This was sent to me by someone who wishes to remain anonymous at this time. She is not declared, and has recently been on org lines. I find it interesting to read the observations of someone who ha…
Source: An Evaluation Of Scientology
Over the years there have been many so called “evals” by former members of the Church of Scientology.
Problem is that for the most part they have not been cold, objective and dispassionate.
Most importantly going where the data the data goes. Probably why the information on how to do an Evaluation is contained in a series of Policy Letters entitled the Data Series.
Though it is mentioned in this so called “eval”. The key policy Data Series 11 The Situation which involves finding the Situation defined as the furthest departure from what is known as the Ideal Scene is never used.
Instead the author of this “eval” uses an example in the policy as the basis for the “situation” then uses this to establish a “who-there” which of course is David Miscavige, Chairman of the Board for the Religious Technology Center then takes a leap of logic to compare him to L Ron Hubbard who eventually becomes the so called “why”.
Yes of course if it wasn’t for Hubbard then Scientology wouldn’t be in the dire straights it is in. Ignoring the fact when Hubbard was directly and indirectly involved in Church Management after resigning as the Executive Director World Wide in 1966 the Church went through a incredible period of expansion until just shortly after his death in 1986.
What started out as a few scattered organizations in the 1950’s became a World Wide Network constituting of close to two hundred in the latter part of the eighties.
Well if one reads this so called “eval” they will never find out because instead of delving into the relevant data. The writer ends up doing a critique on the subject and its founder.
In other words the article is nothing but a bombastic piece of propaganda posing as an “eval” by an anonymous source claiming to have done the Data Series Evaluator’s Course.