Hello,
I am a long time critique of Scientology (never a member) who is writing a PHD thesis regarding the evolution of the psychology of religion. Unlike others in the field, I put much emphasis on cults and conversion as extreme examples which shed light on the nature of religiosity in general.
One of the chapters of my thesis consists of analyzing the church of Scientology in light of my theory. I have read many books and accounts of Scientology, but I still have a few questions, mostly regarding the nature and manifestations of what scientologists call “wins”.
I understand that a “win” is a form of mystical/spiritual/religious experience. And that these come about usually during the TRs involving being still, as well as during auditing. Is that true? Are there different types of “wins”? Are wins that come about through TRs different in their nature than other wins? Can other events bring about wins? Can they occur spontaneously? How common are wins, and is this variable over time (beginners having more wins than others for example), or between people (some people just have more wins than others)? Do wins differ between people who were born into the group compared to those that join? Is the event which turns someone into a Scientologist always a win? I understand that the win is the proof that the tech works. But is it ever considered by scientologists that a win is an experience, and that experiences are not arguments?
I know that these are many different questions, and I might have missed the most important ones. So feel free to answer any of them, or just explain wins and their influence.

Thanks in advance,
Yuval Laor

from Scientology: The Truth Rundown **UPDATED, 13th June 2010** (page 6) at viewtopic.php?f=11&t=30854&start=75
More discussion of wins at
Precious Technology at viewtopic.php?f=9&t=31874
This stuff is serious after all at viewtopic.php?f=9&t=18895&p=191292

It's not so much a spiritual achievement, but either (1) bragging that a past situation proves you have OT abilities, when it proves no such thing, or (2) lying about a past success that never even occurred, in order to be allowed to take the next Scientology course.

Hi Yuvall.

Most people involved in scientology come into it with a basic course that is heavy on the training routines (TRs). Some start with auditing but those people are very much in the minority, and even starting with auditing it doesn't take long to get them doing TRs. TRs pervade scientology. They are done on every course. Staff members do them daily.

Every TR has a bulletin that gives instructions on what the TR is for and how to do it. Each TR has the instruction that it be done until the student has a "major stable win." What is a major stable win, you may ask. I did when I first came across the term. I was instructed to get the dictionary and look up 'major,' look up 'stable,' and look up 'win.' So I did that, per L. Ron Hubbard's instructions on looking up words, getting them defined and putting them in sentences. From that I got the idea of what a major stable win is.

Then I started doing the TRs. I began to change. It's very subtle at first. At the end of the first day doing TRs I felt very good and slightly light headed. I did the TRs twelve hours a day for about eight days. From doing this I got the 'mass' to the 'significance' of the term, 'major stable win.' You could also say I got the 'reality' of it.

I've never taken cocaine but from the way that high has been described to me it sounds like a pitifully mild version of the euphoric state that one achieves from doing scientology's TRs. That extreme euphoric state is the result of a series of about ten TRs, each of which has a major stable win at the end of it and whatever the description or content of that win might be associated with it is this tremendous state of euphoria. By the way in that state one is extremely suggestible so it is also very much a hypnotic state as well.

I think when a person involved in scientology speaks of a win, what they are implying is a major stable win. Such a win may have descriptive elements to it as described in the success stories that those involved in scientology write but in addition to that the win has to a greater or lesser degree, the euphoric state that the person achieved when first doing the TRs.

The euphoric state itself is not stable. It fades over time. There are also diminishing returns to that state from doing TRs. Auditing sessions tend to bring the euphoric state back to the individual at the full intensity of when the TRs were first done and sometimes more so. I never did the OT levels but I have a feeling the euphoria achieved from doing them is even greater.

There are points along the way for people in scientology where they feel they have had enough euphoria and they want to take a break from auditing. One person who had received auditing almost every day for about three or four weeks told me they reached a point where they needed a break from it. I felt the same way when I finished dianetics, which, by the way is done quite differently from the method described in Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. At the time I did it dianetics was done before the grades. Now it is done after them.

That's my opinion on the matter. To summarize: a win is in fact thought of as a major stable win. There is content to a win. That content could include a feeling that an ability has been achieved or enhanced, a new ability has been discovered or released, or a defect or disability has been diminished or dispensed with. The person involved describes that content in a success story. In addition to the content of the win a varying state of euphoria accompanies it. The state of euphoria is extreme and contains a hypnotic state as well as its feeling of well being and being light headed.

There are wins in the form of success stories included in many publications put out by scientology. I suspect that many of them, especially those involving so called OT phenomena are completely fabricated, i.e., lies.

Great question Yuval. Scientologists often relate their "wins" in auditing and training, as recorded in Scientology promo and magazines.



Re: def. #2 of Intention: I.e, the higher-toned someone is on Hubbard's emotional tone scale, the more intention he or she has. Hubbard made many claims about how auditing raises people on the tone scale.

The highest point on the tone scale is Tone 40 (Serenity of Beingness). "Serenity," as Hubbard defined it, manifests with the effortless execution of intention, total control, etc.



I came across a book in a used book store recently, entitled Focusing by Eugene T. Gendlin, Ph.D. which may be helpful in understanding the wins as experienced in auditing for example. The author's method of self therapy "teaches you to identify and change the way your personal problems concretely exist in your body."



Dianetics and Scientology "therapy" is unlike focusing. However the description of "felt shift" is somewhat similar. It is experienced as a reorganization of mental content and a release of some sort.

One Scientology process called a "Date/Locate" seeks to find dates and locations of past incidents by E-meter reads (example: 75 million years ago, Mount Shasta). These incidents are dated and located "until some mass or energy blows", which is similar to a felt sense described by Dr. Gendlin.



The Date/Locate indoctrination teaches auditors and preclears to link such mental energy shifts with wins. I believe that false memory syndrome is a significant danger in any Dianetics or Scientology auditing because, for one thing, these so-called wins are achieved when preclears are regressed and under the complete control of an auditor who is trying to be a "living embodiment of LRH technology."

The first entry under "win" in the Tech Dictionary definition above, however, is the way the word is most commonly used among Scientologists: "intending to do something and doing it or intending not to do something and not doing it." This an amoral meaning, and it is used by Scientologists amorally. So they can have a win caving someone in, have a win maxing out a customer's credit cards, or have a win "shooting down SPs." Scientologists win by executing the "Command Intention" of their cult leaders.

This is a classic example of how "win" is used from L. Ron Hubbard:



See also how Scientology features the "Winning" meme here: OSA Newsletter "Winning" circa 1997/98 *now with jpeg images. (Thanks, Gubka. )

And perhaps relate the mass of material on Scientologists and "winning" to the observations of Psychologist Martha Stout about sociopaths and "winning."



More related references: Life is a Game

Scientology site: How to win an argument
Scientology site: Study Technology: Successes from application

To Wieber's excellent observations, I'd add a few things.

The state of consciousness brought about by Scientology practices is essentially the same whether one has just completed one of the most basic TRs for the first time, or whether one is attesting to Clear -- all that going Clear is, is attaining this state in a way which you believe (at the time) to be permanent. Some wins have more content than others, "cognitions" about some real or fancied part of existence, but the state is always the same.

There is euphoria, but there is more than that. When I'd be very "keyed out" from TRs, auditing, or whatever, I'd feel wonderful, but I'd also feel somewhat intellectually impaired. Kind of like when you're 16, head over heels in love, and walking on clouds? You can't sit down and play chess or do math problems well, nor would you even want to try. I found that practicing Scientologists had relatively low beta brain wave activity, but lots of alpha and even theta compared to controls. One might be able to get into the same state through biofeedback training, or other forms of meditation, not that I've tested that hypothesis personally.

The state will fade over time, usually by the next day, but can be indefinitely extended by doing TRs every day, as all staff do. This gives some credibility to the cult's assertion that one has undergone some sort of permanent change for the better, when in fact the state is quite impermanent, and is only better in limited contexts. TRs before going to the dentist would be fine, as it would help one to relax through the experience. TRs before taking an important test might be a bad idea. TRs before being subjected to a registrar's hard sell would be a perfectly horrible thing, yet that is definitely the rule in Scientology, and not the exception. Registrars strike while the iron's hot, and their victims are at their most easily manipulated.

I don't think that the state changes too much as one goes higher in Scientology. It may become more stable, but it may lose a little of its edge, kind of like the way someone who habitually uses a recreational drug can never get back what they experienced the first few times they used it. There will definitely be ups and downs in auditing, and different people experience different things, but as a whole, I'd say that most people have more pleasant experiences on the lower parts of the grade chart, and find the OT levels (particularly in some of their newer forms) to be relatively tedious. Once one has done the first couple of TRs, and had 20 or 30 hours of auditing, one has probably been through experiences which are the best Scientology has to offer, and can hope for little more than repeats of the same kind of state.

Although I can easily get myself into that state, I haven't done so for decades, because it takes some time to get into (probably at least a few days, if you're out of practice), and I haven't found any real use for it. Scientologists accept the state as evidence that they're being permanently transformed into powerful spiritual beings. I see it as merely an altered state that is a lot of bother to get into.

There are also "wins" which are unrelated to TRs or auditing, but those are just a Scientologese way of saying that you got something done, as intended. Maybe you finally caught up on the dishes and took out the trash, and that's a win. Or got through reading some assigned policy letters. But I don't think those are the sorts of wins you had in mind.

Thanks, Wieber, Caroline and Zenuetrawl - very informative. It sounds a lot like your personal boundaries are lowered, which is good for family reunions, bad when you're being asked for money. I wonder if the IAS events systematically use music, videos, and trigger phrases to loosen people 's hold on their wallets. I have volunteered at fund-raisers for a major community charity and saw the excitement and emotion building up to "The Ask," where people were directly asked to put their checks in the shiny envelopes on the table. In this case, the people left happy, having given to a really good cause. In Scientology, the euphoria can lead to ignoring the growing debt and the woe it causes, until the person loses house and more.
Diamond merchants about to haggle face-to-face, or bid at an auction, for a special gem will examine it carefully and write down a number they are willing to pay, but keep that number to themselves. This keeps them from being emotional and swept away in the rhythym and excitement of the bargaining or the auction. I recommend this to Scientologists starting to resist the demands, but not able to completely say no.

Wieber's description of the euphoria is excellent, as is ZenuEtrawl's explanation about the state of consciousness. I'd describe my first "major stable win" on TRs as being somewhat euphoric, but certainly dissociated, and "out of my body," or "exterior." Yes, Don Carlo, I'd definitely agree that boundaries are lowered in this state.



The floating needle signifies that the previously emotionally charged button, problem, or targeted mental content is now flat. Around this time, the preclear expresses a new realization or cognition.

There are numerous mentions of GSR (galvanic skin response) in the papers published at http://www.psychosomaticmedicine.org/, and it would surprise me greatly if Hubbard's research with the E-meter didn't have an "earlier beginning." (A journal content search on "galvanic" yields 179 results. Limiting the search to articles appearing between Jan 1939 and Dec 1950, "galvanic" yields 17 articles.

Also see lyrics to the new IAS song re winning: Dauntless, Defiant, Resolute

___
Edit: Added links.

Welcome, Yuval. I am very sorry but I think I accidentally deleted your subsequent post, along with a boatload of spam. Please post again and I will be more careful. After 3 posts you're home free.

I think, Yuvall, it might be helpful for you to tell us your interpretation of what was posted here and then ask any further questions you might have developed from that.

I think the KSW policy demonstrates the nature and importance of winning for every Scientologist.

Hello Everybody,
Thanks for the thoughtful and informative answers. I wrote a reply, but, as you saw above it was eaten with all the spam, so I will write again.
Talking about the “win” experience is a little tricky, as experiences are hard to talk about. I think that the “win” in a specific example of a mystical experience (sometimes referred to as a spiritual or religious experience, but also known as nominus, god-experience etc.) but this is too simplistic. To describe what I think of these experiences, I will talk about what causes them, their effects, and what they might feel like.
What brings about these experiences, at least initially, is a sufficient anomaly. This anomaly can be a “miracle” where one sees something which they take to be impossible, but it can also be a somatic anomaly. I will give examples of these: let us consider a person who drops a bowl of sugar, and on the floor, they can see the word “truth” spelled out in sugar. Due to the anomaly of the event, this person is likely to undergo an intense mystical experience and convert into a religion which is completely unrelated to the miracle itself. The biblical miracles are like this, someone parts the sea, and others come to the conclusion that they should be circumcised. The sufficient anomaly that can bring about the experience might also be somatic. An example can be seen in someone seeing LRH, and starting to feel a tingling sensation in their back. Because they know that normal people do not bring about such tingling, they interpret the situation as a kind of miraculous power that LRH possess. As a result they too can undergo a mystical experience.
In the case of the “wins” of scientology, the anomaly of the extreme experience brought about through TR-0 (there are neurological explanation for why the tr-0 bring about hallucinations, I can explain these if you want), triggers the mystical experience. This too follows the same logic, this experience is really strange, and therefore it is a proof of something which is unrelated, namely that the entire “tech” works. Of course, this depends on expectations, one needs to know beforehand which conclusions they would come to, if they experience the miracle; in Scientology, expectations are manipulated by the cult through the context of the situation, and the social milieu.
There is a difference between the experience which cause conversion into the cult, and subsequent experiences which re-affirm the belief in the cult and intensify one’s fervor towards it. I would speculate that the first encounters with the experience, especially the experience which can lead a person to undergo a complete transformation in their life as they enter the cult, to be much more intense.
An experience, in itself, is not an argument for anything, but for humans, an experience can be the ultimate proof of the truth of some unrelated tenant. This means that following such experiences one actually “feels” that something is true, and this is not just a regular truth, but it is an ultimate truth. I define ultimate truths as those which are relevant to every context that is entertained by the believer. In scientology, this means that the tech is relevant to absolutely everything, which I understand it is.
The manifestation of the experience (or set of experiences) of the “ultimate truth” is a cause of great controversy which has been going on for more than a century. I really think that experienced scientologists might be some of the most informed people about this subject. But then again, the experience is greatly affected by its anomaly. And once someone is used to the experience, it might change its nature.
In your replies to my post so far, the only experience which was discussed was that of the experienced scientologist, not differentiating it from the experience which leads to conversion. This might be because those replying (Wieber) might have never converted into the cult, but rather were born into it. I was happy to see Zenuetwarl describe the experience “like when you're 16, head over heels in love, and walking on clouds”. This is completely textbook, as teenagers (and the elderly) are very prone to have these experiences, it has to do with changes to the temporal lobes that they are undergoing. The average age for religious conversions is 15.3. (It also corresponds to the age that chimpanzees change groups, which might be the chimp equivalent of a conversion)
My research is regarding the evolution of all this stuff, specifically conversion and fervor. So let me know what you think, and if you have anything to add. I am really happy with your posts; as I said, you guys might be the ultimate experts on this kind of experience.
Thanks again,
Yuval Laor

What an interesting topic. Do these Wikipedia terms work for your questions about conversion? Do you identify conversion with the point of "internalization of the new belief system?"

Personally, the "major stable win" I had, (out of body, dissociated) occurred about 10 minutes after I started doing OT TR0. But my so-called conversion took place months before I started course. And I did not have a "religious" conversion in 1975. I was lured in with a free career consultation.



Enlightenment in Scientology occurs in front of the registrar, before the auditing and training even take place. (Everyone knows the one about wallet enlightenment... ) But seriously, it is the registrar's job to enlighten people.




Brand new people are handled with disseminators and registrars who specialize in Hubbard's dissem tech. This specialized activity is done in Division 6a, Department of Control. [OEC Vol 6, 1991 ed., p. 18.]



The awareness characteristics that new people must achieve, are "Need of Change" and "Demand for Improvement." Evidence of this "Demand for Improvement" is cash or check. The entire list of awareness characteristics is represented on the Grade Chart), center column. Also here. Wieber explained this very well in OCMB thread: The Grade Chart.



Scientology disseminators don't seek to induce a trance-like or mystical state with which to lure people in. Their techniques are entirely different, covered in the material on dissemination.

For me the initial reg experience was quite traumatic. My "career consultant" had me in terror and sobbing before he gave me a "Well Done" and $25.00 invoice for the Comm Course.

I have to disagree with you on this Caroline. It was crammed down my throat, before we got Big League Sales Closing Techniques that people were not to be offered a choice and that enlightening them in the registrar's office was a waste of time. Hubbard said that in order to make a decision people had to be brought to enlightenment and since that took time the registrar was not to do that. After Big League Sales arrived offering a choice became mandatory, but the choice offered was along the line of, "Do you want training or auditing."

I have to say, though, I was a lousy registrar and didn't last long doing it. Upset me at the time but I'm proud of it now. In the wog world I was very good with doing sales.

As to conversion, I did convert. I was not born in and I was in my twenties when $cientology got me. Most people don't come to $cientology. In most cases someone from within $cientology comes out and gets people. It's a small distinction but I think it's important to make it.

The most effective conversion method in $cientology is the TR drills. The organization has faltered a bit in recent times because, probably after Hubbard died, the people in the organization adopted the notion that the TRs were too valuable to be offered so cheaply at the entry level. So instead of offering a TRs course of some kind they offer the personal efficiency course or the ups and downs course. People involved in scientology are discouraged from looking at anything else than scientology and it is an insult to them for scientology to be called a cult, so they don't really understand that the TRs are a conversion tool, as described in William Sargant's Battle For the Mind.

All this stuff gets learned after one gets out and reads the proscribed materials.

I think the vast majority of people involved in scientology, and it may be everyone including David Miscavige, do not know what they are actually doing to themselves and the people they bring into the organization. Hubbard said there is no hidden data line but he lied a lot. There are, in my opinion, based on what I have read after I left, aspects to the application of scientology technology that Hubbard did not disclose.

I have one more thing right now that comes to mind from this discussion. I think for most people when they get inducted and indoctrinated into a cult like scientology they become super aware of other such organizations. In addition to that, once they go through the conversion process in one group that more or less immunizes them from every other group's conversion process. I used to think of all the other groups out on the street when I was out there promoting scientology: the moonies, the krishnas, the process, etc., and think how lucky I was to have found THE ONE.

Oh, yes, I'm an expert on brainwashing from the inside.

Well, I think we might have agreed if I had put the word "enlighten" in quotes. I'm talking about the type of enlightenment Hy Levy talked about in his St. Pete Times interview. The St. Pete Times also discussed this enlightenment.







Understandings plural, and Enlightenments, plural, occur in front of the reg, before Scientology services, plural. (Ref. Org board.)

You are correct about not giving the public a choice. That's in policy too.





My own experience is at odds with what you say about the TRs, but I was not a reg. I was also a lousy disseminator, and I knew how these failures would be seen by the techies, so I took courses in Hubbard's dissem tech to try and overcome my "flaw."





Interesting reference, W, and I think there's some application to the Scientology conversion. But can you give us a quote?

Sorry, I think I misled you. In Battle for the Mind Sargant discusses conversion techniques, but does not make reference to anything related to scientology. The book was first published in 1957. Sargant discusses conversion methods used by the Methodists, and in voodoo rituals. The common element in them is the induction of a trance state, which, from my experience, is mainly what the TRs accomplish.

Very early in the book, by the way, he describes abreaction therapy, the theory and application of it. Abreaction therapy was used to treat acute post traumatic stress disorder (at the time called shell shock) in soldiers during world war one. The therapy was largely developed from Pavlov's findings with his experiments with dogs. From the description of abreaction therapy and the way it is done, I am convinced that Hubbard used that as the basis for his 'book one' dianetics techniques.

In Judith Herman's Trauma and Recovery she discusses the history of post traumatic stress disorder treatment. She points out that at different stages researchers put attention on post traumatic stress disorder and later moved away from the subject leaving the work done on it out of public view, if not forgotten. Taking abreaction therapy and repackaging it Hubbard produced something that was apparently new.

Therapists using abreaction therapy in the 1914 to 1918 period discovered that use of the therapy made patients extremely suggestible. Hubbard must have known this but has not mentioned that fact, as far as I could find, in any of his writings.

I think if Miscavige were to direct that the TRs be collected together in a course pack with a check sheet such that the course concentrated only on getting the students to do the TRs for about twelve to fifteen hours each and then offered that as a basic course to the public for, say $50, scientology would actually expand beyond his wildest dreams. He won't do that. The advice comes from a suppressive person and the TRs right now are deemed too valuable to be 'given away' for such a low price.

For anyone just coming out of scientology or who still has the opinion that L. Ron Hubbard's writings are IT, Battle for the Mind may be a difficult read, mainly as Sargant approaches the material strictly from a physiological point of view.