A couple observations from university

Discussion in 'General Scientology Discussion' started by kate8024, Aug 21, 2013.

View Users: View Users
  1. kate8024

    kate8024 -deleted-

    So I'm getting settled in here at university working on Religion and Psychology degrees and wanted to share a couple things I have noticed:

    * Unopened cases of books sent to the religion department by Bridge - apparently they send them a free case or five every year (I'm not sure whats in them though, I'm guessing DMSMH and SFOT) but there are no classes here which even touch on Scientology as part of the curriculum, so they go unopened.

    * The school bookstore has Jenna Miscavige Hill's and Lawrence Wright's books, but no books from Bridge.

    * The guy who works the cash register at the book store has read both of those books and commented that the CofS is "a really weird group".

    * My advisor does consider Scientology a religion (there has been a lot of debate about this on ESMB lately), at least for the purposes of writing papers and such - but he seems extremely inclusive about what he considers a religion.
     
  2. Lermanet_com

    Lermanet_com Banned

    well tell your adviser that Arnie Lerma said he is in idiot.
     
  3. kate8024

    kate8024 -deleted-

    LOL ok will do. FWIW he is a professor at a public university, so he could probably be fired for stating that he doesn't consider something a religion.
     
  4. Lermanet_com

    Lermanet_com Banned

    My "professor" used to beg me to stay to help him get the students through the labs, I would decline, pointing out, I was paying to be there whereas he was getting paid. Tell him to do due diligence before opining about that which he knows nothing about. His kind are routinely used by $cientology to fool heathens who think professors know what they are talking about, of course that's not why you mentioned it..
     
  5. AnonKat

    AnonKat Crusader

    like this dude Dr Thomas Szasz
     
  6. kate8024

    kate8024 -deleted-

    [​IMG]
     
  7. iHateDuplicity

    iHateDuplicity Patron with Honors

    Actually, what would probably be a better idea would be to suggest he read Lawrence Wright's book (since Wright is a Pulitzer prize winner, not an apostate and had no ax to grind) and suggest he re-evaluate based on that information. If he's interested or really has his head on straight, he could also be directed to Tony Ortega's blog or any of the other books by the "apostates".
     
  8. kate8024

    kate8024 -deleted-

    He and I have already discussed that stuff a little bit and he is familiar with it. He has read some of it, but I'm not entirely certain how much. I suggested Dr. Urban's book to him which he did say he had not yet read but he wrote it down and said he was interested in reading it.
     
  9. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    Tell him to read what Dr. Steven Kent has to say on the matter:

    "Although some social scientists insist that Scientology is a religion, the more appropriate position to take is that the organization is a multi-faceted transnational that has religion as only one of its components."

    http://www.bible.ca/scientology-not-religion-kent.htm


    ____________​


    Excerpts from a legal Declaration of Denise Brennan of May 2008:


    RELIGIOUS CLOAKING IN THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY


    Deception and manipulation of "scholars."

    12. Once religious cloaking was begun in earnest and many self serving documents were made and images created to reflect a religious image, it was considered vital to get “experts” to support the concept that organized scientology was in fact an organized religion., it’s policies “religious scripture”, etc. The entire intention behind the acquisition and use of such religious and legal scholars was to create and develop “evidence” to support the religious cloaking that could be used in courts and elsewhere where needed. While organized scientology today parades out various scholars that say they are “religious”, I can tell you that this scholar program was started in the Guardian’s Office and I worked on it as early as 1974. I worked on the obtainment of such scholars opinions personally and by supervising others to do same and I used such scholars opinions to obtain recognitions that organized scientology would not otherwise have obtained.

    13. At no point where any scholars briefed on either the real controls of organized scientology or the reasons why religious cloaking was developed. Instead they tended to be briefed using the religious cloaking materials developed and/or by speaking with pre qualified, briefed scientologists who were told what to tell the scholars. If scholars wrote less than glowing reports of scientology being religious in nature, their opinions were discarded. For those who would write glowing reports supporting scientology’s “religious nature”, those reports were kept for further use in legal and/or PR matters....

    17. In summation, religious cloaking was constantly pushed within organized scientology by Hubbard by its legal and PR departments and later by Miscavige to gain undeserved legal and PR advantages, to make more money, to use as a cover when abusing staff, public and even non scientologists, to hide behind when attacked by others and to use to discredit and attack others...
     
  10. iHateDuplicity

    iHateDuplicity Patron with Honors

    Well, there is hope then.
     
  11. kate8024

    kate8024 -deleted-

    1) Dr. Urban mentions this in his book that I recommend to him.

    2) You keep quoting this, but to me this says its not wrong to consider Scientology a religion because one component of Scientology is, in fact, a religion - which seems to me to be the opposite of what you are trying to actually say so you might consider finding a different quote for that point as this one can backfire on you.
     
  12. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    No at all.

    One "religious" component - used mainly for display - of a multi-faceted transnational operation does not make that transnational operation a religion, just as window dressing displayed in a store front, is not the store.

    The point is that Scientology uses cloaking, and a publicized "religious" component, as one part of a transnational operation that is not religious, but commercial.

    It does this to mislead.
     
    Last edited: Aug 22, 2013
  13. Terril park

    Terril park Sponsor

    Particularly Professors of new religious movements get a lot of stick on critical forums.

    If people consider what they believe in to be a religion That would mostly make it one
    I'd guess.

    I personally consider Scn a religion. It has axioms, factors, concerning man's
    relation to the universe and loosely to God or Gods and to man's spiritual nature. These are
    religious ideas. Not all scientologists share the view that Scn is a religion but consider it
    an applied philosophy.

    Wikipedia seems to consider it a religion.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion


    However Scn has some complications to it.

    It primarily operates as a business and as a business has sued others who practice that
    same religion. This would be really the activity of CO$ who do many things that are way
    different to core religious beliefs.

    Then there are human rights violations which don't belong in a religious framework....
     
  14. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    ...While organized scientology today parades out various scholars that say they are “religious”, I can tell you that this scholar program was started in the Guardian’s Office and I worked on it as early as 1974. I worked on the obtainment of such scholars opinions personally and by supervising others to do same and I used such scholars opinions to obtain recognitions that organized scientology would not otherwise have obtained.

    At no point where any scholars briefed on either the real controls of organized scientology or the reasons why religious cloaking was developed. Instead they tended to be briefed using the religious cloaking materials developed and/or by speaking with pre qualified, briefed scientologists who were told what to tell the scholars. If scholars wrote less than glowing reports of scientology being religious in nature, their opinions were discarded. For those who would write glowing reports supporting scientology’s “religious nature”, those reports were kept for further use in legal and/or PR matters....

    In summation, religious cloaking was constantly pushed within organized scientology by Hubbard by its legal and PR departments and later by Miscavige to gain undeserved legal and PR advantages, to make more money, to use as a cover when abusing staff, public and even non scientologists, to hide behind when attacked by others and to use to discredit and attack others...



    ___________​


    That's because they, not uncommonly, have been influenced by the manipulative efforts of Scientology Inc., and by other Destructive Cults.

    See above statements by Denise Brennan.

    And it's also because some of them have a long history of being paid shills for Destructive Cults.
     
  15. kate8024

    kate8024 -deleted-

    Well I'm quite certain that my professor does not fall into this category as he has not mentioned Scientology in class and I don't think its ever mentioned in the curriculum of any of his other classes either.
     
  16. SpecialFrog

    SpecialFrog Silver Meritorious Patron

    The comparative religion definition is very broad. Deliberately so, as it is very difficult to define a religion in such a way that excludes all things generally considered religions without being broad. This definition effectively includes things like Marxism and Objectivism. Additionally, I have seen intro comparative religion courses have students examine frosh / freshers week as a religious ritual.

    For a religious scholar, the label essentially divides the world into "subjects on which I can get published" and "subjects on which I cannot get published."

    Academics might try and define others out of their territory but they aren't going to define themselves out of any territory.

    Saying it is a "legitimate" religion is absurd. Urban's description of it as a simulacrum of a religion is fairly apt given that it has deliberately tried to make itself look like a religion.

    But it is reasonable for academics of religion to conclude that it is something in their domain.

    And Terril, human rights violations and religion are old friends so that's hardly something to disqualify it.
     
  17. ClearedSP

    ClearedSP Patron with Honors

    So if you lost an earring while gardening, is your yard a diamond mine?
     
  18. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    well Kate,

    if scientology is based on dianetics which is based on "engrams",

    have you personally gone in session, in an auditing session, and experience some "engram" you received, and gone thru that incident?
     
  19. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    From what I can tell your professor just wants to get by, do his job, not rock the boat, go with the flow and, eventuality, collect his pension.

    If he ever decides to read "scholarly" opinions on Scientology, he will, however, encounter the writings of those who have been deceived and manipulated by Scientology, and even some who have been paid by Scientology.
     
  20. kate8024

    kate8024 -deleted-

    I do not agree with your assessment that everything hinges on engrams. I understand that for you the whole engram thing was a very important point, but it never has been for me. To me, Scientology is built on a whole giant mound of crap, not just one piece of crap. Take away one of the pieces of crap and you still have the giant mound.