When People Say “You’re Working Too Hard”

29 08 2009

image Just listened to the 2nd disk of the lecture entitled “Responsiblity” from The Command of Theta lectures by L. Ron Hubbard.  Even more than the first, this lecture had some brilliant quotes on the subject of responsibility, and how responsibility ties to one’s own sanity and ability to attain one’s goals.

I particularly liked the following quote:

“…Oh, the biggest operation that they can pull on you in this society is ‘You’re working too hard.  You should have some relaxation.  You should get out and you should have an avocation.’  You could kill a man this way.”

“And this fellow has been awfully interested in his work and that was his fun.  That was his fun, to paint for twenty-three hours a day.  And as long as people leave him alone, he’ll stay in pretty good shape.”

The lecture goes on to detail how this can turn someone around from where work was fun, to where work is arduous and to where the person just loses all drive toward life. 

I also particularly like this, as the topic of “burnout” is so prevalent in the technology field – that someone would get “burned out” on a job that they started out really liking.  What does “burnout” mean anyhow?  Obviously it’s not that someone has no more carbon-oxygen fuel to expend, there’s obviously more to it.

I thought this a great lecture to listen to for anyone who “thinks” they’re being burnt out by life.   As you can find out pretty fast in Scientology, there is really not such a condition as “burnout”.

In any case, give the lecture a listen, if you’re thinking that the above might fit you!

Advertisements




Responsibility: Courts based on Arbitraries rather than Ethics

23 08 2009

image I’m listening to the lecture Responsibility from the Command of Theta lectures, and came across the following from LRH which I thought interesting:

In this section of the lecture, LRH is humorously describing some of the illogics of the way people behave, in the context of whether or not people could actually be responsible for things (good or bad) which they cause to occur.  He said:

“When I tell you some of these things about Earth, you’ll think I’m romancing.  You’ll think I’m telling you long, drawn-out stories and things when I tell you they have what they call a court of law that has nothing to do with ethics.  Now don’t laugh.  I mean, it’s true.  They have courts of law whcih have nothing to do with ethics but have only to do with arbitraries.”

He then goes on to explain:

“These courts judge solely on the basis of whether or not it has been written down someplace, not on whether or not it’s bad cause or good cause.  And this whole thing is devoted to just answering this question: ‘You were bad cause, but was it justified – not by reason, but by something somebody wrote in a lawbook?’” 

imageI thought it a very interesting point, one worth reflecting a bit on.  How may parts of our judicial system are built around determining if someone acted rationally or if he acted unethically?  And then how much is just built around figuring out whether or not what he did was written down in some lawbook somewhere?

  Take the most recent school-shooting conviction, in which (thankfully) the psychs on the case did not succeed in convincing the court that the defendant was “legally insane” just because he was on psych meds

That our current system even allows people to be represented as “legally insane” is itself a bizarre illustration of the above. 

In any case, I thought it an interesting quote worthy of some more reflection.








%d bloggers like this: