes uplifting. Sometimes it means cleaning up the wreckage of our actions and discovering what we could have done differently so if that situation occurs in the future things can end on a more positive note.

Brighid

snatchbalance

Brighid,

Learning to eat humble pie has been one of my hardest leasons to learn. Once I learned how, my life got much better.

Trying to see things from other's perspectives is definately something I can work on.

SB

[ June 14, 2002: Message edited by: snatchbalance ]</p>

jpbrooks

True. Left to themselves without psychotherapeutic intervention, the emotions that are evoked by traumatic events, over time, continue to have an influence on the thought (and behavior) patterns of the individuals who experience the traumatic experiences. I don't know how much research has been done on this issue, but sometimes it seems as if people who have had traumatic experiences, whose reactions to situations in the present are noticeably influenced by a traumatic experience, are behaving like hypnotized people. If traumatic events can actually have a "hypnotic-like" influence on people, then it is indeed possible for such psychological "glitches" to become obscured.

Yes. As far as I am concerned, LRH was a man who (allegedly) had an interesting background and a number of insightful ideas that deserve to be taken seriously and subjected to critical examination. But my "veneration" of him ends at that point. That doesn't appear to be the case for many Church of Scientology members.
There are, however, other groups of Scientologists outside of the Church of Scientology, <a href="http://www.freezone.org" target="_blank">like this group</a>, who are less "cult-like" with regard to LRH and Scientology theory and practice.

Again, this seems to be more of a problem for the Church of Scientology than for other groups of Scientologists not directly affiliated with the Church. Most Church members that I know believe that other religions and worldviews are inferior to Scientology. So they believe that it is pointless to study other religions and worldviews for the purpose of obtaining knowledge from them. They believe that one needs to know no more than what LRH has discovered and taught.

Having said that however, I don't see much difference between that attitude of Church of Scientology members and members of Churches of other religions with whom I have become acquainted.

Good. There seems to be no reason to assume that different psychological techniques to achieve certain specific results can't be used at different times, especially if the results are complementary and don't "undo" the results achieved from using the other techniques. But testing to see what techniques are complementary to one another requires a lot of research and experimentation. And that may be one (other) reason why some Church of Scientology members avoid pursuing techniques other than auditing.

(I have to run.)

[ June 14, 2002: Message edited by: jpbrooks ]</p>

Ierrellus

snatchbalance,

There are many types of introspection. Choose only that which allows you a sense of personal integrity. Do not compare; do not contrast. See through your own eyes. Doubt everything but your own right to exist. Believe everything that makes this possible.

Ierrellus
(Jerrell)

pax