From International Viewpoints (IVy) Issue 7 - August 1992
 
Classic Comment
By Terry E. Scott, England

True For You...

In a popular tape of a public lecture, L. Ron Hubbard approvingly 
quotes Buddha: "If it isn't true for you, it isn't true". And in the 
1950s, it was quite okay to go around saying "Ron says .." if one had 
no personal reality on a datum in Scientology. No-one jumped up and 
down or breathed ethics fury.

Today, in the Church, it is unlikely one would encounter such a 
liberal attitude. But thank heavens we Independents do have the 
freedom that existed in the early days - we can be selective, and may 
use things that have been found to work and which are real to oneself.

The same should apply to studying LRH's materials. There is a most 
incredible variety and number of them, in books, tapes, films and 
videos. Ron could have done with an editor. Better, and I speak 
as a professional writer, he could and should have edited his own 
stuff from time to time.

It is one thing to preserve one's original material in an unaltered 
state, which is something that most writers with integrity would wish 
(free from the hands of those editors who are less skilled than the 
writers). But it's good to offer later versions of materials where the 
author clearly states that it has been brought up to date. The 
original work could still remain in existence.

Scientology would have been better applied and understood if it had 
been edited (I do not mean altered) by its author(s).

After all, any communicator has the responsibility of communicating 
clearly. The recipient's primary task is to duplicate perfectly.

Remember L. Ron's simile of an ocean of drops and wanting to pick - 
the - drops: to decide on the important data from a mass of them. 
Today, one must do that with the philosophy, techniques, ethics and 
administration.

And, consistent with one of Ron's principles, one should aim in the 
direction of true simplicity. For this has power. And where the Tech 
lacks potential, it is unduly complex. Ron recognised this, I guess, 
when he "stripped down the engine" of Dianetics and introduced 
Standard Dianetics in the late 1960s.