Kate, may I ask which of the more general parts of Scientology align with your personal beliefs?
Absolutely! This is a fairly broad question but I'll try to answer it the best that I can.
My actual views on metaphysics go (IMHO) quite a bit beyond Scientology and I personally view time and all experiences as highly episodic and much of my philosophy regarding this has strong ties to Schema Theory with a good smattering of crazy hypothesis based on personal mystical experiences. Having said that, within this 'type' of what I call a 'scenario' there is an apparency of the following items based on mystical experiences and logical extrapolation from those experiences:
* In general, to me Scientology is a mystical religious framework. Dianetics, "clear", "ot", etc. are to me more or less meaningless or useless concepts.
* something resembling cartesian dualism, though I view it in a bit more of a Platonic light with multiple levels of existence once you get completely beyond the physical reality
* reincarnation
* existence as a true static, but with temporal emanations into this (and other) universe(s)
* completely bizarre other universes
* the general concept of the 'full track'
* creation by postulate
* pre-each-life postulates that guide certain aspects of that life (ie similar to between-lives implants though less sinister in tone)
* that its possible to remember things from other lives
* the overall ideas of the 8-dynamics, the ARC triangle, the overt-motivator sequence, start-change-stop, though I'm sure there are some minor differences in my views on these
* that _something_ genocide-like happened on the whole track which LRH interpreted as the Xenu myth but I don't believe his interpretation to be quite correct.
* I believe that doing the lists in Self Analysis can be immensely helpful even if just used to get better at this-life recall of events and nothing else
* I believe that doing the processes in COHB can be very useful
* I believe the clear cognition to be sort of like a Zen koan
I also maintain a purely psychological-physicalist perspective in which I view all of these thing to be functions of the subconscious and the imagination but either way of viewing it generally works well for me as I find the associated phenomena fascinating either way.
Hope that explains it a bit, if I didn't answer your question please let me know what I can clarify.