The "How Foolish Are You?" survey

[Desertphile]

And remember, no matter WHAT it looks like to everyone else on the planet, Scientology is a religion. No, really it is!

From: "Surveys" survey@lists.scientology.net
Date: July 13, 2005
Subject: LRH's Books/Lectures Courses Pricing Opinion Survey
Reply-To: survey@scientology.net

Dear xxxxx,

Please answer the below simple survey.

Your answers will directly help to finalize key decisions for the creation of vital org services that will help connect thousands of Scientologists more closely to Source, and increase their knowledge and ability in Life. So the time you take to answer this will be really appreciated.

Sincerely,
Rick Siegel
Survey Network Chief
Church [sic] Of Scientology International

(Important: Hit reply to fill in your answers. Type your answer between the brackets, using as much space as necessary. Don't worry about extra spaces at the end of your response. On answers that are multiple choice such as yes/no please place your X between the square brackets and select only one choice unless directed to choose more than one or as many as necessary.)

Q. 1
If a new service were available in Scientology orgs, of providing standard courses for an LRH lecture series (of about 12 lectures) and a related book, with checksheets and practicals to help you fully understand and apply the data from those lectures, please state what amount of donation for such a course you would consider to be so expensive that you would not consider doing the Course?
[ ] $50
[ ] $100
[ ] $150
[ ] $200
[ ] $250
[ ] $300
[ ] $350
[ ] $400
[ ] $500
[ ] $600
[ ] $700
[ ] $800
[ ] $900
[ ] $1000
[ ] $1250
[ ] $1500

Q. 2
At what amount would you begin to perceive this service as too inexpensive to be worth much?
[ ] $50
[ ] $75
[ ] $100
[ ] $150
[ ] $200
[ ] $250
[ ] $300
[ ] $350
[ ] $400
[ ] $500
[ ] $600
[ ] $700
[ ] $800
[ ] $900
[ ] $1000
[ ] $1250
[ ] $1500

Q. 3
At what donation rate would you perceive this service is beginning to be too much so that it is not out of the question, but you would need to give it some thought before getting it?
[ ] $50
[ ] $75
[ ] $100
[ ] $150
[ ] $200
[ ] $250
[ ] $300
[ ] $350
[ ] $400
[ ] $500
[ ] $600
[ ] $700
[ ] $800
[ ] $900
[ ] $1000
[ ] $1250
[ ] $1500

Q. 4
At what amount would you perceive this service to be an excellent deal -- a great buy for the money?
[ ] $5
[ ] $75
[ ] $100
[ ] $150
[ ] $200
[ ] $250
[ ] $300
[ ] $350
[ ] $400
[ ] $500
[ ] $600
[ ] $700
[ ] $800
[ ] $900
[ ] $1000
[ ] $1250
[ ] $1500


Q. Congresses
Are you listening to the LRH Congress Lectures?
[ ] Yes
[ ] No

Q. CongressList
If so, which Congress are you currently listening to?
[ ] Anatomy of the Spirit Of Man Congress (June 1955)
[ ] Games & The Spirit Of Play Congress (Aug - Sep 1956)
[ ] London Congress On Human Problems (Oct 1956)
[ ] Anti-Radiation Congress (Dec 1956)
[ ] London Congress on Nuclear Radiation and Health (Apr 1957)
[ ] Freedom Congress (June 1957)
[ ] Ability Congress (Dec 1957)
[ ] Clearing Congress (July 1958)
[ ] London Clearing Congress (Origin of Aberration) (Oct 1958)
[ ] Success Congress (Jan 1959)
[ ] Theta Clearing Congress (Jul 1959)
[ ] Melbourne Congress (Nov 1959)
[ ] The State of Man Congress (Jan 1960)
[ ] London Open Evening Congress (Jun - Aug 1960
[ ] London Congress on Dissemination and Help (Jun - Aug 1960)
[ ] Anatomy of The Human Mind Congress (Dec - Jan 1960/61)
[ ] South African Anatomy Congress (Jan 1961)
[ ] Clean Hands Congress (Dec - Jan 1961/62)
[ ] Clearing Success Congress (Dec 1962)

Q. Country
What country/area do you live in...
[ ] Australia/New Zealand/ Oceania
[ ] Canada
[ ] Europe (not including Great Britain or CIS)
[ ] Latin America/South America
[ ] Russia/CIS
[ ] South Africa/Zimbabwe
[ ] United Kingdom and Ireland
[ ] United States East of the Mississippi
[ ] United States West of the Mississippi
[ ] Middle East
[ ] Africa (not including South Africa/Zimbabwe)
[ ] Japan/Taiwan/Indochina/China
[ ] Asia/South Asia (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan)

Q. Training
What is the highest auditor training level you have achieved?
[ ] Division 6 Courses
[ ] Book Auditor (HDS, HDA etc.)
[ ] Student Hat/Study Certainty
[ ] M1/Trs & Objs
[ ] Pro Trs/Upper Indoc Trs
[ ] Pro Metering
[ ] Academy Levels
[ ] NED
[ ] Class V Grad
[ ] On Or Completed SHSBC
[ ] Class VIII
[ ] SOLO Part I Course

Q. Processing
What is the highest processing level you have achieved?
[ ] None
[ ] Pre-Clear
[ ] Clear
[ ] Pre-OT (OT I-OT VII)
[ ] New OT VIII

Q. RecID
Your Record ID is (note this is for our internal use only)
[xxxxx]

Thank you very much for your answers

 

[neutrino_cannon]

Perhaps it is.

Where do you draw the line?

 

[Kopji]

I have to admit they seem a lot like most religions to me. Yeah their spam reads like wacky humor of the day, but how is that different from any other toxic religion?

A real business, even a corrupt one, does things like disclose their finances to the investors. Somebody must be making money. Someone, somewhere, is being honest with themselves and knows what's really going on.

There does not seem to be any 'business case' for religion. It is more like a living organism that does what it does to survive and expand, without much thought about it. Very unbusinesslike.

But who would really know how much a religion actually brings in? Most religions keep their actual finances a closely held secret.

How much money does the Salvation Army bring in each year from all those little buckets? What are their overhead expenses? Is there some kind of oversight that keeps someone from snatching something from the offering basket before the money is turned in? Statistic analysis that might expose theft?

So how is Scientology any different?

 

[jjramsey]

How much money does the Salvation Army bring in each year from all those little buckets? What are their overhead expenses? Is there some kind of oversight that keeps someone from snatching something from the offering basket before the money is turned in?

I don't know how much the Salvation Army brings in, but I do know that their overhead expenses include how much they pay the bell ringers who aren't volunteers. The buckets are designed so that they are easier to get money into than out of, and they are locked. The bell ringer doesn't have the key. When bell ringers go on break, they are supposed to bring the bucket to the customer service desk of the store where they are ringing the bell. They are emphatically not supposed to just carry the bucket around, or carry it into the bathroom, and so on. Someone really determined could break a bucket open, but it would take tools to do so.

So how is Scientology any different?

Last time I checked, Scientology charged for services like "auditing," which is a core part of its religion. Churches obviously take donations, but participation in the rituals like communion, confession, singing, and so on, are free.

 

[bigred]

Last time I checked, Scientology charged for services like "auditing," which is a core part of its religion. Churches obviously take donations, but participation in the rituals like communion, confession, singing, and so on, are free.

.....so is the entire service. Last I checked nobody was forced to put anything in the plate, and in all my years I've not gotten so much as even one nasty look if I didn't. Key word: "donations" - ie completely voluntary.

Comparing Scientology to any mainstream religion is incredibly idiotic. If you don't know the diff's, yank your head out of the sand (or wherever it is) and take an at least semi-objective look. I double-dog dare ya.

 

[jjramsey]

.....so is the entire service. Last I checked nobody was forced to put anything in the plate, and in all my years I've not gotten so much as even one nasty look if I didn't. Key word: "donations" - ie completely voluntary.

Settle down. To steal a line from another poster on another thread, "I think we are in violent agreement." The main reason that I singled out specific rituals is that they are as core to Christian religious practice as auditing is to Scientology, and that puts into clear focus that Scientology charges for participation in its core practices while Christianity does not. Also, I didn't want to deal with people trying to make false equivalencies like "Well, churches charge for wedding ceremonies" or "Some churches charge for counseling" or "Christian conferences are expensive," and so on.

 

[Z]

Just remember - there WAS a time in Church history (Catholic, anyway) where tithing was a MANDATORY practice.

But it wasn't a foundational practice, nor something definingly Christian.

Hey, at least Scientologists and Christians don't go around mutilating female genetalia and deciding that women don't have souls anymore...

 

[Kopji]

Comparing Scientology to any mainstream religion is incredibly idiotic. If you don't know the diff's, yank your head out of the sand (or wherever it is) and take an at least semi-objective look. I double-dog dare ya.

1: The silly auditing meter seems a corollary to taking communion.

2: Courses are a more complicated form of baptism or ritual.

3: High level members like Tom Cruise function like priests.

4: They both prey upon the mentally ill and/or use them as tools to promote belief in their products.

5: They both take your money and give you what????

The Salvation Army was only an example because they are renowned for being secretive about their finances.

 

[Kopji]

Sorry, we don't evaluate The Salvation Army.
Why not? Many religious organizations are exempt under Internal Revenue Code from filing the Form 990. As a result, we lack sufficient data to evaluate their financial health.

Above is the typical response you will get if you input your favorite mainstream religion's name into a research database on charity organizations.

So how foolish are YOU?

 

[Kopji]

Scientology
A Comparison with Religions of
The East and West
PER-ARNE BERGLIE
professor, history of religion
University of stockholm
Stockholm, Sweden

http://neuereligion.de/ENG/Berglie/01.htm

For example, if one uses a common definition of religion -- "Religion is the conviction of the existence of a supernatural world, a conviction which first and foremost is expressed in concepts of belief of various kind which are concretely illustrated in rituals and observances and in epic portraying" (Ake Hultcrantz, "Methods Within the Comparative Research of Religion," 1973, page 13), the Church of Scientology very clearly appears as a religion. There is furthermore no reason for an historian of religion to rank different religions from different starting points along a scale of value.

Comeon, ya better not run away or you'll be called a silly Englishman.

That was the sound of one glove slapping.

Ni!











you empty headed animal food trough water! I fart in your general direction! You mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries!

 

[jjramsey]

1: The silly auditing meter seems a corollary to taking communion.

Communion is free, however.

2: Courses are a more complicated form of baptism or ritual.

Agreed.

3: High level members like Tom Cruise function like priests.

Actually, Tom Cruise is used as an advertisement for Scientology, not as a priest. You won't get any argument from me, though, that some Christians, like Mel Gibson, can and have used their celebrity to promote Christianity.

4: They both prey upon the mentally ill and/or use them as tools to promote belief in their products.

Hmm, looks like a gross exaggeration to me. While you could easily cherry-pick bits and pieces from the histories of mainstream religions so that it looks like you have made your case, you would be hard-pressed to show that preying on the mentally ill was either a formal or informal policy of the various religions, rather than the results of minorities who acted either contrary to their religion or in a way that their religion did not demand.

5: They both take your money and give you what????

Scientology is "pay to play." Mainstream religions are not.

 

[jan]

Just remember - there WAS a time in Church history (Catholic, anyway) where tithing was a MANDATORY practice.

But it wasn't a foundational practice, nor something definingly Christian.

I suspect it partly depends whether a church has power and opportunity to make payments mandatory, or not. For example, in Germany, were the separation between church and state is no part of the constitution, the state collects the member fees of both the catholic and most of the protestant churches along with income taxes. If someone refuses to pay those fees, she will be excluded from her church.

That being said, I don't want to equal Scientology with Catholicism or mainstream Protestantism.

 

[Xeriar]

Thank heavens the IRS doesn't consider Scientology a religion either.

 

[bigred]

Settle down. To steal a line from another poster on another thread, "I think we are in violent agreement." The main reason that I singled out specific rituals is that they are as core to Christian religious practice as auditing is to Scientology, and that puts into clear focus that Scientology charges for participation in its core practices while Christianity does not. Also, I didn't want to deal with people trying to make false equivalencies like "Well, churches charge for wedding ceremonies" or "Some churches charge for counseling" or "Christian conferences are expensive," and so on.

Pardon the misdirected shotgun blast. I was really hitting (OK "aiming" ) at the whole "Scientology is the same as any other religion" gibberish.

 

[Kopji]

We would probably all agree Scientology is worse than your average mainstream religion.

Q: What would be left of religion if it did not have the occasional prophet seeing visions, dreaming dreams, hearing voices, or having certitude about a perceived quest or mission?

These rare yet singular events keep religion going. There is no difference really, except in degree, of the mindset in a believer who blows himself up for God, and one who believes God stopped a bullet from killing him.

 

[jjramsey]

What would be left of religion if it did not have the occasional prophet seeing visions, dreaming dreams, hearing voices, or having certitude about a perceived quest or mission?

Confucianism?

Actually, humanism, secular or otherwise, might be closer to a real answer, I suppose. It's certainly not a religion in the classic sense, but it is a value system, and something that could be a common binding belief.

There is no difference really, except in degree, of the mindset in a believer who blows himself up for God, and one who believes God stopped a bullet from killing him.

I have to disagree. Someone who believes that "God stopped a bullet from killing him" could just be prone to making too much of a coincidence. To blow yourself up for God takes serious conviction, and it often requires the mindset of a classic True Believer.

BTW, this is more politics than religion, but there's an interview about someone who studied suicide bombers here:

http://www.amconmag.com/2005_07_18/article.html

From the interview:

Islamic fundamentalism is not as closely associated with suicide terrorism as many people think. The world leader in suicide terrorism is a group that you may not be familiar with: the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka.

This is a Marxist group, a completely secular group that draws from the Hindu families of the Tamil regions of the country. . . .

The central fact is that overwhelmingly suicide-terrorist attacks are not driven by religion as much as they are by a clear strategic objective: to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from the territory that the terrorists view as their homeland.

 

[David Carroll]

I think it's awfully considerate of the Scientologists to ask their droids...,er, flock, just how far they are willing to take it up the wazoo.

 

[Kopji]

Thanks for the more reasonable responses. Iam heading off on vacation for a few days so here is a quick response.

A RAND corporation paper gives an alternate view:

http://www.rand.org/publications/randreview/issues/rr.winter98.9/methods.html

Indeed, the religious imperative for terrorism is the most important defining characteristic of terrorist activity today. The revolution that transformed Iran into an Islamic republic in 1979 played a crucial role in the modern advent of religious terrorism, but it has not been confined to Iran, to the Middle East, or to Islam. Since the 1980s, this resurgence has involved elements of all the world's major religions as well as some smaller sects or cults.

The characteristics, justifications, and mind-sets of religious and quasi-religious terrorists suggest that they will be much more likely than their secular counterparts to use weapons of mass destruction--that is, nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons. Four incidents in particular--the Tokyo nerve gas attack, the Oklahoma City bombing, the 1993 bombing of New York City's World Trade Center, and the 1998 attack on U.S. embassies in Africa--indicate that terrorism may be entering a period of increased violence and bloodshed. The connecting thread linking these four otherwise unrelated incidents is religion.

I do follow reports on the Marxists around India and Tibet occasionally. Some of the political causes are much like what has happened in parts of Africa where citizens are suddenly disenfranchised. They have a both religious and political components.

Marxist rebels seem to follow an ideology that functions as a religion, and additionally uses people of traditional religious mindset to do the killing. This seems a weak foundation to build the argument that love of homeland instead of religious fundamentalism is a deeper root cause of the violence. They are a certainly a potent combination.

Excerpt below indicates that there is a deep religious history behind the Tamil violence. I am more inclined to think that Marxism is simply the latest convenient excuse for violence extending back thousands of years - violence rooted in religion.

The deprivation of citizenship of a million Tamils was the result of actions of a Sinhala -Buddhist majority which regarded the island as the exclusive home of Sinhala Buddism and the Tamils as invaders from Tamil Nadu in South India.
" The history of Sri Lanka is the history of the Sinhalese race ... The Sinhalese people were entrusted 2500 years ago, with a great and nobel charge, the preservation .... of Buddhism .. in 1956 will occur the unique three fold event - the completion of 2500 years of Ceylon's history, of the tie of the Sinhalese and Buddhism ... The birth of the Sinhalese race would thus seem to gave been not a mere chance, not an accidental occurrence, but a predetermined event of high import and purpose. The nation semed designed, as it were, from its rise, primarily to carry aloft for fifty centuries the torch that was lit by the grear World-Mentor (the Buddha) twenty five centuries ago.. " (The revolt in the Temple, by D.C VIjayawardena, 1953).
http://www.eelamweb.com/history/short/

The presence of these extreme religious attitudes makes reaching a permanent political solution more difficult than it would otherwise be. A similar situation exists with Israel and their neighbors.

I followed the Bamiyan tragedy for a while. Religious attitudes cannot be so neatly excised from the political. If "we" remain uninvolved in these regional issues, the logic follows that sooner or later they would be at our door. The reasoning for the slaughter below could be used to attack anyone. We ignored what happened at Bamiyan and to the Hazaras to our own peril.

http://www.pcpafg.org/organizations...Homepage/pits_reveal_evidence_of_massacre.htm

A team from the United Nations travelled to a remote Afghan province yesterday to investigate three mass graves allegedly containing victims of one of the last Taliban bloodbaths.

Pits with what appear to be bodies of people slaughtered last November in a campaign of ethnic cleansing have been found in Bamiyan, just a few miles from the rubble of two giant Buddhist statues dynamited by the Islamist regime.

Hazaras, said to be descended from Genghis Khan's Mongol warriors, form around 10% of the population and were backed by Iran against the ethnic Pashtun Taliban.

If they encountered someone who heard voices, what logic or reason could they use to discern if the voices were real or not? To question this is to question revelation. The voices are never real, and this fact undermines religion. They must accept that some visions and voices and whatever ARE real communications from God or the Devil, or undermine their own foundations.

Scientologists eventually teach someone else is inside you: 'thetans'. I can't think of a much more harmful mindset for some people. Scientology is toxic at any dose.

So yes, I admit to holding a somewhat extreme and minority position on the use of people we would call 'mentally ill' by religion. (Holding moderate views all the time is probably boring anyway.) -shrug-