Conference hydra::dejavu

    "Scientology" is an offshoot of "Dianetics," a so-called "science
    of mind -- meaning something vaguely akin to
    psychoanalysts/psychotherapy that was developed by L. Ron Hubbard
    in the late 1940s or early 1950s.  At the close of his book,
    _Dianetics_, which, oddly enough, is being pushed heavily in TV
    ads, Hubbard likened Dianetics to a bridge from the current mental
    state to a perfect mental state known as "Clear" (I won't go into
    details), but claimed it wasn't a very good bridge.  His last sentence
    was approximately, "For God's sake, let's build a better bridge."
    
    Scientology is supposed to be the "better bridge."
    
    They are rumored to have taken "church" status for possible tax
    breaks, though I've no evidence obn bthat, pro or con.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

	I have a friend who lived out near San-Diego (sp?) for about
3-4 years in the army.  He had some friends who were involved in the
church and they convinced him into trying it.  He said when he went
to check it out it was set up like a series of seminars.  He spent
$50.00 just to go for the first week and learn about the church.  It
seams they expected him to be there most every night at class.  Well
he went for three or four days and found that after this series of
classes was over they wanted him to pay around $150 for more classes
coming up soon.  It appeared that these classes or seminars were
required and that by the time you got done the cost would run into
the thousands!  He quit showing up ( which he got much grief for )
and had to complain to the base just to get his money back.

	
	I have no personal experience or knowledge of the internal
workings of the church.  But if the story I heard from this friend
is true then I don't think I want to either.

Chris.

    re .3:
    
    That was your mistake: answering. :-)
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

	    I've had some delightful dealings with Scientologists.
	I was walking down the street and some guy with a clipboard
	asked me if I wanted to take a personality test.  I took
	one and answered it honestly.  After adding up my scores
	(including one "102%" rating), Mr. Clipboard showed me that
	I had these terrible failings that only a dianetics course
	could correct.
	    We're talking extremely hard sell.  If I was reluctant
	to take the course, it was apparently because of one of my
	newly-revealed terrible faults.  If I had no money, I could
	borrow some:  dianetics would make me such an effective
	person that I could get a job and earn enough to pay it off.
	At the very least, I could buy a dianetics book, couldn't I?

	    A week or so later, I was walking down the same street
	and was offered a personality test by a different guy with a
	clipboard.  I took the test again, only this time answering
	as what psychologists would consider an ideal personality
	(Level 5, self-actualizing, etc.).  Again, terrible results.

	    A week later, I was reading _The_Organization_Man_, and
	noticed the appendix:  instructions for taking personality
	tests in such a way that you would seem average (and thus
	a harmless and reliable hireable person).  I headed for that
	same street and once again took a personality test.  Again, I
	was a hopeless case in immediate need of a dianetics course.

	    Scientology claims to be scientific, but they don't share
	their methods with the scientific community.  My investigation
	(which was, incidentally, censored from my school newspaper)
	showed that their standards of ideal personality aren't quite
	in agreement with other scientists'.
	    My personal opinion is that it's a big money-making scam.
			<_Jym_>

    HOWDY,
         I EXPLORED SCIENTOLOGY A VERY LITTLE BIT.  EST TAKES A LITTLE
    OF THE AUDITING METHOD.  THEY BELIEVE, AS EST DOES, THAT O LOT OF
    OUR NEGATIVE EXPERIENCE IS COVERED OVER, IGNORED, WHATEVER.  THEY
    ALSO BELIEVE THAT THE IDEA IS TO EXPERIENCE THE HELL OUT OF IT,
    CONCENTRATING ON IT UNTIL IT NO LONGER SHAPES US SO STRONGLY.
         NEXT TIME YOU HAVE A HEADACHE, PAY ATTENTION TO EXACTLY WHERE
    IT IS IN YOUR HEAD, FEEL THE PRECISE SHAPE OF IT AS BEST YOU CAN.
    KEEP PAYING ATTENTION TO IT'S SIZE, SHAPE, AND LOCATION.  FOR MOST
    PEOPLE IT WILL DIMINISH OR VANISH ALTOGETHER.  THIS WILL WORK WITH
    A LOT OF THE ACHES AND PAINS IN EVERYDAY LIFE.  I'VE USED IT IN
    JOGGING (WHERE EXACTLY DOES IT HURT?) AND WEIGHT LIFTING, FOR EXAMPLE.
    I LEARNED THAT LITTLE ONE IN EST.  HAVE FUN
    
                                    MIKE GAUTHIER

    re .5:
    
    Thanks.  But why are you shouting?
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

    I was wondering if the Science of the Mind Church is an offshoot
    of Scientology.  There is one here in the Colorado Springs area.
    Some friends of mine invited me there.  I went and enjoyed it 
    so much I kept going back as a guest for 3 months.  My biggest 
    objection to churches has alway been the DEMAND for money, and at
    first I was quite impressed with the no pressure approach of this
    church.  Then I started getting mail for their classes starting
    at $50, the beginner member class, to 150, for full membership.
    I started to pay a bit more attention to the people in the church
    and found that the requirement for "tithing" was $15 per person.
    My friends aren't rich but they gave there $15 each weekly.  When
    I told them that I didn't have the moneys to give away, they said
    no problem, they would donate for me if I would keep going.  
    With a clear sense of guilt for my monetary situation, I quit going
    to the church.
    
    One interesting thing though:  My friends husband died and the 
    memorial service was held at this church, and it was the most
    comforting service I had ever been to in my life.  Having suffered
    thru many religous memorial services were I was made to feel so
    sorry for the departed, praying that they will not rot in hell,
    they expounded the peace, release to another plane, and hope
    for my friend Pat.  I felt Pats presence there and his sense of
    peace and happiness.  It was truely profound.  
    
    Just thought I would share that.

    
        I went to the "Church" in Boston because I had read Dianetics
    and I wanted to go clear.  The concept of Dianetics sounds quite
    plausible in my book (no pun).  But... the people there reminded
    me of Jahova's Witnesses and they charged me a lot of money for
    next to nothing ($30 for a flimsy workbook plus the class).  
        I don't think Dianetics is a scam and I would still like to
    go clear.  But I shall never go back to the Church!  I think what
    L. Ron Hubbard has done has been corporated into a big business
    whose major concern is the almighty dollar.  They've placed a bad
    stigma around Dianetics and that's really sad.
    
    					Tim
    
    

    Hubbard's son wrote a book himself a year or so ago.  I forget the
    name, but the premise was Dianetics is a major rip-off.
    
    Karen
    

    This may be a legend, but might also be worth noting (no pun
    intended!):
    
    Dianetics/Scientology started out when L. Ron Hubbard, dissatisfied
    with the income he was making as a sceince fiction writer, decided
    to invent his own religion and enjoy the tax shelters set up for
    churches.  He did indeed make MUCH more money as a "guru" than he
    ever did writing dreck, and he died a rich man.
    
    Caveat emptor, as they say...
    
    --Karen

RE: .10 (Karen) and others
    
    You have to distinguish Dianetics (a kind of psychological discipline)
    from Scientology (the religion).  In large part aided and abetted by
    John Cambell (editor of Astounding Science Fiction, later renamed
    Analog Science Fact/Science Fiction), Hubbard developed the system of
    Dianetics on the usual basis of intuition, introspection and badly
    done experimentation.  The result is mostly an amalgum of various
    other systems of psychology and philosophy.  There is certainly a
    lot of good parts to it, and many people find that it "works" for them.
    IMHO the useful parts are not original and the original parts are not
    particularly useful; but perhaps it has a uniquely useful combination
    of useful parts from other systems.  If it works for you, it doesn't
    really matter if it is either true in some abstract sense or original.
    
    Dianetics got a good reception from just about everyone except
    psychologists and other scientists.  After a while, Hubbard announced
    that by applying the principles of Dianetics to himself, he had managed
    to achieve a state of ludity whereby he had been able to percieve some
    fundamental truths about the Universe, and was therefore in a position
    to start a new religion -- Scientology.  This he proceeded to do,
    complete with mythology, ritual, levels of initiation, heirarchy
    (himself at the top, of course), recruitment and of course tithing and
    tax-exempt status.
    
    Apparently Hubbard made some rather cynical public statements to the
    effect that founding a church was the best way to riches; but these
    were made, his followers will point out, before he became clear.  And
    besides, what difference does it make if he founded the Church for
    selfish reasons?  That doesn't mean that Scientology isn't true.  After
    all, a person who is "clear" is unaffected by useless sentiment and
    will therefore frequently be seen as selfish or cynical to those who
    are not.
    
    Personally I suspect that Hubbard believed Dianetics to be true, but
    that he designed Scientology without particular regard to what he
    actually believed.  It is not just a matter of the money from
    tax-exempt status -- he could have gone the standard route of an
    educational or research foundation for that purpose.  The non-monetary
    wealth that accrues from the power associated with your own church
    (for example, a virtually unlimited number of personal "servants" who
    will do anything you say for free) is at least as significant.
    
    					Topher

This weekend while nursing the flu I read a biography of L. Ron Hubbard
called "Bare Faced Messiah".  Sorry, I can't remember the author and I
took it back to the library just today.  I have no interest in Scientology or
LRH either way but this book is fascinating.  It documents Hubbards'
life from start to finish with copious footnotes.

If you are into Hubbard or Scientology you won't like it, to say the least.
John

    OK here goes !
    
    Without meaning to upset anyones opinions, I'd like to state mine. I've
    been into Dianetics & Scientology on and off for some 8 years. I've
    heard all the ugly rumours and spoken to people who weren't happy about
    the course/auditing fees, Church organisation etc. For myself, and many
    others none of these contrary matters have outweighed the personal
    benefits gained. The bad P.R. can be exasperating, but when you're onto
    a good thing you have to fly in the face of negative opinion.
    
    It might sound cliched, but when I started off in Scientology, I was a
    paranoid wreck from 6 years of continual hallucinogenic drug use. I
    hadn't held down a job for years, and used to be terrified of other
    people. Within a few weeks of simple Communication drills, learning
    how to just "Be there comfortably and perceive" other persons - nothing
    weird, or heavy - I had achieved a remarkable, miraculous recovery.
    This was so mind-blowingly good, I just never looked back, and swiftly
    put my life back together. So from my own view, which has been both
    subjective and objective, I can't praise it more highly.
    
    From the above, you might think that Scientology is for people whose
    lives have gone fairly off the rails. Not the case. Many famous 
    personalities are dedicated Scientologists today, among them for
    example Chick Corea, John Travolta, Kirstie Alley, Maxine Nightingale,
    Charles Lake...
    
    For many people, it offers a practical way out of the human
    predicament (whatever you might perceive that to be !) 
    
    Your colleague,
    
    	Gil
     

    Just finished a book called "Religion Inc." By a guy called Lamont.
    Very interesting. It definitely has a negative attitude towards
    Scientology. It attacked the 'religion' on the following criteria;
    
    1) Its use of constant pressure during the first few days when a 
    	possible recruit shows interest in the 'church'.
    
    2) Its use of dissociation...i.e. ridicule and criticism of ones
    	previous life system as being wrong and untenable...i.e.
    	Scientology is the only way and if you dont buy in then
    	you're finished...
    
    3) If you do join and then decide to leave you are regarded as a
    	"Suppresive Person'...i.e.one who is an enemy of the 'church'
    
    4) When the scientologists landed after Hubbards wanderings at sea
    	in Clearwater, Fla...they bought up property under the name of
    	'United Churches of Florida'..Why didnt they buy under their own
    	name? were they afraid theywould not be allowed to buy?
    
    5) The mayor of the town (an anti-scientologist ) was subjected to
    	legal action, threatening phone calls, blackmail and many other 
    	dirty tricks by the Scientologists...even claims that he had been
    	in an unreported 'hit and run' which , it transpired , was
    	staged by the 'church'...
    
    6) Confidential information on recruits who had been audited was not 
    	treated with due care...in fact , if the recruit left the 'church'
    	and started bad mouthing it (i.e. expressing any criticism of it)
    	then very personal details of that person's past were often held
    	over their heads so that they'd shut up.....akin to a Priest in
    	the R.C. church selling the secrets of the confession box to the 
    	media...
    
    7) Hubbard's wife was implicated as being a member the Guardian group
    	in the 'church' who were responsible for certain clandestine 
    	activities in which they were found guilty by the courts.
    
    
    nice poeple.....eh??
    
    
    cheers,
    
    	Tiger

    Last night on the Barbara Walters Special she interviewed Tom Cruise.
    He is a member of the Church of Scientology, and said that the
    inquirery into the church does not bother him, that he is comfortable
    with the religion.  
    
    Any comments?
    shannon
    
    

    I've read that the Scientologists treat their
    celebrity members quite differently than the
    general membership...  but I wouldn't take TomCruise's 
    word for anything, anyway...
    
    /bruce

    It seems to be very hard to find an objective source on Scientology.
    I tried for several years, and then gave up.  the closest I found
    was John Atacks's recent _A_Piece_of_Blue_Sky_, which I didn't think
    was very scholarly, very interesting (except for some morbid
    fascination), and certainly not very objective, but at least it
    properly documents the various specific cases it discusses.
    
    All in all there doesn't seem to be much more involved than a
    modified Freudian-based abreactive therapy, and a lot of dogma starting 
    with how Scientology is the only hope for the world, and everyone is either
    a friend of the Church or an enemy, and then continuing from there.  The 
    curious part is that there is as much interest in it as there is.  That's 
    what attracted me.  I still can't figure out the appeal.   Especially among
    the celebrity supporters, some of which seem intelligent enough
    to see through it.  
    
    							todd

    I remember a promo flyer that had some celeb pix and endorsments
    in it...  and even a poem by Sonny Bono!  I was ready to sign
    up on the spot, but all the operators were busy :-(    Then I
    figured out that he probably didn't join until after Cher had left him
    anyway, and the luster wore off...
    
    /bruce

    There is also a neo-gnostic cosmology ("We were once part of the
    Godhead, but the Godhead got lonely/bored so the Godhead split itself
    into many fragments each with the power of a God, but the Godlets got
    bored and so invented a game where they limited themselves to the
    material level and became demigods, but the demigods got bored and so
    played with forces that they no longer had the wisdom/power to control
    and so there was a disaster and they forgot their godhood and became
    mortal (us).  By becoming Clear we can regain our self-knowledge and
    start the trek back through being demigods, to being Gods, to being the
    Godhood.  Or something like that -- it was a long, long time ago that I
    had a girlfriend who tried to convert me, by letting me in on
    "advanced" secrets).

    Despite the rather Freudian techniques used to create "clears" the
    psychological theory, with its engrams, etc. seems to be more based on
    Jungian than Freudian psychology.

					Topher

    Re .20
    
    My experience tallies with Topher's.  Once, I was curious enough about
    them to borrow a book from one.  (This resulted in getting on a mailing
    list for about four years.)  The book was "Dianetics," Hubbard's
    "science" of which Scientology" is the "-ology."
    
    It loudly proclaimed to put psychology in a firmly axiomatic basis.  It
    did this by declaring each teaching to be a new axiom.  The teachings
    added up to Freudian psychology as understood by TV script writers,
    with the jargon changed around.
    
    As I understand the history of it, Hubbard promised great things when
    you got rid of all your repressions-- sorry, "engrams" and became
    "clear" -- a specimen of perfect mental health.  You did this by going
    to (and paying for) lots of sessions with dianetic councellors, who
    measured your progress in part with an "E-meter," which on examination
    turns out to be a potentiometer, I think it was, or some other piece of
    standard electrical equipment.  It was supposed to measure the presence
    or activity of "engrams."
    
    When people did this for years and never got "clear," Hubbard & Co.
    decided that the problem was you were only clearing the engrams from
    your current incarnation.  We now introduce reincarnation and re-invent
    Hinduism and/or Gnosticism, as Topher noted, with new terminology.
    
    Earl Wajenberg

    re: Topher,
    
>    Despite the rather Freudian techniques used to create "clears" the
>    psychological theory, with its engrams, etc. seems to be more based on
>    Jungian than Freudian psychology.
    
    That's interesting.  I suspected some significant parallels.  
    I noticed particularly the similarity of 'engrams' to
    'complexes,' even more than to repressed memories a la Frued.
    As well as the emphasis on the technique now used in
    computational linguistics of measuring the amount of time it takes
    for someone to respond to specific words, which I think Jung
    also emphasized.   I tried to compare Individuation with 
    Clearing, but that's where the analogy seemed to break down.
    
    Most Scientologists don't seem to know about Jung, though, and
    Jungians apparently rarely study Scientology, so 
    I couldn't get enough information to make a useful technical comparision
    of Scientology with Analytical Psychology.
    
    						todd

    The E-meter is a simple "GSR" (Galvanic Skin Resistance) meter.  It
    measures the resistance from point-to-point on your skin.  They may be
    bought or made for a few dollars (the Church of Scientology charges
    hundreds of dollars for them).

    When people are stressed their skin resistance drops.  You can use this
    as a simple lie detector.  The sessions with the E-meter would
    essentially consist of the trainer (or whatever they are called)
    prodding the student with subjects, images, phrases or whatever that
    makes the resistance drop -- i.e., causes stress.  When the student can
    keep the needle steady however obnoxious the trainer gets, they are
    "clear" -- at least for this lifetime.  In traditional psychology, this
    would be labeled "reduced affect" and is generally considered a symptom
    of potentially serious problems.

    I'm not sure that the Gnosticism/reincarnation stuff came originally as
    a justification for continued "treatment".  I think, though I could be
    wrong, that it was there from the start in Dianetics as an explanation
    for the existence of the engrams (take Jung, stir in a bit of
    Theosophy, add a dash of Original Sin, pour and serve).  It needed to
    be elaborated when the therapy of Dianetics was transformed into the
    religion of Scientology -- which is frequently interpretted as having
    been done because of the tax advantages.

					Topher

    The E-meter you describe, Topher, sounds like the thing in bars where
    you put a quarter in the slot and stick your index finger on the pad
    and it supposedly measures your heart rate.
    
    It also sounds like the gadget at old penny arcades, where you put in
    the penny, squeeze the handle and it measures anything from you sexual
    prowess to how much you love youur family to whether or not you kick
    cats for pleasure. :-)
    
    PJ

    I haven't seen the bar gadget you describe, but my guess is that it
    actually does measures the pulse.  Such a gadget is easy enough to
    build -- a red LED is pressed against one side of the finger, and a
    photocell on the other.  As you can see with a falshlight in a dark
    room, red light is transmitted pretty easily through the hand.  The
    increase in blood volume with each heartbeat, however, decreases the
    amount of light transmitted a bit.  Some simple electronics and the
    pulserate can be measured.  Used a lot with exercise machines.

    I can think of two penny-arcade gadgets that might be what you are
    describing (I worked at Palisades Amusement Park one summer in HS). One
    measured arm strength -- how hard you could push against a spring. The
    other gave increasing electrical shock to see how long you could hold
    on.  Another possibility would be skin temperature (I've seen this used
    with tubes with bulbes containing a volatile liquid.  Skin heat
    evaporates the fluid in the bulb forcing some of the liquid up the tube
    -- the higher up it goes the "hotter" a lover you are), though I've
    never seen it in that form.  And of course, it would be easy enough to
    set up a GSR meter -- that I haven't seen it doesn't mean no one has
    done it.

				    Topher

    Well for starters I thought his science fiction was rubbish. 

    We have one of their centres in Amsterdam and every so often they come
    out on the streets to bug the passing people. Strangely enough they
    always seem to be mono-lingual people with English as their mother
    tongue. This amuses the Dutch who suddenly lose their ability to speak
    English. A most effective way of getting rid of them.

    As far as I see it they work on the same principles as most cults. They
    prey on those who are unsure of themselves by convincing them that they
    are inadequate and require help to survive in this life. Having lured
    them in, they then part them from their cash and con them into working
    to bring in more money. Those at the bottom are treated like dirt while
    those at the top live a life of luxury. Anyone attempting to leave is
    put under extreme pressure to stay.

    The thing that amazes me is the fact that people fall for it. I have
    met several rational people who have been in cults and managed to
    escape. The only thing that they seemed to have in common was they were
    at a particularly low point when they came into contact with the cult
    and they were suddenly surrounded by apparently friendly people who
    seemed to give their lives some meaning again. This condition however
    soon wore off.

    They seem to think that the law does not apply to them as it does to
    others and they regularly break the law. I think that they should be
    brought to book and punished when they do this. However as they are
    technically religions, usually for the sole reason of tax avoidance,
    the authorities seem reluctant to act.

    Their little gadget consists of a reasonably sensitive ammeter and a
    small battery. The electrical resistance between two points of your
    body varies, this is usually caused by the contact with skin.
    Increasing the area in contact or making the contact better will reduce
    this resistance and give a better deflection on the meter. When you
    sweat this will also improve the contact and give a better deflection.

    Under normal conditions most of us tend to alter our sweating,
    breathing, pulse rate etc when we knowingly tell a lie or are stressed.
    As has been stated the gadget can be made for very little money and
    proves nothing. But to those who have no knowledge of such things it
    may seem impressive.

    Jamie.

    I put this on the same level as all other organised religions. It's a
    simple case of the greedy, unscrupulous and lazy, preying and feeding
    on the fears and insecurites of the inadequate.
    
    Laurie.

Where I went to Polytechnic - Portsmouth UK, they use a local pub to conduct
meetings etc. and are often seen handing out leaflets to all and sundry on the
main shopping street. I believe it is very easy to become embroiled in their
dealings without knowing it... most of the leaflets are interesting reading and
broad enough to apply in some way to most people (e.g. "Did you know you only
use 10% of your brain capacity?") *but* there is usually absolutely *no*
mention of Scientology or L.Ron.Hubbard (or just the smallest mention) on these
flyers. I find this disgraceful, and get very annoyed each time I see someone
standing there handing out these "harmless looking" pamphlets to passers-by,
especially since an ex-girlfriend of mine had read the books and was all set to
start going to meetings - until I convinced her not to (and that took some
effort!). An ex workmate was also hassled for years after filling in another
"harmless personality test questionaire" which he'd been handed in the street &
had taken an interest in...

								- JIM CAD*

    It might be interesting to take their personality test and give the
    answers that would be given by a psychotic killer then watch the tester
    try to get you out of the building. I have always wanted to do that on
    an ink blot test.

    Jamie.

    Hubbard WAS a science FICTION writer wasn't he? :-) Maybe the whole
    thing was a piece of fiction that got out of his control. Maybe it was
    all a scam by him. Who knows. Maybe it's all true.
    
    Topher, I was being a facetious on the penny arcade game. I think all
    that one did was give the appearance of a light spinning around and
    then it stopped randomly. I used to feed pennies into those things and
    got ten different answers in ten different tries, done one right after
    the other. They were just silly amusements that were considered
    sophisticated when they were knew. No one took them seriously. they
    were quite old when I was a kid back in the late 50's to early 60's. 
    
    The heart meter is something else. I think it's 50 cents now and if one
    has had a few drinks then one will not get an accurate reading. Might
    scare the bejeebers out of someone though. Also, I think these things
    are meant to be taken seriously. I've seen them in airports and
    shopping malls too.
    
    sorry to Rathole.
    
    PJ

    re: E-Meter,	
    	Just some Scientology trivia.  The E-Meter is affectionately
    	known as 'The Cans,' because the electrodes have the size and
    	shape of two soup cans, and are held in the grip of the
    	individual being audited.  Seems to me that this might be a 
    	potential methodological problems with auditing, that semi-random 
    	changes in grip pressure might influence the reading.  I don't know
    	if they address that or compensate for it somehow.
    	The device also contains some kind of wheatstone bridge, I think.
    
    							todd

    I doubt if a true Wheatstone bridge would be used as it is a very
    sensitive instrument and it would be like taking a sledge hammer to
    crack an egg.

    Yes changing your grip should drastically alter your readings. It might
    be interesting to spray your hands with some thing that is transparent
    and a good insulator before taking the test. The thing would then fail
    to operate with you.

    Jamie.

I had heard that Hubbard actually wrote somewhere (I think it may have been
a diary that was later published) that he decided to start a new religion to
see if he could do it and to see how gullible people were.

He must be really chuckling...

Linda

    Re .32
    
    The way I heard it, he was once heard to say -- *before* founding
    Scientology -- that a sure way to get rich was to create a religion. 
    This is much the same thing as your version, of course.
    
    (A few iterations of this and we caqn start a first-class rumor...)
    
    Earl Wajenberg

    Yeah,
    
    	It's simple isn't it, read up on some well-known techniques and
    theories, change all the terminology, gear your "introduction tests" to
    choose those most fragile and gullible and get hold of some cheap
    brightly coloured material!
    
    								- JIM CAD*

    A book I've been reviewing in parts recently in ::PHILOSOPHY called
    _Persuasions_of_the_Witches_Craft_ by T.M. Luhrmann has an
    interesting paragraph about Scientology, and H. Whitehead's
    study of it (Renunciation_and_Reformation, Cornell University Press,
    H. Whitehead, 1987).  Sorry if this is out-of-context, I hope there
    is enough information for it to make sense ...  She had been
    talking about the shift in the way people perceive and
    interpret new experiences resulting from magical ritual, and now
    compares the same phenomenon to a previous study of Scientology ...
    
    "Whitehead's ethnography of Scientology describes this
     experiential transformation slightly differently, as
     'renunciation and reformation'.  The idea is that 
    becoming a practitioner involves abandoning old ways of
    contextualizing experience for new; by this she means
    'a movement away from and dissolution of a set of [mental]
    structures, and the construction and movement into another set'
    
    "Scientology is an extraordinary enterprise: a richly descriptive
    philosophy of mental life, cast in a peculiar mentalistic
    vocabulary, with a practice involving extensive self-revelation
    and fantasy before an 'auditor' who judges its value by the subject's
    metered skin resistance (and thus, emotional stimulation).
    
    "The subject talks through emotionally charged events until the
    constrictive 'bank' of obstructive psychological tendencies has been
    emptied.  By Whitehead's account, the practitioner begins to have
    intensely personal experiences which he makes sense of with the
    symbolism and the language of the practice, and begins to redescribe
    past life events in its terms. 
    
    "The evocative power of symbolism - the 'meaning' of the rite - is
    important, but even more important is 'the interpretive function of
    the symbolism in handling the unusual experiential world called into
    being by the practice.'  Personal experience is understood by the
    terms dictated by the practice.  Similar analyses - similar to
    the extent that describe the symbolic description of experience
    as a means by which a particular symbolic system becomes effective
    and personally persuasive - include : Levi-Strauss's comparison
    of shamanism and psychoanalysis (1967), Kakar's analysis of
    of indigenous medical techniques (1982), Harding's study of
    fundamental Baptist conversion (1987) and so forth."

    Re  .33
    
    If memory serves, it was Theodore Sturgeon who wrote about his 
    conversation with Hubbard (& other struggling SF writers), in which 
    Hubbard outlined the process of starting his own religion. 
    
    -Art- 

    Re. last few
    
    I had the marvelous opportunity this spring to sit in a corner and talk
    with L. Sprague and Catherine DeCamp at a local Science Fiction/Fantasy
    Convention.  They are both authors of many books, he being the writer
    who rescued the Conan stories from obscurity after Robert Howard died. 
    
    They are very gracious and endlessly fascinating people to talk to, and
    they talked at length on Hubbard. 
    
    He was indeed a pulp SF writer in the 30's (not very good) and was
    asked to consult on a war-gaming project of some kind for the Navy
    along with L. Sprague DeCamp, Robert Heinlein, Ted Sturgeon, Isaac
    Asimov and some others.  This is where the DeCamp's met him.  They said
    he was a scoundrel, a liar, a charlatan, an opportunist, and someone 
    you wouldn't trust for a minute. He embellished greatly on his Naval 
    career (in which he failed miserably but wouldn't admit it ), and 
    took every opportunity to take advantage of people.  Mrs. DeCamp says 
    the couples often danced after their husbands finished war-gaming, and 
    once Hubbard danced with her (much closer than she would have liked) 
    for the sole purpose of making her husband jealous.  She avoided him 
    afterwards, but pointed out he was always doing something like that
    just to disruptive. 
    
    	He did indeed invent a religion for the sole purpose of making
    money.  He researched it thoroughly, found ways to get recruits,
    figured out how to get around taxes, and set off to make money. He
    bragged about it.  The DeCamp's (among others) took great exception to
    the way his followers came to be treated.  He tended to concentrate on
    people under 25 who had some money (can't get rich off of poor
    followers). He would bilk them out of their savings, and sometimes
    their family's money too.  Then drop them when they hadn't "achieved
    clarity" or whatever.  
    
    	When the DeCamp's spoke out, they were hounded by the loyal
    Scientologists.  Mr. DeCamp has a severe allergy to cats. One day they
    found posters up all over the neighborhood saying that they were taking
    in stray cats, please bring all you can find!  (It took years to quash
    that rumor - it even got around SF conventions!)  They were threatened
    with everything from legal action to having their house burglarized. 
    They said it still continues.  They have spent untold $$'s in
    legal fees to combat threats and lawsuits and smear campaigns against
    them.  They continue to speak out against this "religion".   
    
    Oh, by the way, in case it hasn't been mentioned - Hubbard hasn't
    written a book since "Dianetics" in the 40's (?).  The "Church" has
    legal use of his name.  They've been turning stuff out by the
    truckload.  There's another scam going on there - an author friend of
    mine was told by her publisher that all the "Battlefield Earth" books
    that show up on the New York Times bestseller list do so because the
    Scientologists buy them - then send them BACK to the publisher where
    they are sent to the bookstore again.  It was caught once when a
    Waldenbooks opened a box of "new" books that had their store's mark on
    them... they had sold them the week before.  It's easy to have a
    bestseller when you can sell the same book 5 or 10 times!
    
    So that's the story from people who knew the man.  Personally, I
    wouldn't get near one of their meetings. 
    
    - Russ