Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Dienetics is only one of many Hubbard books.

But it's possibly the only writing of Hubbard that has any merit at all, albeit somewhat limited.

On a purely psychological level, the theory of engrams has gained traction and seems as valid as some other, more mainstream, theories. Still a theory, though, and it may never be proven.

Originally posted by Suzianne
But it's possibly the only writing of Hubbard that has any merit at all, albeit somewhat limited.

On a purely psychological level, the theory of engrams has gained traction and seems as valid as some other, more mainstream, theories. Still a theory, though, and it may never be proven.

Any proof would be in the pudding. Scientologists have been proven to be totally screwed up psychologically. You think, for instance, scientology has made Tom Cruise a better person? Scientologists have been very very vindictive against apostasy from their own so-called religion. They have killed them, ruined them financially.

For instance in the town of Fall hill, something like that, a small town in the UK, Scientology at one time made that town their world headquarters. So with billions to blow, they built up a nice fortified castle of power. Well, the townspeople didn't like what they saw and objected to the local government. What did the scientologists do?
The ordered all the people involved in their so-called religion to boycott the town and the town really suffered because of it. There could have been prosperity but instead brought chaos and misery to that town.

That is the normal modus operendi of scientology, that is how they do business. If you are for us, great, if not you are our enemy.

If you don't believe that, read what happens to former scientologists, besides being broke, giving them the deed to their homes in their drive to become OT's.

There is NOTHING worth saving about scientology. It came about as the result of a party given by John W Campbell, who owned a couple of science fiction magazines like Analog and Amazing science fiction where L Ron Hubbard was part of his stable of writers and one day at a part they discussed how you would start a religion. Right after that, L Ron wrote Dianetics, total BS pseudoscientific crap from page one to the last page. Then magically scientology was born with totally whacked out ideas, aliens, spaceships and all that rot, stuff of L Ron Hubbard's imagination.

All of a sudden scientology was on the map, and when they became a billion dollar business, all of a sudden L Ron Hubbard was a best selling author. And do you know why? I'll tell you why: Because the management of scientology wanted it that way, so they just bought up enough of his books to make it look like he was some kind of new Hemmingway.

That is exactly how Hubbard made all those top seller lists.

The state of scientology reminds me a lot of the Catholic church in the year 1300, selling indulgences for crimes commited, give me a thousand pounds oh king and all your sins are forgiven.

Also a lot like the crusades, kill or ruin those who you perceive as enemies.

Don't even BEGIN to support ANYTHING about scientology, it is a 'religion' of hate and the generation of money pure and simple.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Don't even BEGIN to support ANYTHING about scientology, it is a 'religion' of hate and the generation of money pure and simple.

It's not a religion at all, man.

It started as a tax shelter, plain and simple. Ol' L. Ron wanted tax-exempt status, and he got it by starting a "church". It's still the quickest, easiest way to tax-exempt status. He knew he could bamboozle enough people to get rich, especially if he didn't have to give half of it to the government. Oh, I fully agree that it is about the money, that much is obvious. He took the base need of humans to discover something beyond themselves to devote themselves to, and ran with it, all the way to the bank. It's just too bad that he's deceived so many people AND made a laughingstock of religion in the process.

Scientology was created in 1952, two years after Dianetics was published. L. Ron Hubbard researched his book for years before writing Dianetics, and my opinion is that Dianetics, or what I will call The Engram Theory, is a valid research work on a subject that does have some validity, in my opinion. This is all before L. Ron created Scientology with the intent to fleece people. He used his theories in Dianetics to fuel his new "religion" in order to confer on it the appearance of a valid religion, going so far as to create out of whole cloth an alien civilization to explain how his solution for removing engrams was somehow "metaphysical" in nature. Still, at this point I would call it a "philosophy" rather than a religion, even though L. Ron's main concern was achieving tax-exempt status, not founding an actual religion, but founding something which resembled religion closely enough to obtain tax-exempt status, nothing more.

I would separate Dianetics from Scientology. Dianetics is The Engram Theory, which is an interesting new take on psychology, something not seen since Sigmund Freud. Scientology (created two years later) is a false religion, based on the Love of Money, which the Bible calls "the root of all evil". I do not support anything about it.

The best lies, however, all contain a seed of truth, or what could reasonably be confused with truth. Scientology uses Dianetics to provide a "true-sounding" basis to build upon. Dianetics is not Scientology, and Scientology is not Dianetics. Scientology does USE Dianetics as its "seed of truth", but that's not the same thing as BEING Dianetics.

I'm not even arguing the absolute validity of Dianetics. It's a theory, nothing more. An interesting theory, but still just a theory. But I am denying Scientology as anything resembling a religion. If it IS a religion, it is a religion of Greed. A similar argument could be made for modern capitalism, the "de facto" state religion of the USA.



Note: The above is purely my opinion. Your mileage may vary.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
ummm i have read Hubbards book, i dont remember any of that to be honest, it was
more psychological than extra terrestrial.

It is list as one of the top ten cult religions on the following website:

http://listverse.com/2007/09/15/top-10-cults/

P.S. That is, the top 10 destructive cults. Jehovah"s Witnesses aren't listed
because they are not considered too bad.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I'm not even arguing the absolute validity of Dianetics. It's a theory, nothing more. An interesting theory, but still just a theory.

To avoid confusion with scientific usage, you should call it a hypothesis.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
yeah, almost as silly as the belief that a god incarnated himself in a man, then had himself tortured and killed to appease his own wrath.

yeh, almost

the similarities are staggering. i never saw it until now. thank you great spirit of enlightenment, for showing me the obvious.

Originally posted by twhitehead
To avoid confusion with scientific usage, you should call it a hypothesis.

No confusion. I AM using the word theory just as if I was speaking of the Theory of Evolution. Scientific usage. Exactly. Dianetics is the Theory of Engrams.

You evidently missed the whole point of my post.

That Dianetics should not be confused with Scientology.

One is a theory of psychology, the other is a grab for peoples' wallets and the attempt to not share any of it with the government.