Skip to main content

Dianetics

From the Writer's Almanac:

"It's the birthday of science fiction  writer and Church of Scientology founder L.  Ron Hubbard, born in Tilden, Nebraska  (1911). He enrolled in George Washington University in 1930 to study civil engineering but was placed on academic probation because  of poor grades, and he left after two semesters. In 1950, he wrote Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental  Health, which formed the basis of the Church of Scientology's  teaching. The book explains that humans have 'engrams,' recordings of  painful events experienced in the past, stored in their subconscious and that  these are the basis of physical and emotional problems. In order to be cleared  of these engrams and unwanted spiritual conditions, a person takes part in an  'auditing' session, where a counselor uses an Electropsychometer, or  E-Meter, to measure the mental state of a person, helping to locate areas of  spiritual distress so they can be addressed and handled in a session. The book  became a best-seller and sold 150,000 copies within a year of publication.  Groups formed all over the country to apply Dianetics techniques. Hubbard said,  'The creation of Dianetics is a milestone for man comparable to his  discovery of fire and superior to his inventions of the wheel and the  arch.'"

Comments

mtspace said…
The wheel and the arch. Right.

I'm sure that it is true that painful events play a crucial role in the way we conduct our lives. And I think it is probably quite common that people avoid things that could give them much pleasure in order to avoid pain.

I suppose Hubbard's message played to the interest Freudian psychology, the growing popularity of behaviorism, and the peculiarly 1950's cult of scientism in which anything that could be measured was meaningful and anything that could not be measured was illusory.
One wonders if it is not an Essential tenet of any religion that it was not just created by one person writing a book? :)

Popular posts from this blog

Re: Science and Christianity--Can these both be believed?

David Moyer Posted:      I am a Christian Engineer/Scientist and I have no problem with conflicts between the facts of science (as opposed to some hypotheses of science) and the teachings of scripture. I know literally dozens of other engineers and people with doctorates in technical fields including medicine, veterinary medicine, biology, etc. who also see no conflict. I was once a staunch evolutionist and I could easily teach a high school or community college course on evolution. There are some aspects of evolutionary theory/hypotheses with which I have no quarrel. But nearly the entire field is a matter of hypotheses with very little of it proven by the scientific method, because so little of it is falsifiable. It certainly does not deserve to be classified as a theory- that is a hypothesis that has been tests by real scientific methods so often that almost no one can devise another test that might disprove it. Remember, that scientific hypotheses are not proven, but rather

Rob Bell, Christianity Popular and Out of Context...

Good Morning    I have been reading about Pastor Rob Bell - Pastor Bell has written a book in which he asserts that there IS NO HELL - while quoting scriptures out of context [and very fluidly] to make his point - Below is a link to a NY TIMES article about him [TIME magazine made it the cover story a week ago].    This stands out for me as one of the greatest problems for the Dialogue, and society; how to approach examples in which a newer "form" of Christianity becomes popular but in total disregard for traditional and even explicit, foundational, Church teaching...there appear to be, in the mind of many, no Essentials to anything...Will science be next? See: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/05/us/05bell.html

State and Religion

Steve - I agree that there is a need for ongoing dialogue about this - in almost every case when the state has a endorsed a "State religion" problems arise...and even in America, where there is a lot of freedom to choose one's religious practice and to carry it out unimpeded, we still see many trying to use courts and legislative actions to limit or remove one or another group's rights [sometimes even private citizens rights] to practice their own religion peaceably.       I certainly do not have any easy answers: this country was designed to allow tolerance of diverse ideas and views, but our international policies and actions seem to me, at times, to belie that. and internally, many of us are very intolerant of other's worldviews...I hope the Dalai Lama's decision plays out as he hopes... As for the USA, If Christians would take the lead in promoting religious tolerance it might help...I find it hardest to be that person when it comes to my closest associa