Who loves Clay Demos!?

Share your experiences and comments about Scientology's "Study Technology".
rlsteve
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 7:16 am
Location: Seattle, WA, United States

Who loves Clay Demos!?

Post by rlsteve » Tue Dec 28, 2004 6:14 am

Can I say how much I HATE Clay Demos!?

They'd always take forever to do! And clay would get into my cuticles and fingernails and it would just itch! And it just took so long, especially if it was some abstract idea.

My aunt is still in Scientology. She recently got her PTS Type A declare lifted. The Ethics Officer gave her an ethics program and one of the steps on it is to clay demo RESPONSIBILITY. And my aunt is having such a HARD TIME with it, it is way too steep of a gradient for her, in my opinion, and the Ethics Officer says, "Well, why don't you get some word clearing on responsibility and maybe that will help?"

What the HELL was LRH thinking when he invented clay demos!?!?

Girlfriend
Posts: 3690
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2004 6:27 pm

Post by Girlfriend » Tue Dec 28, 2004 6:51 am

Posted on Thursday, September 18, 2003 - 5:26 am:
------------------------------------------
Maria Montessori was born in 1870 and died in 1952. She used clay for teaching long before LRH ever coined the term "dianetics."
- Freeborn

Whether she conceived it or not, she used it for good as opposed to another "technique" in an arsenal of ridiculously expensive "tech."

Hubbard wasn't 'thinking' Steve, he was "borrowing" - yet again - others' concepts and practices to add to his repertoire of stolen concepts and practices. You know, for his product scientology/dianetics. He merely invented a new vocabulary to describe these concepts and practices so they could be marketed to make a profit.

Here's a thread from awhile ago on "clay demoing" you might find interesting.

Clay Demo Thread

User avatar
mikedewolf
Posts: 1694
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2004 4:41 pm
Location: Anytown, USA

Post by mikedewolf » Tue Dec 28, 2004 7:09 pm

Using clay to make a 3-D diagram ofsomething might sometimes be useful - but Scientology has made it a bizarre ritual. Studants waste a lot of time constructing intricate and meticulously labelled demos of abstract concepts even when they thoroughly understand them. Demos must be done according the supervisor's idea of how they should be done, and this can vary from supervisor to supervisor.
Mike de Wolf
"A science that depends on Authority alone is a breath in the wind of truth and is therefore no science at all." - L. Ron Hubbard

marie42
Posts: 81
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 3:14 pm

Post by marie42 » Tue Dec 28, 2004 8:40 pm

I thought they were fun - but then - when they need to be checked by an idiot that just doesn't "get it" - it can be frustrating.

free_for_real
Posts: 1643
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 6:12 pm

Post by free_for_real » Tue Dec 28, 2004 10:04 pm

I thought they were a waste of time on checksheets when I totally understood the concept.

Plus it depended on who you were and who was checking you out. Since there were never very many people on course and I guess I was held in high regard, no one ever flunked my clay demos anyway.

Hubbard's Mushroom
Posts: 8290
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 4:02 pm

Post by Hubbard's Mushroom » Wed Dec 29, 2004 1:48 am

Where's the creativity in clay sculptures when they must be done exactly as someone else says?

User avatar
programmer_guy
Posts: 8877
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 7:55 am
Location: Somewhere far beyond the land of Oz.

Post by programmer_guy » Wed Dec 29, 2004 4:41 am

Most WOG education occurs without clay demos and people still get very well educated.

However, wherever possible I like getting my hands on the actual objects that I am studying (or building a model - not necessarily clay).

When I took a course in automobile automatic transmissions we actually did use a cut-away model of the Simpson gear train (two planetary gear assemblies connected together) AND we had to take apart and put together and take apart and put together the guts of automatic transmissions. (The real thing is usually better than a model - except where dangerous.)

Having actual models or play-enacted demonstations is good BUT I'm not usually really big on making clay models - sometimes they just take too long to do - or are too innaccurate.



(Message edited by Programmer_guy on December 29, 2004)
codo ergo sum.

User avatar
programmer_guy
Posts: 8877
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 7:55 am
Location: Somewhere far beyond the land of Oz.

Post by programmer_guy » Wed Dec 29, 2004 4:49 am

When studying "lists" and "trees" (data models) in computer science, it makes no sense to me to make a clay demo of them. BUT, drawing conceptual pictures on paper does help.
codo ergo sum.

User avatar
programmer_guy
Posts: 8877
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 7:55 am
Location: Somewhere far beyond the land of Oz.

Post by programmer_guy » Wed Dec 29, 2004 9:18 am

BG,

Maria Montessori was born in 1870 and died in 1952. She used clay for teaching long before LRH ever coined the term "dianetics."

That may be - I haven't studied that particular history.

I can tell you this. I had placed my daughter in a Montessori school for many years. I never saw or heard about the students doing demos with clay.

Maybe that was just done a long time ago.
codo ergo sum.

rlsteve
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 7:16 am
Location: Seattle, WA, United States

Post by rlsteve » Wed Dec 29, 2004 9:58 am

I went to a Montessori school in my preschool and first and second grades, but I don't remember using clay.

User avatar
programmer_guy
Posts: 8877
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 7:55 am
Location: Somewhere far beyond the land of Oz.

Post by programmer_guy » Wed Dec 29, 2004 10:09 am

BTW, what we say is "clay" (in school) is actually "plastecene" - not really true clay.

The Brits have correctly called it plastecene.

As in "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds"
by the Beatles
...
"plastecene porters with looking glass eyes"
...
codo ergo sum.

freebird602
Posts: 247
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2004 9:10 pm
Location: Somewhere in England........, That's somewhere in England too!, England

Post by freebird602 » Wed Dec 29, 2004 10:31 am

Clay demos were one thing that used to piss me off during my days of being a member of this weird cult.

I could never see the purpose of using labels to show what each of the individual components were, and then putting it all together. It was generally obvious what the model represented.......!!!

As far as I'm concerned this was another method to make scino courses even longer, and thus even more expensive.

I believe that this was also another means to degenerate peoples' thinking to a lesser level, making them more prone to all the suggestions and manipulations put forward by the cult.

After all, playing with pasticine is the pastime of generations of children for many years now......

Ball of Fluff
Posts: 8106
Joined: Sun May 26, 2002 2:23 am
Location: Cyberspace
Contact:

Post by Ball of Fluff » Wed Dec 29, 2004 11:13 pm

I like 'em just fine.

Clay representations, though- even better.

User avatar
Markus G.
Posts: 234
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:31 am
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by Markus G. » Tue Dec 13, 2005 2:33 pm

The clay demos were one of the reasons why I didn't manage to complete my Full Hat course.
Some of the clay demos I did during that course:
  • What is money?
    What is an executive?
    Purchasing - the liability of staff members
    Why you must organize while you are coping
    etc. etc.
Clay demos can be extremely time consuming. And I think that they distract more than they help.

Ball of Fluff
Posts: 8106
Joined: Sun May 26, 2002 2:23 am
Location: Cyberspace
Contact:

Post by Ball of Fluff » Tue Dec 13, 2005 7:12 pm

I used to not like them til I had to do a couple that filled two entire tables. Then I got so I really liked them.

It really does seem to help demonstrate something and take it out of the realm of theory.

Post Reply

Return to “Study Technology”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests