Sunday, May 18, 2008

Personal Integrity

Hey! I'm back from vacation. :)

This post is about something I should have gone over earlier - Personal Integrity.

In Scientology, personal integrity is defined like this: "knowing what you know, what you know is what you know - and to have the courage to know and say what you have observed. And that is integrity and there is no other integrity."

In the article (called Personal Integrity) written by L. Ron Hubbard, he goes on to say, "Nothing in Dianetics and Scientology is true for you unless you have observed it and it is true according to your observation. That is all."

This is one of the things I think is so cool about Scientology. You are not asked to take anything on faith, but you are asked to apply the information in Scientology and see if it works. If it does, they you'll know it's true.

What do you think about this?


Claudia Blanton said...

Hi Julia!

Thank you for your very interesting blog. I have found you through a link from another blog, and I agree with you whole-heartedly! How wonderful is it to encounter a faith, that tells you to try it first, then believe it!
Well, despite the fact that I am not a Scientologist, I am very interested in the subject, as I study a variety of faiths, and have found so much truth and common thoughts in many of them. Freedom to believe how you want to, and the freedom to openly express that without the judgment of another, and instead learning from each other would make such wonderful peaceful planet to live in for all of us, no matter where we live. Thank you for your information, and for teaching me and others about your interesting faith.

Peace and Love

Claudia Blanton

Julia said...

Hi Claudia,

Thanks so much for your comment. I do love that fact that my religion allows me to see how it applies to life - instead of just taking it at face value.

It's great that you have been studying many religions - which ones strike you as having the most in common with Scientology?

I'm glad you like my blog and, as always, I'm happy to answer any questions you may have - just shoot me a comment!

:) Julia

Sytse said...

I've been reading a bit in an old copy of dianetics, and in it LRH states somethings like "the human being is a good being". He states this as a fact, so I'm wondering how things like that mesh up with the truth is what is truth for you tenet.
One thing I'm trying to figure out while studying LRH's theories on communication is this; Communication is duplication, and ofcourse it's dependant on the rest of the ARC triangle.
But since only that is truth what is truth for you, how is it possible to confirm that you have reality? How can one be sure that you achieved duplication?
I mean, someone might have a different understanding of the words we agreed on. We'll think we have sucessfully completed a comm-cycle, but since we have a different definition of a word, it turns out we have no reality at all! But since what is truth is what is truth for you, we'd have achieved duplication without ever having mutual reality! Can you help me figure this out?

Julia said...

Dear Sytse,

I am sorry to say I don't quite understand your question. My understanding is that you can read anyone's theories, but until you try them out in the real world and see that they really work, they aren't very useful. That was my main point with the above post. You can try out anything in Scientology in the real world. If it works there, then the tenet you read must be true.

When it comes to communication, sometimes two different people do look at things in a different way. If you have enough communication between two people, they generally are able to understand where the other is coming from and thus have reality.

Please let me know if I was able to help and answer your questions.

Sytse said...

Hi Julia,
I'm sorry if I wasn't very clear, I'm just doing some studying on Scientology, and made the assumption that you were refering to the page of TWTH wich says "What is true is what is true for you."

It's just that I find this hard in combination with the communication theory from LRH, because you say that you'd be able to have reality if you take the time to communicate. But how can you ever truly acknowledge reality if your truths are different?

Julia said...

I think I see where you are coming from. The way I have resolved the above situation is by recognizing that your reality is different than the other person's. If you both agree on that - you've at least established reality on the fact that you don't have the same ideas about something.
Does that make sense?