What “Keeping Scientology Working” Means to Me

I’ve seen the video clip where Tom Cruise talks about "Keeping Scientology Working" and thought I should log in with what it means to me as a Scientologist.

To really get where I’m coming from, you should know that I looked into Scientology because I was curious, but I stayed because it worked.

I was looking for spiritual answers—who am I really, what am I here for, what is life really all about. But I wanted answered that worked. It wasn’t enough to me to have someone give me their opinion. I’d had plenty of that. I wanted to be able to see for myself.

Well, Scientology filled the bill in a very surprising way. It’s described as an applied religious technology. And that’s exactly what it is.

This is my own personal take on Scientology and what it means to me to "Keep Scientology Working,"

Scientology is a technology. Just like any other technology it will only work if you use it exactly.

If you were trying to repair a car, you’d expect the car manual to help you locate what was wrong and give you comprehensible directions to fix it. And you should be able to use it to troubleshoot your car and get it back on the road again.

If you were learning how to program a web site, and you grabbed a textbook on the subject and tried using it, you would expect to be able to learn it, follow the directions and create web pages.

Okay. So car repair and web site programming are technologies. No one would complain about having to learn them exactly and use them correctly to get them to work.

When I say Scientologist is a technology, I mean just that. Yes, it’s about you as a spiritual being, but the entire body of information that it’s based on was researched and documented by the founder of Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard.

In 1965 he wrote "Keeping Scientology Working," where he stressed that you have to apply Scientology exactly to get the results from it, and that when you don’t get results, don’t go looking for new ways to apply it, but rather go back to the text, find out what you didn’t understand and failed to apply correctly, and do it right.

This concept is a big yawn to an engineer. Of course that’s what you do when you’re talking about a technology.

But it’s is a startling new concept in the field of the humanities, a zone of life which has been dominated by opinion and junk science, witness the dramatic lack of results visible in skyrocketing statistics of criminal populations, addiction and broken marriages, all social problems that should be improving if the "established authorities" in those fields had effective technology.

When Scientologists refer to "Keeping Scientology Working" (sometimes described by the acronym "KSW") they are referring to this concept of a standard technology that works uniformly and invariably whenever you use it correctly.

People new to Scientology are sometimes amazed to see the kinds of results they can get in their lives just by reading a book by L. Ron Hubbard and trying out some of the concepts. For me, when I first read the book The Problems of Work it almost seemed like magic. I was so impressed I spent the next three days telling every one of my friends how incredible it was. But it doesn’t take long before you realize that the "magic" actually comes from exact application of the technology, and that’s when KSW becomes important to you.

I’ve used Scientology to help people for years. I’ve helping my family, people I work with, complete strangers and best friends. And I know that the results I get and the help I’ve been able to give is because I’ve applied it exactly.

So to me, KSW is a very important part of being a Scientologist. In fact, I couldn’t really call myself a Scientologist if I didn’t use it.

Keywords

Religion

reactions article

0 vote

by Anton (xxx.xxx.xxx.210) 21 January 2008 22:12

As a Scientologist for 17 years, I couldn’t of said it better myself. Well done.

KSW means many things to many of us, I want to encourage other Scientologists to write it up! Here or anywhere, state what KSW means to You.

Remember to quote/make:

" What "Keeping Scientology Working" Means to Me. " as your very FIRST entrance/sentence to facilitate all search engines.

I will write my own opinion here and in a New blog dedicated to this shortly.

Thank you SuperNews, hell of an idea! This is, for all of us; "Start!"*

*colloquil=begin

Comment on article React to that message Report an abuse
0 vote

by japarthur (xxx.xxx.xxx.60) 23 January 2008 20:23

Nice little story, that might be true. But:

1. Is it just chance or the timing for writing the paper has something to do with the Cruise crisis ?

2. Many people - even some of the most dedicated opponents to scientology - accept the idea that basic courses cannot harm anybody and that, as it is grounded in common sense, may actually help. What they don’t like is the rest of the story (OT levels, Xenu, RPF even for children, OSA, disconnection, etc.)

3. One of the central questions is: as LHR spent his life lying about himself, how can one trust him on anything ?

4. Having monitored the Cruise crisis recently, I am pretty convinced that KSW stories won’t be enough to limit the dammage. So far, scientology managed to control - more or less - its image. But the video - that many people still have to see in full - is of a different nature:

a. It is Tom Cruise speaking freely. I am quite sure that such a zealot did freak out many people that considered entering scientology.

b. Everybody can see what the top of scientology is looking for. I wonder if any proeminent people will agree to be seen with him in the near future wondering how their image will be used.

c. Look at it for yourself. Do you really think that it is appropriate to put the rationale for an award as if it was about selling a car ?

I am convinced that scientology will disappear in a not so far future. Internet does a lot to make the public aware of its inherent inconsistencies. I only hope that people inside it will be able to cope with that and to live in the "wog" world again.

Comment on article React to that message Report an abuse
0 vote

by super news (xxx.xxx.xxx.170) 23 January 2008 23:20

What do you really want? I think you are using comment sections to spread your propaganda. Or is this another cut&paste text you found somewhere else. You see, I am not willing to talk to robots and c&p’ers. That would be a waste of time. If you want a talk, go to my talk blog and log in (snvisitor/suppernews).

Comment on article React to that message Report an abuse
0 vote

by japarthur (xxx.xxx.xxx.254) 24 January 2008 08:44

@ super news,

Who are you talking to ?

In my case, I can only tell the following:

1. If I use the comment section to spread my propaganda, you use the article section to spread yours.

2. My text is genuine. A simple search will easily prove it. (Besides, part of my comment refers directly to your piece.)

3. I am not a robot.

4. I cannot access your site with the link you provided without registering, and I don’t want to.

5. Why not talk here ? You posted your article here and I would be glad to share some thoughts with you, if you want.

Comment on article React to that message Report an abuse
- 0 vote
  
  by stephanemot (xxx.xxx.xxx.228) 24 January 2008 12:20
  
  AgoraVox’s content is not monitored. You see corporate advertising in disguise, propaganda for sects, bouts of racism and revisionism...
  
  This "article" is pure propaganda for a sect.
  
  Comment on article React to that message Report an abuse
- 0 vote
  
  by super news (xxx.xxx.xxx.170) 24 January 2008 21:16
  
  you don’t have to register. look at my comment. the last line is the login id/password for guest comments. I think you are dodging real communication.
  
  Comment on article React to that message Report an abuse
- 0 vote
  
  by super news (xxx.xxx.xxx.170) 24 January 2008 21:17
  
  you don’t have to register. look at my comment. the last line is the login id/password for guest comments. I think you are dodging real communication.
  
  Comment on article React to that message Report an abuse
- 0 vote
  
  by super news (xxx.xxx.xxx.170) 24 January 2008 21:31
  
  I find it funny so see the rather hostile reactions on an editorial why I think my religious principles should be applied as written. Even the press got that, here:
  
  "For me, it’s all about KSW." So says actor and celebrity Scientologist Tom Cruise on a video allegedly circulated by a disgruntled former member of the church. What does that acronym mean? And why are people so suspicious about the Church of Scientology?
  
  The video, which was aired in part on Wednesday morning shows, allegedly is used to promote the Church of Scientology belief system to newcomers and features Cruise speaking about his commitment to its tenets. Cruise joined the church in the 1980s, according to Andrew Morton’s new unauthorized biography of the star, and has emerged as a spokesman for Scientology in recent years.
  
  KSW stands for Keeping Scientology Working, a policy letter written in 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology’s founder. In the letter, Hubbard, a science fiction writer, outlined 10 steps to ensure survival of the movement. He commends members for carrying out the first part of the mission, but urges them to take it further and eradicate what he called "incorrect technology."
  
  "This point will, of course, be attacked as ‘unpopular,’ ‘egotistical’ and ‘undemocratic,’" Hubbard wrote in the letter. "It very well may be. But it is also a survival point. And I don’t see that popular measures, self-abnegation and democracy have done anything for Man but push him further into the mud."
  
  If you want to do something else than Scientology, go ahead and do it, I don’t mind, but don’t call it "Scientology".
  
  https://www.rtc.org/reports/form/in...
  
  Comment on article React to that message Report an abuse
- 0 vote
  
  by super news (xxx.xxx.xxx.170) 25 January 2008 00:33
  
  You got something wrong here, pal. YOU are promoting your business here, no me. YOU are trying to tell others what they are allowed to believe and what not. Why don’t you stop this hypocrisy and fascist attitude and become a honest netizen.
  
  Comment on article React to that message Report an abuse
0 vote

by stephanemot (xxx.xxx.xxx.228) 24 January 2008 12:14

Scientology defines itself as a religion, but mixing religion with politics, mixing religion with science... that is the essence of fundamentalism.

Comment on article React to that message Report an abuse
0 vote

by japarthur (xxx.xxx.xxx.238) 25 January 2008 07:29

@ the author,

1. The problem I mentioned in my previous message (§ 4) was not about your site, but I had a problem with wordpress. Everything seems OK now.

2. It is quite nice to have a scientologist citing LHR about his disdain for democracy.

3. I guess that people are suspicious because they heard about nice things such as OSA and RPF, among others.

4. Cruise’s video impressed many people because it shows clearly how scientologists see themselves. He is such a zealot that it freaks people out. I guess it is the worse PR piece for scientology in many years.

5. From what I know, the free zone begun when D. Miscavige took over scientology and imposed harshly new rules to franchises that were going for a rather long period. Beside the loss of relative freedom in their practice, they begun to reject the alterations the new management was imposing on LRH’s texts. To a certain extend, part of free zoners are more "fundamentalist" than scientology itself.

6. Calling people fascist does not help the dialog.

Comment on article React to that message Report an abuse
- 0 vote
  
  by super news (xxx.xxx.xxx.81) 25 January 2008 19:14
  
  Ok, you don’t seem to be a Scientologist. What’s your beef with Scientology?
  
  Comment on article React to that message Report an abuse
0 vote

by japarthur (xxx.xxx.xxx.98) 25 January 2008 22:28

I have no beef with scientology.

At first, I just wanted to mention that nice KSW cases don’t address the issues usually connected with scientology.

I just mentioned a few in order to open a useful dialogue.

Comment on article React to that message Report an abuse
0 vote

by Terryeo (xxx.xxx.xxx.7) 10 March 2009 14:28

Knowledge is common, everyone has some. But to use knowledge, you understand it. You read the car manual and understand it well enough to fix the car. You memorize the multiplication table and understand its use well enough to multiply numbers. You simply can not use knowledge which you do not yet understand. And this idea is also true when you have knowledge about emotion, or about thought. Whereas critics will tell you that nothing can be known about emotion or thought or spirituality, Ron Hubbard’s writings lay out things that can be known and used, if and only if, they are also understood. Critics stop just before they understand and this is unfortunate. For the knowledge is there for understanding.

Comment on article React to that message Report an abuse