Why believe Scientology?
In the current edition of The New Yorker Lawrence Wright reports on the Church of Scientology. Tuesday, Terry Gross interviewed Wright on Fresh Air. Wright described the thorough fact checking the magazine did which leaves little doubt that Dianetics is based on a lie.
What difference does this make to believers?
"It's hard to measure, because we're dealing with a religion," he says, "and people are drawn to it because of faith. And if it were simply a matter of reason, then one could put this [document about Hubbard's service] down in front of you and say, 'Here is conclusive proof that the founder of Scientology lied about his military record and lied about his injuries and lied about the fundamental principles out of which he created the Church of Scientology. But that may not matter to people who are involved in it, who may feel they are gaining something from their experience — either because they feel like the truths of Scientology enhance their lives or because the community of Scientologists that they live among is something like their family. So they intentionally shield themselves from knowing these types of things."Here's a link to the Fresh Air Is Wright saying something universal about religious belief?
fn. Writing in an Esquire blog, Mark Warren asks, "Wouldn't the resources and time of journalists be better directed at the finances, earthly corruption, and raw power of the Catholic Church, an institution that wields influence incalculably greater than L. Ron Hubbard's itty-bitty religion?
Read more: http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/scientology-vs-catholicism-5204435#ixzz1DVQCgVWj"
[document about Hubbard's service] down in front of you and say, 'Here is conclusive proof that the founder of Scientology lied about his military record and lied about his injuries and lied about the fundamental principles out of which he created the Church of Scientology.
Certainly, RC apologists like to list Henry VIII's failings (I'm probably not the only one here to counter w/ any number of Popes' sins!).
I suppose Scientologists are able to and/or enable the separation of the revealer of the Truth, w/ the Truth itself.
Christianity at root, has no such separation (Christ IS the Truth). To empiricists who only know the failings that EVERY human being has, it's an exceptionally difficult faith-claim, to say "Well, 2000 years ago, there WAS one who was sinless." [Questioning the epistemology of their empiricism is where I (would) like to next take the conversation.]
JC Fisher
Posted by tgflux![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/nav-commenters.gif)
|
February 10, 2011 2:19 PM
One thing that makes Scientology so easy to get caught in and so difficult to escape is the combination of monetary and psychological cost.
Very quickly, you can sink four or five or six figures into the process. And the more you've paid, the more difficult it is to say to yourself, "I was duped out of $35,000 by a dead, third-rate, writer of science fiction--emphasis on the fiction--and his minions."
(Anyone who has ever said to themselves, "I've sunk $3000 into this car over the last year, maybe this $1500 repair will..." has a bare inkling.)
Meanwhile, your Scientology friends and superiors are saying, 'Spend the money. Do the next course and you'll understand...'
And then you find yourself thinking, 'If I leave, I have to face my family and friends who warned me not to get involved with Scientology in the first place.'
And then you begin to think about the possible 'retribution' Scientologists have no problem imposing on 'traitors' because Scientology is all about Us vs Them.
All in all, you've got to admit that Hubbard was a (diabolical) genius when he
organized Scientology. Everything works together to keep people from 'seeing the man behind the curtain' and then acting on that knowledge.
Posted by Craig Bustrin![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/nav-commenters.gif)
|
February 10, 2011 6:50 PM