This (to my way of thinking) renders down to the "what is Scientology" question. Is it a science?
It is most certainly not. Science is a process whereby errors in a system are filtered in a systematic way. You never say in science "I accept this to that to be 100% true." You create suppositions and find ways to test them, the testing must allow one to verify or falsify the supposition. If this is not done for each possible question in a subject than you are simply not doing science.
For example, Hubbard makes many assertions which he calls axioms and according to Scientology cannon. "Axioms are truths which are proven by all of life and which represent the most succinct distillation of wisdom regarding the nature of the human spirit."
None of these "axioms" however are even slightly scientific. They are a mass of opinion presented as fact. i.e. "AXIOM 48. LIFE IS A GAME WHEREN THETA AS THE STATIC SOLVES THE PROBLEMS OF THETA AS MEST." This may be all well and good but it's meaningless as testable hypothesis.
Scientology is simply a world-view as directed by Hubbard. Science does not exist in Scientology because verification is whatever said it is and falsification is not allowed. This does not mean that everything in Scientology is false (science does not work in absolutes.) Simply that as a set of suppositions about how the mind works, Scientology has never been tested in a systematic way and unless and until it is, it's not a paradigm or a science, or much of anything.
There is NO new paradigm.
It ain't gonna happen.
I won't let one gonna happen!
Let me become a thought-stopper here.
Noone can make anyone see what they want to see.
Scientology has exceeded what it wanted to have. It will never recover.
There seems to be some confusion about what I have posted is not a science, referring to the amount of research and experimentation that science undergoes. The postings I have made and the scientific research is based on over a hundred years of research by many scientists including Einstein. Some of the quotes I have pasted were written by current scientists and have based their writings on their own research plus that of the older scientists no longer with us. I am not a scientist but I study science. I was in Scientology for 22 years and worked with LRH on the ship.
None of what I have written is based on Scientology - it is based on pure science.
It's an EX Scientologists Message Board, for gawds sakes!
If you want to go into another one, here is the good one (to start with):
http://www.acnlp.no/textsider/The Game of games.pdf
From some of the posts I have read here it is evident that many on this website know nothing about Scientology, maybe did a com course or read a book or did nothing at all but are on the band wagon with real ex scientologists.
The real message of Scientology was about spirituality but there is a lot of missing data. My posts amplify the message of spirituality.
Catch a wake up!!!!
This is not about Scientology none whatsoever. This is about the latest scientific discoveries.
It makes Scientology obsolete.
There may be a battle between the materialist scientist and the Idealist scientist. The materialist would probably like to maintain their current status but the old always gives way to the new.
Here's to the "New World View" and a better one than what we have had. It is also an evolving one.
Moreover, there appear to be many who are against spirituality. They push the song of bodies ~ Be like me..asleep in a coma living the lie.
How far down the tone scale was "needing bodies" ?
I haven't been able to find any research where the tone scale, other than it's parallels with the stages of grief, has been looked into at all, nevermind such supposed "tones" as "needing bodies".