melancholy Category: Religion and Philosophy
Now, most people know I'm not one to belittle or question the religious beliefs of others. Then again, I believe Scientology is a crock of shit. It could be described as a ferocious tidal wave that stands to engulf every stupid and gullible person within its radius. Yet, ludicrously, it could be described as a religion featuring a set of beliefs and practices found in most belief systems today. So why do I condemn such a widely accepted, yet highly criticised, body of beliefs? In this persuasive rant, I aspire to show you and implore you to regard Scientology as the new Atheism – A basis on how society today has deemed the use of rational thinking as prehistoric and irrelevant in dignifying one's beliefs.
I shall begin with a brief summation of the history of Scientology. It was created by a science fiction author, and self help philosopher Lafayette Ronald Hubbard as a means to promote his Dianetics self-help books. Scientology became its successor, and like an over clingy girlfriend, stuck to society's shoes like a smelly dog turd. People couldn't get enough of self-help books in those days. The 50s saw an abundant volume of releases from so-called and self-proclaimed 'psychologists' when really, all they were doing was mindlessly (pun intended) philosophising without the slightest regard for theoretical support. It was something we in the 'know' like to call bullshit psychology. When I think L Ron Hubbard creating Scientology, I can't help think about him as a senile forty-something year old who spends too much of his time either taking a lot of acid or looking at naked children whilst taking a huge dump. Of course, he is not squarely to blame for the outlandish ways of Scientology at present, but then again I'm not going to let that over breeding cunt off without a little bit of criticism. He was a smart man. He saw an opportunity to take everything bad about one religion, wrap it all up in a tidy package tied with a neat little bow, and unleash it upon the unsuspecting, stupid and gullible public who believe their opinions matter in other people's meaningless lives. You have got to give the bastard credit for that at least. His heart started off in the right place – making himself feel good by making money off other people's social and emotional misfortunes – but slowly he built a cult that could shake the very foundations of human credibility (as it stands today – which isn't really that much).
"Wow, Matt! You've certainly made scientology very appealing to me. How do I join?"
I'm sorry to say to burst your bubble, but you can't. That's right. Scientology isn't interested in you, it's interested in people with the big bucks (or should I say, in the words of 'Holy Hubbard' – "(
Holy shit! Wait a minute…Clippit is telling me "It looks like you are attacking Scientology..." But…no! That's not what I want to do! Based on Hubbard's "Attack the Attacker" policy, Scientologists are ordered to do the following duties in order to keep their good name safe and untarnished:
(1) Spot who is attacking us.
(2) Start investigating them promptly for felonies or worse using own professionals, not outside agencies.
(3) Double curve our reply by saying we welcome an investigation of them.
(4) Start feeding lurid, blood, sex, crime actual evidence on the attackers to the press. (source: Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversies)
Hang on a minute…I thought L Ron Hubbard was a philosopher. Then he would know that when someone questions premises about your beliefs, what you should be doing as a respected philosopher (not like Dennett) is attack the person's criticisms of his beliefs…not the person. Oh and it gets much, much better. After further investigation I found this quote in relation to teaching church leaders how to deal with someone directing criticism towards them;
"…Make it rough, rough on attackers all the way. You can get "reasonable about it" and lose…"
WHAT THE FUCK?! So they are basically saying that we completely avoid critical reasoning here, and just attack people for simply defending the validity of their own beliefs! I don't fucking believe what I'm reading. With people actually BELIEVING this is the right thing to do, it's no wonder how our society is being over populated with IFQ, IFS makers (Irrelevant Fucking Question, Irrelevant Fucking Statement – respectively) and people who lack the motivation to use logic, critical reasoning or any sort of fucking defence for what ever they say. People believe in things, and then get upset when they can't defend their points of view. You people make me sick in the stomach. And to top it all off, here's some more bullshit…
"…attackers are simply an anti-Scientology propaganda agency so far as we are concerned. They have proven they want no facts and will only lie no matter what they discover…"
A total contradiction if I've ever seen one. I think Jeremy and Ashleigh would agree with me in saying that this should be nominated for grounds of 'self-ownage.' First of all they said attackers were only anti-Scientology propaganda (no, just professional philosophers who know how the whole belief system works, jerks). Now here's the contradictory part: "They have proven they want no FACTS and will only lie no matter what they discover." First of all, for a fact to be a 'fact' it has to have strong empirical evidence supporting it. Where are the
"…Don't use us. I speak from 15 years of experience in this. There has never yet been an attacker who was not reeking with crime. All we had to do was look for it and murder would come out…"
Philosophers attack other philosophers theories all the time! And did anyone of them kill someone? I think not. In fact without attacking other people's belief structures, we would never have some of the strong empirical theories we have today. In fact, we would probably still be living under a strong Christian rule…which wouldn't have seen the creation of Scientology in the first place! Hmmm…now that I've seen the options, I think I could easily decide between a life under strong Christian rule or to live a free life with Scientologists making a mockery of Philosophers worldwide…I'd probably choose the strict Christian life. Hell…life was much simpler back then. And there were less idiots. That's fo' sho.'
Anyway in summation, I'm not stating that Scientology has it all wrong in regards to their beliefs, however I think they should not be considered valid or sufficient in terms of basing your life around. For the fact they can't defend their own beliefs (which an organisation should be able to, seeing as they believe they are 'the way' and completely right) they lack credibility and should stand as a symbol of how some people in society nowadays lack critical reasoning, logic and are gullible, stupid, foolish, and idiotic for believing what they say is right and not defending it. Harden up, you silly cunts, people criticise everything – it's normal. Stop acting like 13 year old emo girls who can't take criticism and mope and inflict self-harm all day and night. Start acting like philosophers god dammit and defend your fucking theories! It actually kind of makes me sick that I'd prefer a life of atheism than this sorry excuse of a belief structure.
Hopefully I'll live through the Scientologist Hit-Men to write another blog! :S. If I don't…well I suppose someone could release several "Best-Of" collections spanning my several years spewing forth several hundred rants regarding Emos, Female comedians, IFQs, Cliff, Dennett, Love or Money and other various miscellanea.
(Oh and if you are a Scientology hitman, I'm the guy on the right ;) nawt.
P.S. What the FUCK is THAT? Is that a man or a woman?
