Slashdot Mirror
Book Review: Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood, and the Prison of Belief
benrothke writes "In its first week, Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood, and the Prison of Belief was #3 on the New York Times Best Sellers list and will likely be #1 soon. The fact that the book is in print is somewhat miraculous given the voracious appetite Scientology has for litigation. It is the first time that such an expose could have been written and found such wide-scale reading. An interesting analysis of this fact is found in Why the Media Is No Longer Afraid of Scientology by Kim Masters. But as mesmerizing an expose as the book is, I doubt that this will be more than a speed bump to Scientology's growth and fund raising." Keep reading to be clear about what Ben has to say.
Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood, and the Prison of Belief
author
Lawrence Wright
pages
448
publisher
Knopf
rating
10/10
reviewer
Ben Rothke
ISBN
978-0307700667
summary
Compelling and engrossing book, thoroughly researched and extensively fact checked
Scientology has long called anyone who has written against them as having a vendetta. It calls former adherents heretics with a vendetta. But after such hyperbole, it is illogical and questionable that Pulitzer Prize winning author Lawrence Wright would risk a distinguished career to write an expose simply based on those with a vendetta. But to cover all bases, including those of litigation, the books nearly 50 pages of notes puts Wright and his publisher in a strongly defensible position in case the church decided to litigate.
Wright is aware of the dangers of writing against the church, as he details the story of Paulette Cooper. Cooper, whose 1971 book The Scandal of Scientology, was sued nearly 20 times by the church and harassed for years due to its contents. The book details that an FBI raid a few years later found a Scientology file about Operation Freakout, which had the purpose of getting Cooper in a mental institution or jail.
The book places Church President David Miscavige is a negative light (over 20 people in the book accuse him of abuse, including being kicked, punched, slapped, choked and more). Karin Pouw, a Scientology spokeswoman states that details about Miscavige are false and defamatory.
The church created a web site for what it believes are errors in the book. While Wright is short on drama, the web site hyperbolically states that the book is "so ludicrous it belongs in a supermarket tabloid". The web site states that British publishers have chosen not to print it "which speaks volumes about their confidence in its factual accuracy". The truth is that British libel laws are so onerous and archaic, that publishers are reticent to publish such a work. While it might not be published in the UK, it is easily available via the Amazon UK web site.
In Going Clear, Wright has created a fair and balanced overview (if such a thing is actually possible) about Scientology. The book has interview material and facts from over 200 current and former members of the Church of Scientology, and takes a historical look of its history, and that of its founder L. Ron Hubbard and successor, current President David Miscavige.
In the introduction, Wright notes that he was drawn to write the book by the questions that many people have about Scientology; such as: what is it that make the religion so alluring? What do its adherents get out of it? Why do popular personalities associate themselves with a faith that is likely to create a kind of public relations martyrdom? He notes that these questions are not unique to Scientology, but that they certainly underscore its story.
As 372 pages covering 3 parts and 11 chapters, Wright is a mesmerizing author that creates a non-fiction spellbinding page-turner. The 4 main characters of the book are Hubbard, Miscavige and actors Tom Cruise and John Travolta.
In chapter 2, the book details the many discrepancies between the legend of L. Ron Hubbard and fact. While Scientologist's may think that Wright has a vengeance against the group, he writes that it is a fact that Hubbard was genuinely a fascinating man. He writes that Hubbard was an explorer, best-selling author and the founder of a worldwide religious movement. At the same time, Wright's research found that the truth is counter to some of the postulated facts about Hubbard's naval career, his miraculous recovery from wartime injuries and overall naval accomplishments.
As to the manipulation of facts, in the final pages of the book, Wrights notes some of Hubbard's medical records do not corroborate his version of the actual events. Some of the naval medals that Hubbard supposedly won were not created until after Hubbard left active service. The supposed Purple Heart medal for being wounded while serving on duty that Hubbard claimed to receive was also different from the Purple Heart medals given out at the time.
In Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, Hubbard specifically names psychotherapy as being dangerous and impractical. Hubbard felt that other methods of mental science are based on principles that are opposed to the principles of Scientology, and Hubbard had an anathema of psychiatry and psychology until his dying day.
Wright observes that Dianetics arrived at a moment when the aftershocks of World War 2 were still being felt. And that behind the exhilarations of victory, there was immense trauma for millions of Americans. With Dianetics, Hubbard offered a do-it-yourself manual to that claimed to demystify the secrets of the human mind and produce guaranteed results, for free, and that was bound to attract a large audience.
Wright notes that given Hubbard's biography, it would be easy to dismiss Hubbard as a fraud. But that would fail to explain his total absorption in his project. Hubbard would spend the rest of his life elaborating his theory and obsessively construct the intricate bureaucracy design to spread and enshrine his understanding of human behavior.
Wright notes that for all of Hubbard's enormous wealth, he spent much of his time in his ship cabin alone, auditing himself with an E-Meter (the electronic device used Scientology auditing sessions) and developing his spiritual technology. Wright rhetorically notes that while Hubbard may have been grandiose and delusional, if Hubbard was a fraud and a con, why would he bother creating such a system?
As objective as Wright is, he takes no quarter when he details Scientology's approach to children. Hubbard viewed children as adults in small bodies. While they were physically small, Hubbard felt that they were responsible for their own behavior. Young children would be sentenced to virtual prisons for weeks, for minor infractions such as messing up an incoming telex.
In Scientology parlance, such an individual was a suppressive person. One young girl, who was deaf and mute was placed in a locker for a week because Hubbard thought it might cure her deafness.
A large part of the book deals with celebrities and how Scientology sees celebrities as a boon to the church. Wrights notes that Scientology orients itself toward celebrities and by doing so, the church awards famousness a spiritual value. People who seek fame in the entertainment industry will gravitate to Hollywood, where the Scientology Celebrity Center is waiting for them, validating their ambitions and promising a recruits a way in. The church has long pursued a marketing strategy that relies on celebrity endorsements to promote the religion.
Some celebrities prominent in the book are Paul Haggis, Travolta, Nancy Cartwright (famous for being the voice of Bart Simpson) and Tom Cruise. Haggis is an ex-Scientologist, recently leaving the church after nearly 40 years, who is interviewed in the book.
Wright is highly critical of Cruise, who he notes that probably no member of the church derives as much material benefit as Cruise does. Cruise then consequently bears a moral responsibility for the myriad indignities (which the book points out in great detail) inflicted on members of the Sea Organization (a unit of the Church, encompassing its most dedicated members), sometimes directly because of his membership.
Wright concludes with the notion that Scientology wants to be understood as a scientific approach to spiritual enlightenment, but has no grounding in science at all. Serious academic study of the church has to date been constrained by the church's vindictive and litigious reputation. Researchers and academics are terrified by Scientology and reluctant to direct their research into the church. The book observes that compared with other religions, the published literature on Scientology is improvised and clouded by bogus assertions.
In Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood, and the Prison of Belief, Wright has composed a bombshell of an expose. This is a compelling and engrossing book, thoroughly researched and extensively fact checked. The book is a perfect read for a long flight as it is riveting and fascinating. Wright has a unique ability to keep the narrative flowing and interesting.
But with all that, it is not a Silent Spring, which 50 years ago helped launch the environmental movement. Had the book come out 20 years ago, it is likely that lawsuits from the church would have prevented its release until today. Yet the passive public has a short memory and Scientology has believers that sign billion year contracts with the church. As salacious as every page of this book is, one is hard-pressed to envision the church of Scientology contracting or being hurt in any way by this book.
Ben Rothke is the author of Computer Security: 20 Things Every Employee Should Know.
You can purchase Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood, and the Prison of Belief from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
Wright is aware of the dangers of writing against the church, as he details the story of Paulette Cooper. Cooper, whose 1971 book The Scandal of Scientology, was sued nearly 20 times by the church and harassed for years due to its contents. The book details that an FBI raid a few years later found a Scientology file about Operation Freakout, which had the purpose of getting Cooper in a mental institution or jail.
The book places Church President David Miscavige is a negative light (over 20 people in the book accuse him of abuse, including being kicked, punched, slapped, choked and more). Karin Pouw, a Scientology spokeswoman states that details about Miscavige are false and defamatory.
The church created a web site for what it believes are errors in the book. While Wright is short on drama, the web site hyperbolically states that the book is "so ludicrous it belongs in a supermarket tabloid". The web site states that British publishers have chosen not to print it "which speaks volumes about their confidence in its factual accuracy". The truth is that British libel laws are so onerous and archaic, that publishers are reticent to publish such a work. While it might not be published in the UK, it is easily available via the Amazon UK web site.
In Going Clear, Wright has created a fair and balanced overview (if such a thing is actually possible) about Scientology. The book has interview material and facts from over 200 current and former members of the Church of Scientology, and takes a historical look of its history, and that of its founder L. Ron Hubbard and successor, current President David Miscavige.
In the introduction, Wright notes that he was drawn to write the book by the questions that many people have about Scientology; such as: what is it that make the religion so alluring? What do its adherents get out of it? Why do popular personalities associate themselves with a faith that is likely to create a kind of public relations martyrdom? He notes that these questions are not unique to Scientology, but that they certainly underscore its story.
As 372 pages covering 3 parts and 11 chapters, Wright is a mesmerizing author that creates a non-fiction spellbinding page-turner. The 4 main characters of the book are Hubbard, Miscavige and actors Tom Cruise and John Travolta.
In chapter 2, the book details the many discrepancies between the legend of L. Ron Hubbard and fact. While Scientologist's may think that Wright has a vengeance against the group, he writes that it is a fact that Hubbard was genuinely a fascinating man. He writes that Hubbard was an explorer, best-selling author and the founder of a worldwide religious movement. At the same time, Wright's research found that the truth is counter to some of the postulated facts about Hubbard's naval career, his miraculous recovery from wartime injuries and overall naval accomplishments.
As to the manipulation of facts, in the final pages of the book, Wrights notes some of Hubbard's medical records do not corroborate his version of the actual events. Some of the naval medals that Hubbard supposedly won were not created until after Hubbard left active service. The supposed Purple Heart medal for being wounded while serving on duty that Hubbard claimed to receive was also different from the Purple Heart medals given out at the time.
In Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, Hubbard specifically names psychotherapy as being dangerous and impractical. Hubbard felt that other methods of mental science are based on principles that are opposed to the principles of Scientology, and Hubbard had an anathema of psychiatry and psychology until his dying day.
Wright observes that Dianetics arrived at a moment when the aftershocks of World War 2 were still being felt. And that behind the exhilarations of victory, there was immense trauma for millions of Americans. With Dianetics, Hubbard offered a do-it-yourself manual to that claimed to demystify the secrets of the human mind and produce guaranteed results, for free, and that was bound to attract a large audience.
Wright notes that given Hubbard's biography, it would be easy to dismiss Hubbard as a fraud. But that would fail to explain his total absorption in his project. Hubbard would spend the rest of his life elaborating his theory and obsessively construct the intricate bureaucracy design to spread and enshrine his understanding of human behavior.
Wright notes that for all of Hubbard's enormous wealth, he spent much of his time in his ship cabin alone, auditing himself with an E-Meter (the electronic device used Scientology auditing sessions) and developing his spiritual technology. Wright rhetorically notes that while Hubbard may have been grandiose and delusional, if Hubbard was a fraud and a con, why would he bother creating such a system?
As objective as Wright is, he takes no quarter when he details Scientology's approach to children. Hubbard viewed children as adults in small bodies. While they were physically small, Hubbard felt that they were responsible for their own behavior. Young children would be sentenced to virtual prisons for weeks, for minor infractions such as messing up an incoming telex.
In Scientology parlance, such an individual was a suppressive person. One young girl, who was deaf and mute was placed in a locker for a week because Hubbard thought it might cure her deafness.
A large part of the book deals with celebrities and how Scientology sees celebrities as a boon to the church. Wrights notes that Scientology orients itself toward celebrities and by doing so, the church awards famousness a spiritual value. People who seek fame in the entertainment industry will gravitate to Hollywood, where the Scientology Celebrity Center is waiting for them, validating their ambitions and promising a recruits a way in. The church has long pursued a marketing strategy that relies on celebrity endorsements to promote the religion.
Some celebrities prominent in the book are Paul Haggis, Travolta, Nancy Cartwright (famous for being the voice of Bart Simpson) and Tom Cruise. Haggis is an ex-Scientologist, recently leaving the church after nearly 40 years, who is interviewed in the book.
Wright is highly critical of Cruise, who he notes that probably no member of the church derives as much material benefit as Cruise does. Cruise then consequently bears a moral responsibility for the myriad indignities (which the book points out in great detail) inflicted on members of the Sea Organization (a unit of the Church, encompassing its most dedicated members), sometimes directly because of his membership.
Wright concludes with the notion that Scientology wants to be understood as a scientific approach to spiritual enlightenment, but has no grounding in science at all. Serious academic study of the church has to date been constrained by the church's vindictive and litigious reputation. Researchers and academics are terrified by Scientology and reluctant to direct their research into the church. The book observes that compared with other religions, the published literature on Scientology is improvised and clouded by bogus assertions.
In Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood, and the Prison of Belief, Wright has composed a bombshell of an expose. This is a compelling and engrossing book, thoroughly researched and extensively fact checked. The book is a perfect read for a long flight as it is riveting and fascinating. Wright has a unique ability to keep the narrative flowing and interesting.
But with all that, it is not a Silent Spring, which 50 years ago helped launch the environmental movement. Had the book come out 20 years ago, it is likely that lawsuits from the church would have prevented its release until today. Yet the passive public has a short memory and Scientology has believers that sign billion year contracts with the church. As salacious as every page of this book is, one is hard-pressed to envision the church of Scientology contracting or being hurt in any way by this book.
Ben Rothke is the author of Computer Security: 20 Things Every Employee Should Know.
You can purchase Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood, and the Prison of Belief from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
Litigation is actually one of the lesser threats that a Scientology critic has to face. In the past, open character assassination, attempts to jail critics (sometimes successfully), attempts to get critics audited by the IRS, attempts to get them fired from their jobs, sending private detectives to comb through their trash and harass them--these are all typical tools in the CoS toolbox. When Germany labelled them a cult, they even sent Tom Cruise to meet with Richard Armitage and Dick Cheney in 2003 in an attempt to get the U.S. government to try to strong-arm Germany (a fact that only came out by accident during the Scooter Libby/Vallorie Plame scandal, with details of those meetings still remaining largely classified).
They've taken on entire *countries*. Hell, they even made Slashdot their bitch once.
So litigation is the least of your worries when you mess with those guys. Kudos to Lawrence Wright for his set of brass balls.
While Scientologists range from slightly crazy to dangerously crazy and are obviously biased against the book, this "review" is just as bad in the opposite direction and not particularly coherent either. Don't try to combat garbage with more garbage.
I'm an atheist without any love for Scientology. I don't see Scientology as any different from the "legitimate religions" that people have grown up in.
- all have done unethical acts ( read your history )
- all have beliefs people not brought in the religion would call
superstition ( and less respectful terms )
- all what people not brought in the religion would call myths.
- all, from my viewpoint, are man-made (apologies to the women in the audience for the term )
The only thing I can think of that separates Scientology from any of the "legitimate religions" is that Scientology is so new that there are people outside of the religion old enough to remember seeing it be created by a person.
My guess is that "being created in murky distance" past as well as being brought up in a certain way gives other religions an aura of credibility that Scientology lacks.
However, when you look at they claim, how they act and what they do, it all seems the same, from an atheists point of view.
No disrespect meant to anyone.
The real problem isn't people who believe in invisible martians (for fun and profit), it's the legal system that lets them torment other people with flagrant abandon.
If you have enough money and a good team of lawyers you can effectively destroy someone else's life.
We live in a nightmare world.
The only thing I can think of that separates Scientology from any of the "legitimate religions" is that Scientology is so new that there are people outside of the religion old enough to remember seeing it be created by a person.
Well, as a fellow atheist to another atheist, I recommend you add a few evaluation factors when comparing religions and faiths: power structure, transparency, material cost, financial cost, temporal cost, preservation of individual sovereignty including right to leave and preservation of inalienable rights ... to name just a few.
all have done unethical acts ( read your history )
At least some allow us to document said unethical acts ... hell, the Church's response to child molestation charges against priests was a primary motivator to me leaving organized religion permanently. And, you know, it was super easy to get out of Catholicism ... you should talk to the lucky few who escape Scientology.
My work here is dung.
While I appreciate the writeup and found it interesting, perhaps you should have someone proofread your writings before publishing them. There are far too many errors in this thing.
That said, Scientologists are batshit insane and information is their enemy. It's great to see a book like this published and receiving so much attention.
"From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
But as mesmerizing an expose as the book is, I doubt that this will be more than a speed bump to Scientology's growth and fund raising
From reports I've seen Scientology continues to grow in the sense of buying up property and growing its bank acount, but is not growing and even losing members. Lets not give this science fiction religion credit for anything it really isn't doing.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
There was a local sci "compound" in the neighborhood. Every time you drive by, the radio reception gets all screwed up.
It seems to have been sold recently. The signs are down, the buildings are being totally gutted, pulling out dry walls, insulation, and everything.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
I'm not a Scientologist. I've encountered a few (to the best of my knowledge, fairly low ranking), and they on average seemed no better or worse than most anyone else. And as far as their belief system goes, I'm not sure it's any crazier than any other religious belief system.
A friend of a friend, though, came up with an excellent evaluation rubric to determine how dangerous it was to belong to any organization, regardless of their beliefs. This has been used by law enforcement as well as cult survivor organizations. The tool is the ABCDEF, short for Advanced Bonewits (the inventor's name) Cult Danger Evaluation Framework.
The idea here is that you don't rate the groups beliefs at all. Instead, you rate their behavior. Groups that score low on the ABCDEF are those that are open about what they believe and stand for, have rights and reasonable expectations of members, and make it easy to leave. Which means that if they or their leadership start getting really crazy, normal people can see that and leave.
So a reasonable position might be that Scientology is a belief system like any other, but the Church of Scientology is dangerous.
I am officially gone from
Puh-leez. Scientology has been consistently losing members and shrinking in size and power for at least 15 years, if not longer. Check out www.xenu.net and www.factnet.org for more details.
David Miscavige's successful takeover of the cult has been a disaster for them, and the Internet has been a much worse one because the cult's secrets are now so readily available.
"But as mesmerizing an expose as the book is, I doubt that this will be more than a speed bump to Scientology's growth and fund raising."
Scientology stopped growing a long time ago. All of their claims about them being "fastest growing religion" are lies, pure and simple.
They reached their peak in the 70's and early 80's. After Hubbard died and Miscavige took over, their membership's been declining steadly ever since. Ask anyone who's been around the orgs in the 70's and 80's. Look up the service completion stats in the Auditor magazine from that time period and compare to recent numbers.
Miscavige is no Hubbard, he doesn't have a cult leader's charisma or reality distortion field. However, he turned out to be very talented as a brutal dictator and a bully. He can put used car salesmen to shame when it comes to high-pressure sales tactics.
So while Miscavige has been unable to inspire people or attract new followers, he has used his talents to beat the staff into submission and extract/extort more and more money from the existing public. But lately with the Super Power scam he's taken it to a new level, and things are so bad that even diehard loyalists are speaking out.
Debbie Cook (longtime Captain of Flag) complains about the relentless money-grubbing and tells the Scientology public to disobey Miscavige's non-Hubbard-policies.
Jan. 2013 - High level public members Luis and Rocio Garcia sue Scientology for fraud
Am I the only one bothered by the hideous abuse of grammar and incredibly juvenile writing of this review? I literally could not get through the second paragraph, it was so distracting and off-putting. Tenses are constantly switching, sentences are stilted and disconnected, even basic grammatical constructs are misused. It's not like you have to wait -- the very first sentence ("Scientology has long called anyone who has written against them as having a vendetta") is a complete abomination.
Does anybody still care about Scientology? They've been shrinking since Hubbard died. They've sort of centralized at Clearwater, FL, but other than that, not much seems to be going on.
The amusing thing about Scientology is that it doesn't use science. It's locked into Hubbard's writings and 1930s technology. The "E-meter" is a skin resistance measuring device, the least useful of the three classical polygraph channels. By now, Scientology should have had online and mobile systems as part of their "auditing" process. A modern "E-meter" should have heart rate, respiration, and face gesture recognition sensors, with functional MRI in R&D. But no, they're still using skin resistance.
This may be just as well. With modern sensors, and detailed historical data for each member, much more monitoring and control over the emotional states of members would be possible. Fortunately, Scientology is too inept to bring that off.
until I ran out of money.
Cryonics - Keep cool and carry on.
Very good distinction in my opinion. Kudos. ;)
I'm not sure it's any crazier than any other religious belief system.
It is. Whackier than any other I think. Funny is, the people who were friends with L. Ron Hubbard when he, drinking profusely, created Scientology at a bar in Manhattan Beach, CA, still remember the "event" pretty well.
Just from reading this review. My god, this review was written by an alleged author? If I were to print it and mark up the grammar errors, the page would be covered in red ink...
...with their "Free Stress Test" (using their glorified ohmmeter) and books and DVDs. It pains me to see gullible people conned into this money-sucking gambit.
Any ideas what I could do to mess with them? On one occasion I printed out the fun and informative Xenu pamphlet and gave it to victims around the mall, but that's boring. Currently I'm considering wiring up my arms with about 30V and volunteering for a test, after first warning the "auditor" that I'm actually an OT8 clear and have been known to confuse E-meters with my powers to control body thetans...
Posting as AC because of the Scientologists well known violent ways of dealing with dissenters...
Scientology is utter nonsense. Using an e-meter to come up with bogus stories about past lives billions or trillions of years ago on your own is in no way more valid than doing so under the "guidance" of that "church." Nor do I think my soul, err, thetan has ever been grilled on an electric net.
Rock Center is an NBC television news magazine run by Brian Williams, the main evening anchor. Recently they did a story on this book. I thought the attempt was bold, considering the blowback they'll get from the church. NBC did not spend much time talking about the beliefs, which can get wild at times. But they talked about how the church manipulates some of its members lives. There was a couple who had been clergy level for 30 years before they left. The couple and church fought over whether they could first, have a child, and second whether the child could live with them. When the couple decided to leave, they put them in confinement for some period to reconsider their decision to leave. Then they billed the couple over $100K for room & board and education while in the church. The couple actually paid good chunk of that to get the church off their back. The church gave written answers to NBC's questions, but declined an in-person interview. I thought NBC practically bent over backwards to try to be fair.
I was attended the Denver county Fair last summer. The church had a large booth with a half dozen counselors showing how their e-meter sessions worked. I was surprised to see the sessions fully occupied most of the time and not much snickering among the bystanders. The church openly used their name which was not always the case in the past. I presume they discuss some simple childhood memory, like losing a favorite toy. Then explore the emotions tied with this memory. Then you can sign up and pay thousands for more comprehensive sessions if you like it.
They opened a large new HQ building downtown lat year. So I presume they have a fair following here. But I've never met anyone who has claimed to be a scientologist nor really want to.
Really? Let me present some popular religious beliefs, you tell me which is most rational:
1. an alien overlord abused a bunch of other aliens, and the victim's souls affect us today
2. an omnipotent omniscient benevolent invisible man
3. reincarnation of all people's souls, forever
4. reincarnation of all people's souls, unless they do some sort of meditation thing that allows them to escape the cycle into a state of pure bliss
5. sacrificing a chicken will make your sister's baby healthier
6. a bunch of immortal beings who aren't omnipotent but like to control things with a few well-placed thunderbolts or monsters or bits of advice
Answer? None of the above!
I am officially gone from
When you start is more about clearing your mind and how to live rather than some supernatural scaffolding like many religions. That would make it more like contemplative Buddhism or Epicurism. But if you go deep enough into the church there is some way out supernatural aspect in later courses.
The "religious" aspect seemed to be more of a ruse to avoid taxes and government interference. But other churches sometimes abuse this too.
How unscientific!
Captcha: perfects
2. an omnipotent omniscient benevolent invisible man
I find it kind of interesting that everybody likes to bring up the invisible bit. You wouldn't be very omnipotent if the puny humans could walk in on you by accident...
6. a bunch of immortal beings who aren't omnipotent but like to control things with a few well-placed thunderbolts or monsters or bits of advice
If you were immortal, wouldn't *you* eventually start fucking around with people? Forever is a long time.
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
You probably intended 4 to be Buddhism, but you got it wrong. Unless it wasn't supposed to be Buddhism, in which case I read it wrong.
Buddhism doesn't believe there is a soul. The teaching of "no-soul" is the fundamental separation between Buddhism and Hinduism (well, that and the no-gods-either bit, though people get confused about what Bodhisattva's are supposed to be, or if they are even supposed to be real, so I can sympathize on that point).
So how do you combine reincarnation with the non-existence of a soul? It varies by sect. The Soto monks I spoke to said that the concept is a lot more abstract than the terms in which most people think, so the common belief that "you reincarnate" is popular as an intentional oversimplification. Reincarnation is really a metaphor for the observed fact that the actions we take during our lives have consequences which impact the future, and roll forward from person to person like a never-ending wave. Inasmuch as "you" are really nothing more than the actions you take, "you" roll forward in this way.
So, a better one-line summary of Buddhism might be something like:
You are just your actions and their consequences, which carry forward forever.
or maybe
All separations (including you vs everything else) are just illusions, the universe is one enormous cloud of dust.
or, my personal favorite:
Don't take your self too seriously.
I think an odd thing about Scientology is its current Chairman of the Board - David Miscavige. Where is he?
He is never in public. How the the COB of a Church go underground? He refuses to be interviewed by any non-church paper or TV station.
The book says that Miscavige's wife did something without his permission, and she has been in a Scientology jail for 3+ years.
Miscavige should be investigated.
well, ok, a funny image macro on tumblr said:
In a CULT there's one guy at the top who knows it's a scam.
In a RELIGION that guy is dead.
Ergo, Scientology is indeed a religion.
Sure! I'm still mortal and I already find that fun!
Well, the belief system where someone believes something that was concocted by a bad sci-fi writer while drunk at a bar in Manhattan Beach, CA, with a number of witnesses still alive today, is the least rational. The others have the advantage of either being too low on specifics to handle scientifically (they are not even wrong) or too old for any witnesses to the actual events leading up to the religions creation to still be alive.
Oh, and as someone else said, you got Buddhism wrong. Buddhism is 100% rational.
Steven Hassan on the lack of any mention about undue influence in Scientology
As for this:
It's quite evident that Larry didn't actually read all the literature.
Print these out as big as you like and stand behind the Scientologist staff pointing to their script as you follow along with what they say:
Front side
Back side
Thanks for the correction. I also spent some time chatting with some Buddhist monks in my younger years, and I definitely appreciate that viewpoint, but somehow missed the no-soul thing. My point was simply that all religious systems have their irrational aspects of them, and that's why you have to judge religious groups more by what they do than what they say they believe in.
I am officially gone from
Take a peek at the Amazon.com page for this book, as of the morning of 29 JAN 13, there are 53 customer reviews, categorised as: 5 star - 42 4 star - 5 3 star - 1 2 star - 1 1 star – 4 In the ‘old days’, Scientology would have had all their people write 1-star reviews of this book. I think this does show that the power of Scientology, the same organization that brought the IRS to its knees, is waning. Maybe there are not that many blokes left there.
so others cannot read it. that will cause a best-seller blip
they we accused of buying and reselling Ron's books on a massive scale to get on the best-seller lists
Did anyone else see the Philip Seymour Hoffman movie "The Master" and
think scientology? It's a great movie, and seems to parallel the post WWII
development of scientology. Fascinating stuff.
Interesting tool. I am planning to write a script for an online version. Do you know if anyone already did that?
> whether or not a deity exists (anymore than Santa Claus or unicorns)
That's the wrong question. Once the wrong question is asked then the answer is irrelevant.
'Unicorns' were, or are, most likely rhinos. They did and do exist, but were misdescribed and then became fantasy.
'Santa Claus' was Saint Nicholas of Myra. The dutch called him Sinterklaas and he was mythologised in more recent times. For example the reindeer were added in the 1820s.
Deities and semi-deities also, most likely, follow that pattern. The 'gods' of ancient Greece, Babylon, and most others were most likely real people whose exploits were exagerated and mythologised. Jehovah was similarly a real person, a tribal chief, or a warlord, or perhaps a dynasty of them (granted everything before Exodus was stories, myths and legends). The same process can be seen with Mao, Ras Tafari, and the North Korean dynasty of Kims.
'Exists' is the wrong question, they did exist.
While I appreciate this summary/review, WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED TO BASIC GRAMMAR, SPELLING, AND PUNCTUATION??? I feel like the author was just on lots of crack while writing. Again, good content *thumbs sideways*
I choose facts over grammar any day.
A fact:
Applied section 6(1) the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 and States of Territories law activity may both applying the federal listening devices. The recorded general may not the rule been that is call the very circumstance. Limited warrant applies exceptionally and.
Same fact with gramar:
The federal Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 and State and Territory listening devices laws may both apply to this activity. The general rule is that the call may not be recorded. There are exceptions to these rules in very limited circumstances including where a warrant applies.
This is an excellent review, here is another one...
Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood & the Prison of Belief by Lawrence Wright – review
From reincarnation to revenge to extraterrestrial time travel, a straight-faced and scrupulous exploration of Scientology's dark and outlandish belief system
by David Thomson of The Guardian, Wednesday 30 January 2013
www.guardian.co.uk/books/2013/jan/30/going-clear-lawrence-wright-review
Here is another great article:
Tom Cruise’s Scientology Marriages: The Secret Wife-Auditioning Process Before Katie Holmes, Revealed
www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2012/09/tom-cruise-scientology-marriage-katie-holmes
Now that this book is out...there are starting to be tons of anti-Chuch of Scientology articles.
They won't have enough lawyers to litigate :)
Scientology and the cloak of religion
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2013/01/29/f-rfa-macdonald-scientology.html?cmp=rss&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
If you were in fact omnipotent, you would always arrange things so that no one ever walked in on you by accident.
Do 6 and 3 both correspond to Hinduism?
Well, 3 was really intended as the Hindu belief system (although Plato also speculated about that idea), and 6 as the various mythologies of pre-Christian Europe, but you're right that Hinduism also includes many gods who like to mess with people.
I am officially gone from
That's exactly what I was saying.
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
Here and here
and here and here
and here and here.