“Service facsimiles”: LRH speaks the truth

Marty Rathbun recently posted a couple of ads blog entries (here and here) about a Scientology concept called the “service facsimile.” Translated into English, it’s basically a delusion that people choose over reality.

I’m not going to go into great detail about the “service fac”; rather, I want to simply reprint a couple of paragraphs of the policy that Marty quoted (HCOB 5 Sept 1978 ANATOMY OF A SERVICE FACSIMILE). A quick definition: “Stable datum” is a piece of information considered to be fixed, that puts related information into context.

“How does this stable datum become so fixed? It gets fixed, and more and more firmly as time goes on, by the confusion it is supposed to handle but doesn’t.

“The stable datum was adopted in lieu of inspection. The person ceased to inspect, he fell back from inspecting, he fell back from living. He put the datum there to substitute for his own observation and his own coping with life, and at that moment he started an accumulation of confusion.

“That which is not confronted and inspected tends to persist. Thus in the absence of his own confronting mass collects. The stable datum forbids inspection. It’s an automatic solution. It’s ‘safe.’ It solves everything. He no longer has to inspect to solve, so he never anises [sic] the mass. He gets caught in the middle of the mass. And it collects more and more confusion and his ability to inspect becomes less and less. The more he isn’t confronting, the less he can confront. This becomes a dwindling spiral.

“So the thing he has adopted to handle his environment for him is the thing which reduces his ability to handle his environment.” — LRH

That may well be the best summary of Scientology I have ever read.

ML,
Caliwog

Advertisements

10 responses to ““Service facsimiles”: LRH speaks the truth

  1. OMG, did you ever nail this! LOL. Thanks, Cali!

    “So the thing he has adopted to handle his environment for him is the thing which reduces his ability to handle his environment.” — LRH

    That may well be the best summary of Scientology I have ever read.

  2. It’s an reasonable observation of human coping mechanisms, though he’s hardly the first to point it out.

    But yeah, I guess Hubbard didn’t realize that 1984 wasn’t meant to be a manual.

  3. I wonder if today, Glenn Beck is having the same problem. About oh, maybe a year ago, he was making pretty good sense about the nations problems, and possible fixes. Then he started off on this “…all we need is prayer…” jag, and seems to be wandering farther and farther from the real problems all the time…. I’m neither a real fan or detractor, but he and Boortz make good listening some mornings at work…..

  4. Freed from Hubbard

    Well,All I have to say to Marty and his Hubbard Culties is that first you have to believe Hubbard and watch the swinging stopwatch on the chain till you are in a “reverie”.
    Then the suggestions ,commands and whatever Blah blah Blahs Blubbard throws at you will confuse your reasoning process and fuck your head up.
    Then after this business of running out dominating others ,being dominated and what is right or wrong mish mashed you will be very receptive to more of his happy horseshit.
    You are then free to move out of fixed conditions to being under the thumb of Hubbard and his stormtroopers to do his bidding.
    Of course if you are making a killing selling this stuff like Marty is then why spoil the con, especially when the suckers are plentifull.

  5. Very nice observation, Caliwog! I’ve read over this passage that you’ve quoted here 3 times now. First time, I tried to read it without going past any misunderstood words. I couldn’t get past “Thus in the absence of his own confronting *MASS COLLECTS*.” I couldn’t even make it to “anises”! 😉
    Second reading was immediately after I read your accurate assessment that this sums up scientology. Reading it in that context, I completely agree; this also reflects the theory that LRH was telling his marks *exactly* how he was running his con. He couched his techniques in so much bullshit, it’s becoming less of a wonder to me the more I lurk ESMB how desperately some victims need to keep the con working, in their own minds (I stopped checking out Marty’s blog soon after he posted his wedding video, so I appreciate your interpretations, thx).
    The third read-through I did with an intent to find “loaded” language, ie, unwritten, yet inferred negative connotations, because my 1st reads both led me to feel that obviously, what is being discussed here is an undesirable thing. Thus, a “service facsimile” is a “stable datum” that is an undesirable thing, in scientology, right?
    (This is after a couple beers, so ‘scuse me if I’m slurrrrng my spech)

    • > LRH was telling his marks *exactly* how he was running his con.

      He does that a lot, especially in the Admin tech.

      >Thus, a “service facsimile” is a “stable datum” that is an undesirable thing, in scientology, right?

      It would appear. But seeing as the whole of Scientology seems to fit the definition of “service facsimile,” I guess it’s not such a bad thing as far as Hubbard, Miscavige and their bankers are concerned.

      ML,
      Caliwog

  6. Forgot to finish my thought: I found nothing in LRH’s words up there that is anything but objective, scientifically validatable, evidentially sound, perfectly reproducible verbal diarrhea.

  7. Hello Caliwog,

    Laser precise. I saw it before reading your summation line. Thanks for the laugh.

  8. Talk about being unwilling to confront! I posted this link on Marty’s blog today about using stylometrics to test if David Mayo wrote NOTS and it was instantly DELETED.

    And I wasn’t even snarky.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stylometrics

    Anyway, if you want to run NOTS documents against LRH’s known writings to see if he actually wrote NOTS you can use this free software.

    http://www.philocomp.net/humanities/signature

  9. Helmuth, speaking for Boskone

    There are a number of Stable Datums in Scientology, not the least of which is that “Scientology always works”, with the flip-side that if it doesn’t then you’re doing it wrong (or there’s a lurking SP making it go wrong).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s