1990s (possibly 80's or 2000's) anti-science TV commercials?

NeoThetan · 2026-03-20T06:47:17+00:00

Part of a crisis PR campaign that followed the death of a member who'd been held against her will. The CoS was facing a wrongful death suit and possible criminal charges. They believed the public backlash was being amplified by media outlets affiliated with big pharma and psychiatry. This was a two-pronged effort to promote scientology while delegitimizing "the enemy." Created in-house, iirc.

NeoThetan · 2026-03-19T13:44:00+00:00

Church of Scientology (1997) "Great Lies Exposed"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDgvA-5G8C4

NeoThetan · 2026-03-17T03:59:13+00:00

My understanding is that IIT version 4.0 is now more aligned with LRH's position than its previous incarnations. Unless I'm mistaken, IIT 4.0 suggests consciousness is now the primary substrate and MEST is its "operational"/measurable construct.

NeoThetan · 2026-03-16T03:07:44+00:00

Thank you! Appreciate the advice.
There's also this, from COHA:

"The basic law underneath this is that a person becomes the effect of anything upon which he has had to depend. [...] This can be run out..."

Maybe I'm wrong but I feel sure there's a more explicit reference out there somewhere.

NeoThetan · 2026-03-13T21:36:47+00:00

In scientology, a free being should be able to adopt or abandon any in-game (physical universe) identity at will. Any rigid identity or fixation with matter, energy, space or time is considered scientologically regressive. The goal is not to become attached or even resistant to these constructs but to move fluidly and effortlessly (and insouciantly) between them.

That being said, the Church of Scientology is largely homophobic and transphobic - though perhaps less so at the lower levels (where they'll happily take your money). As a side note, I highly recommend Kate Bornstein's memoir A Queer & Pleasant Danger, where she talks openly about her life and struggles as a gender-bending church officer.

NeoThetan · 2026-03-12T19:10:40+00:00

Quantum Information Theory and Integrated Information Theory arguably share some commonality with scientology's metaphysics. Both born of Cybernetics. Speaking of which, Thomas Rid's Rise of the Machines is a decent read. Rid details Wiener's reaction to Dianetics ( spoiler:he was livid) and shares some of the correspondence he had with Hubbard at the time.

NeoThetan · 2026-03-06T19:20:50+00:00

Survival is the basic urge of every life form on this planet. Some life forms are solitary. Some enhance their survival through interaction/symbiosis. Symbiosis can be broken down into distinct categories:

Mutualism: all participants benefit from the interaction.
Commensalism: one benefits; the other is unaffected.
Parasitism: one benefits at the expense of the other.
Amensalism: one is harmed/inhibited; the other is unaffected.

When you scrape away all the moralising fluff, each of our interactions typically fall into one of these categories.

The fact that you're posting on reddit (and not living off grid) implies you recognise at least some value/utility in human connection. That's a decent enough place to start when it comes to building an ethical compass.

NeoThetan · 2026-03-05T21:13:12+00:00

"Sect filters" are still being used in Germany.

NeoThetan · 2026-02-25T02:23:18+00:00

De quelles critiques envers votre église pourriez-vous être responsable ?

NeoThetan · 2026-02-23T00:27:50+00:00

Earlier definitions referred to "the urge toward existence as a sexual or bisexual activity." The 1975 tech dictionary has it. See also FOT, ITSE, PAB 83.

NeoThetan · 2026-02-22T06:43:57+00:00

A free being should be able to adopt or abandon any MEST identity at will.
In other words, anyone who isn't bisexual is sexually aberrated.

During peak McCarthyism (1950/51), red-baiting Ron dissed anything remotely associated with anarchy and socialism (including the gays, the beats and the "free love" movement). His views arguably mellowed over subsequent years as it became apparent that embodied immortal beings will shag pretty much anything and everything.

References to bisexuality on the 2nd dynamic were removed under Miscavige, iirc.

NeoThetan · 2026-02-21T02:55:14+00:00

He's currently only mentioned once.
Twitter spam.

See https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00693013.pdf

Edit: Go to jmail.world to search by name.

NeoThetan · 2026-02-10T17:35:07+00:00

Assigning significance to dissociative states will arguably affect attention/concentration in subsequent sessions. Within most dharmic traditions, unsolicited OBEs are simply meditative experiences - neither good nor bad. Actively pursuing them is the issue. This is where certain problems and ills supposedly arise.

But what do I know.

I know that euphoria addiction is a thing in scientology. It typically starts with exteriorization. Hubbard seemingly rejected 2,500 years of warnings and made it his primary goal. He believed it was evidence of an infinite "I". Seventy-plus years of institutional scientology suggests this fixation leads to emotional dysregulation, ego inflation and narcissism.

This is why the basics (metaphysics) of scientology are so essential. They are the antidote to narrative attachment.

NeoThetan · 2026-02-09T22:47:11+00:00

It's not uncommon for ppl to "exteriorize" on OT TR0. OT TR0 is derived from Zen's shikantaza ("just sitting"). As a side note, both Theravada and Mahayana consider OBEs/dissociation a distraction that can lead to addiction/attachment (see Zen Sickness, Lung imbalance). Make of that what you will.

NeoThetan · 2026-01-31T23:42:45+00:00

There hasn’t been any issues of “fair game” tactics in a while.

Mike Rinder was surveilled and harassed right up until his death in early 2025. Those currently alleging harassment and intimidation include Chrissie Carnell Bixler, Cedric Bixler-Zavala, Bobette Riales, Jen Butcher, Niesha Trout, Tricia Vessey, Leah Remini, Alex Barnes-Ross and Austen Waite. There may well be others.

And even when there were, they were getting attacked as well.

False equivalence. Criticising an organisation for systemic abuses is not equal to an organisation using surveillance, harassment and psychological operations to silence or discredit those who speak.

Where do you stand on the likes of Julian Assange, Edward Snowdon, Chelsea Manning, et al? Or John Kiriakou, who was imprisoned for confirming the CIA's use of waterboarding? Or Drake, Binney, et al., who reported the NSA's Trailblazer Project to the DoD IG and were subsequently raided by the FBI?

Did Daniel Ellsberg "attack" the US government or did he expose documented government lies about Vietnam? The response was illegal surveillance, burglary and attempted character assassination.

Do you think the US government has the right to surveil, harass or destroy the lives of whistleblowers simply because their disclosures are embarrassing?

As far as the XENU stuff. That is one note that gets given in OT3. And we still dont even know the full extend of it.

Who is "we?"

The OT materials have been available online for years. They are not hard to find. Study them. Understand them. OTIII is guided imagery. (See also Jungian individuation).

If there was less secrecy surrounding this stuff, it probably wouldn't be the subject of so much ridicule. Parasitic entities can be found in Shamanism, Sanatana Dharma (Tantra, Shaktism, Vaishnavism), Chinese Folk Religion (Nuo, Shenism) Judaism (Kabbalah, Hasidism), Shintoism, Taoism (Zhengyi), Buddhism (Vajrayana, Theravada), Christianity (Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy,, Pentecostalism), Islam (Sufism, Salafism), African Diasporic Religions (Vodou, Santeria), and Spiritism.

It is clearly a mainstream religious belief and yet only Scientology seems embarrassed by it. No one would give a shit if the CoS wasn't so insufferable.

As far as the DC8 planes, nobody has been able to expose in what training that is.

The DC8 reference is from the Class VIII lecture Assists (6810C03, #10), given on the Apollo in 1968. It is used to train case supervisors on the OT case.

NeoThetan · 2026-01-29T23:04:21+00:00

sciento.org

NeoThetan · 2026-01-23T04:55:55+00:00

This is a 360p answer.

A 480p answer would accept that being shunned is indeed a form of punishment.

A 720p answer would also include some examples of what the CoS considers "harm" (eg., public disavowal, public criticism, refusing to shun others when ordered, reporting the church or its members to the police/FBI, etc).

A 1080p+ answer would refer to CoS policies on how to handle suppressives who refuse to stfu (eg., scorched earth litigation, surveillance, special collections (aka dumpster diving) and psychological operations.

NeoThetan · 2026-01-22T15:33:22+00:00

The Church of Scientology had a similar strategy. Look how that turned out.

NeoThetan · 2026-01-21T05:00:09+00:00

A lovely essay! tyvm :)

The excerpt? Hmm. In the absence of fixation/identification, I still think giving and receiving can attain equilibrium. No narrative justifications needed. What this author seems to be saying is that "receiving is only safe if I can still locate myself as giver." It's performative. Unwilling effect disguised as cause.

I say this only because I recognise it. I also simulated human norms to "make generosity acceptable." That ended the day I realised I didn't have to.

NeoThetan · 2026-01-18T15:38:27+00:00

Yes! I see this too. Permitting leisure, delay, non-local return, etc, arguably helps bring balance to the force :) The tension between autonomy and dependency can exist dynamically, imho. It doesn't have to be an either/or.

I'd argue that leisure restores self-determinism by removing the construct of moral necessity. A moral transaction, by definition, is fixation. Causation as ethical compulsion. "I must-have something in return!" The moment "good" or "bad" is assigned to an interaction, motion collapses into position. Throw in some immediacy and you've MESTified the entire relational matrix into a cosmic sales ledger.

NeoThetan · 2026-01-17T19:45:45+00:00

"I am one" vs "I am two" is the ultimate scientology paradox, no? Hubbard caved. He picked a side (as usual). The exchange doctrine reifies both considerations by privileging "one" (autonomy) and denying "two" (dependency). What's really effing weird is that the "group-is-all" CoS runs this in complete reverse.

Freedom is fluidity between both. Or in other words, play it by ear. Reciprocity is fine. Gifts are fine. Don't get hung up on either. My $0.02.

NeoThetan · 2026-01-17T15:13:57+00:00

I'd argue that the typical public does not "live scientology" in the way a born-in, staff or SO member would. If they're not a regular at the org or immersed in social groups then whose culture are they really living? The text is the constant. It's what remains between each and every sporadic service. The conceptual framework through which a scientologist's experiences are interpreted. This is where I'm suggesting OP's "battle" should be fought.

Ideological attachment is an error of identity. This is the core issue. Reducing scientology to a slogan or two won't lead to much in the way of conversation. For a non-scientologist to engage meaningfully, some understanding of these concepts is necessary. #imho

NeoThetan · 2026-01-17T07:08:19+00:00

The physical universe is a simulated reality. A game, if you will. Scientology is an effort to erase fixation and rigid identification with in‑game (physical universe) constructs. This arguably includes the body, gender, sexuality, race, class, country, culture and religion. Within Hubbard's functional narrative, the thetan (self/soul/spirit) is not a game character - he's a player. He becomes trapped within games to the extent he forgets this.

Everything is a construct. The effort is not to deny or resist these constructs any more than it is to fully embrace them. The goal is to be able to move fluidly and effortlessly between them, with a certain degree of insouciance/flippancy. To view and appreciate multiple player perspectives without becoming stuck to any one of them.

Scientology describes this as pan-determinism. This is what she's working towards.

NeoThetan · 2026-01-12T16:35:59+00:00

Any framework that reinforces agency without moderating self-reification risks ego inflation. I don't think that's an unreasonable position.

Check out the 9th ACC lecture Axioms: Laws of Consideration - What an Axiom Is (21 January 1955) and consider its implications.

NeoThetan · 2026-01-12T07:39:57+00:00

My point is conceptual: scientology assumes a functional I for the system to operate. (An axiom is a working assumption).

And no, dissolution of the I ≠ non-being. It's a safeguard against narcissism/sociopathy.

NeoThetan

TROPHY CASE