It is interesting to me that some people who recognize the evil of the Church of Scientology, still believe that Scientology, itself, is good.
I see some folks talking about “rehabilitating Scientology’s and L. Ron Hubbard’s image”. I see some wannabe Hubbards going on about which parts “Hubbard got right” and how they have “fixed” the mistakes made by Hubbard.
As if Scientology worked. As if the promises made by Hubbard were real. As if Scientology wasn’t just a long, long history of failed promises and successful fraud.
But in all this effort to “rehabilitate Scientology’s image” and “make Scientology work”, no one has given the slightest glance at the most important aspects of Scientology.
I am speaking of the foundations of Dianetics and Scientology. The absolute basic and extremely key assumptions that all the Dianetic and Scientology “tech” is built on.
Let’s take “engrams”, for example. Sure everyone has had “traumatic experiences” in their lives, that’s a given. But do those events match the very specific and detailed criteria for “engrams” as defined by Hubbard? That is, does the “mind” make a full and accurate recording of everything that happens during unconsciousness? People running Dianetics believe they have “recalled” the content of such incidents, but has it ever been verified against the actual event?
The only time it was tested, it was a complete failure. In 1958, a very scientific attempt was made to validate Hubbard’s assertion that “engrams” did exist and did contain a complete record of everything that went on. A volunteer was rendered unconscious, pain was applied and text was read. Then Dianeticists tried for months to recover the text — and failed completely and utterly. They were unable to recover even one tiny part of the text that was read to the unconscious person. According to that test, “engrams” do not exist.
Validating Hubbard’s basic assertions is absolutely the most important thing any Scientologist could do to “rehabilitate Scientology’s image” or to “improve Scientology’s tech.” This is the foundation of all of Scientology.
Without “engrams”, there is no “Reactive Mind”. Without the “Reactive Mind” there is no “Clear” and much of the rest of Scientology “technology” falls apart as well.
The concept of “erasing engrams” permeates all of Scientology from the very lowest processes to the most “advanced” levels. And engrams do not exist according to the only actual, scientific testing ever done.
It is astounding that no True Believer is working to revisit this information. Despite the obvious importance, no True Believer is even considering testing and validating any of Hubbard’s foundational assertions. There is nothing more important if one believes in Scientology.
Some believers might ask, “If people are being helped, what difference does it make?”
All the difference in the world. If someone is only imagining they are being helped, that isn’t much actual help, is it? Also, if you don’t know how Dianetics and Scientology actually help (when it does), you won’t know why it doesn’t work, you won’t know how to make it more effective and you won’t have a clue where to go next.
What is the goal of Scientology processing when there is no “Reactive Mind” and there is no “State of Clear”? What is the need for “engram processing” when there are no engrams? What value is there in Scientology when its very foundations have been disproven?
For Scientologists, Dianetics and Scientology “tech” is just a black box, you crank the handle, you repeat the rote words and sometimes, something happens and, once in a while, that “something” is good.
Without “engrams” it is likely Dianetics and Scientology work like Visualization Therapy, self-hypnosis or Guided Imagery, people imagine they are “erasing” a bad incident and obtain some relief. But no one knows what is going on with Scientology processing because no one looks at Hubbard’s unproven assertions about the basics of Scientology.
This is exactly why it is so accurate to call Scientology a “belief system”. It is founded solely on a belief that certain assertions are true despite the fact that the only tests ever done showed those assertions to be false.