AboutLaurie Hamilton Expertise I am able to answer questions regarding Scientology practices and procedures, belief system, donations, religious rites, management, administrative and staff matters.
Experience I am a second generation Scientologist whose parents began in Dianetics in 1950 and studied directly with L. Ron Hubbard. I have been personally active in the church for 40 years, have eleven years former staff experience in both technical and administrative areas, and extensive technical and administative training and counseling. I am "clear" and "OT." I come from an extended family of many religions, but my spouse and children are Scientologists, as are my siblings and their spouses, several cousins, nieces, nephews, an aunt, and an uncle. Between us we have had every good and bad experience one might go through in the church at every level.
Thank you for being available to answer questions about Scientology. My question is this:
I was looking through L Ron Hubbard's book, Dianetics," and on the very first page I found this: "The only reason a person gives up a study ... is because he or she has gone past a word which was not understood [up to here it's in italics] ... Every subject you have taken up and abandoned had its words which you failed to get defined."
It could be that I'm missing something -- but to me this seems so obviously false that I'm surprised he would put it in his book. There are an enormous number of reasons a person gives up a course of study. You become ill. You get an offer of a really good job. You move to another city. You realize that you just don't want to pursue that course of study. You become addicted to drugs. You join the Peace Corps and get sent to Malawi. I'm sure you can think of others.
Could I get your thoughts on this?
Thank you, David
Answer The key words here are "give up." As in "I just can't do it. I give up."
Being interrupted or discovering that the study leads in a direction which is not useful to one's life is not giving up.
The tacit assumptions made in the statement are that a study is valid, contains useful and applicable information, and that its materials are capable of being understood. Even in the case of materials which cannot be understood, there is always the theoretical possibility that somewhere there ARE materials on the study which can be understood - Which, given that for nearly all conceivable studies, there is SOMEONE who is practicing in that field, would seem to be the case. If no understandable materials were in existence - even if the materials consist of oral tradition - then no one would ever learn or practice the field.
Then, of course, there are a few false studies - ones which no one is actually practicing because all of their data and premises are false, or the product of the field of endeavor is actually non-existent. Sorcerer perhaps, or psychiatrist.
The catch-22 is that one can be fooled into believing that a study is without worth BECAUSE they failed to understand critical words in their study of it.
But if a study has actual worth to one, and one could have benefited had they completed it, then they abandoned it or "gave it up," having surrendered to their inability to understand it, because of words.
Here's the deal. If you are sane, and if you want or need what the study has to offer, and if you were capable of absorbing its information, then you would. If you cannot absorb the information, which it couched in language, then what is that language you could not absorb made of? Words.
