The "Science" in Scientology

If you've read anything from the Church of Scientology or talked with a Scientologist, you've heard the claims, "Scientology is based on science."

Typical claims from the Church of Scientology:

"Dianetics technology works and is an effective science of mental health"

Hubbard applied "modern science to accomplish the goal of religion throughout history. "

"Scientology, drawing on the same advances in knowledge that led to the understanding of nuclear physics, provides modern answers to these questions."

And look at the titles of L. Ron Hubbard's early works:

• Dianetics: Evolution of a Science
• Dianetics, the Modern Science of Mental Health
• Science of Survival

They push this line hard. You can't have much of a conversation with a Scientologist without this claim coming up. "This isn't about belief," they will claim, "this is scientific."

It is interesting to me how Scientologists can spout this line and never, ever think about what it means. One might assume that Scientologists understand the concept of "science", "scientific research" and the "scientific method", many Scientologists are quite well-educated. Why, then, do they believe that Scientology is scientifically based?

Let's take a look at what is involved in science and scientific research and how this compares with Hubbard's work.

Now, I don't want to get into a long, dry dissertation on the scientific method. That's boring and a bit off the subject. Let's just take a high level view.

What is the primary activity of scientists? Research. The fundamental aspect of all science is research. Careful, accurate, honest, well-documented, repeatable research.

To be accepted as valid science, any research must be transparent. That is, any legitimate, interested person should be able to read the research documentation, duplicate the research work and validate or disprove the original findings.

So where is Hubbard's original research? Hubbard claimed to have done lots and lots of research before developing his technology and writing Dianetics. Where is his research?

Now, you must understand the Hubbard was a pack-rat. It is doubtful that he ever threw anything away. If you've visited the L. Ron Hubbard Museum in Hollywood, you would see how much he saved. He saved toys, diaries, tools, merit badges, everything. Some of it is displayed in the museum, but there was too much to display all of it.

So, where is his research?

No one has ever found any research papers, documentation, notes -- nothing. And, believe me, they looked. Are we to believe that Hubbard saved his scout merit badges and threw away his Dianetic research?

No research papers. None. So, of course, no one has ever vetted his "research" or his findings.

Even today, there is no proper research or documentation on any of Hubbard's findings. In fact, David Miscavige vehemently rejects any attempts to validate any of the claims of Scientology or Dianetics. You want to get attacked by the Church of Scientology? Tell them you are testing their claims.

This is not science. When you have a "technology" with no research, no documentation of research, no validation of findings, that is simply not science. That is belief.

I have no problem with people believing anything they want. But, until the Church of Scientology allows independent validation of their claims, it isn't science and it will never be science.

So, Scientologists: Look up the word "science". Look up "scientific method". And then stop trying to claim Scientology has anything to do with science. You have a long, long way to go and a lot of major changes before you could earn that title.
-