Critical Q&A

The weekly show where I answer questions from viewers left in the comments of my Q&A videos or sent to me by email at AskChrisShelton@gmail.com. This week, the questions I answer are:

(1) I was reading the Technical Dictionary of Dianetics and Scientology and found it fascinating. For non-Scientologists, it offers an inside look into the pseudo-scientific and pseudo-military language of the cult. The dictionary defines the Sea Organization as “an organization which functions at a high level of confront and standard. Its purpose is to get ethics in on the planet and eventually the universe.” The dictionary further states in the definition of “Ethics” that “When one is ethical or ‘has his ethics in’ it is by his own determination and is done by himself.”
If, according to Hubbard, one can be ethical only by doing so himself, how can the Sea Org get “ethics in” on the universe? Doesn’t this imply forcing Scientology ethics on everybody? This makes it sound like the purpose of the Sea Org is world domination. As a Sea Org member, how were you taught to understand the phrase “get ethics in”? Presumably this is a very important concept for Sea Org members, as it is the stated purpose of the organization.

(2) In Sensibly Speaking #85 you discuss the Scientology definition of responsibility and then also relate it to security checking. I’d like to ask something in that context. Say some transgression is uncovered in a sec check (cheating, stealing, sex with a member of another species, etc). Then this transgression is dealt with, if I understood it correctly, by telling every little detail about it and eventually accepting responsibility for it. Correct? Is it now forgiven? After all the person is now cool with it, so the next time around the answer to the inter-species question will be a cold blooded “yes.” Do they then just move on or are the same transgressions discussed again with every new sec check?

(3) What do you think is next up Scientology’s sleeve? The Ideal Org program has ground to a complete halt with new Ideal Orgs not happening without a donation from the IAS to finish. Narconon is still mired in legal troubles and the new boutique, small number of bed, Narconons seem to be having trouble as well. Criminon, you never hear anything about. Same with Applied Scholastics. The aging membership role is on a steep decline. Obviously there is the entertainment district in Clearwater and the upcoming Scientology TV station, but other than that, what do you think Scientology will try next?

(4) What is the “endgame” for a public Scientologist? Say, someone reached the highest OT level. What then? Do they stay involved with the church? If so, how? If not, what happens? Do they just fade away?

(5) Chris, are you watching The Arrangement on E!? If not, you should. It’s clearly inspired by Scientology and some of its most well known members, but the characters are not a one for one match.

(6) What’s your end game bro? Do you want Scientology to be shut down? What about the millions of people it’s helped?

(7) When I first heard of Narconon, I got it confused with Nar-Anon, a 12-step program complementary to Narcotics Anonymous for friends and family members of narcotics users, in the way Al-Anon is complementary to Alchoholics Anonymous. Is there any reason to believe that Scientology exploits the similarity in the names to get people to come to their program, or is this nothing more than baseless speculation on my part? (If it is baseless speculation, I will dismiss the thoughts from my head.)

The post Critical Q&A #107 appeared first on Chris Shelton - Critical Thinker at Large.