Science vs. Scientology
A number of Scientologists have posted claims defending
Scientology as "true for them" and otherwise compared it
favorably to science and the scientific method.
This seems reasonable, so let us put Scientology method and
scientific method side by side and examine them comparatively,
to see what emerges from this fair and even-handed approach.
Scientific Method:
One first observes some aspect of the universe, then invents a
tentative explanation, or hypothesis, which is consistent with
the observed phenomenon. Then one makes a testable prediction
based on the hypothesis, and constructs an experiment which
will determine whether the prediction is accurate. Then, if the
prediction is not borne out by the experimental evidence, one
either modifies or throws out the working hypothesis and
continues doing so until the predictions of the hypothesis
match experimental results. For verification of the results,
when a hypothesis appears to describe the observed phenomena
accurately, have others perform experiments of a similar nature
or attack the hypothesis from any number of angles, points of
view and methodologies until the hypothesis is found wanting,
or found to be workable. Continue this for generations, always
honing and fine-tuning the working hypotheses until you arrive
at theories which explain and predict the world's events in a
manner consistent with repeated experimentation and attempted
falsification.
This is of course foolishness. The Scientologist claims to have
a superior method. Let us examine in an unbiased and objective
manner this proposed superior method.
Scientology Method:
First, take a drunken, drug-addled madman. Then, add a
double-fistfull of various amphetamines, barbiturates, opiates
and other drugs. Pour a bottle of rum down his throat and
shake, not stir. Then sit said drunken, drug-addled madman in
the throes of amphetamine psychosis down at a manual keyboard
and have him pound out reams of bizarre gibberish.
Then charge thousands of dollars to show it to people who sign
an agreement beforehand that says they won't sue if they go
insane or develop the blind staggers from applying the material
in the now-profitable drug-frenzied ravings.
If anyone disagrees, call them at three in the morning and then
hang up when they answer for the next twenty- five years.
Alternately, leave a dead cat on their front porch.
If experimental results do not verify the hypotheses of the
crazed, drunken lunatic, report to Ethics immediately, you
psych-indoctrinated pea brain mental midget!