If considerations and postulates are the basic reality and mathematics are produced by consideration and postulate, as Hubbard claims, then the considerations and postulates must already inherently contain mathematics. The cause cannot contain less than the effect!
“The cause is always equal to or greater than the effect. The cause is of the same order of magnitude as the effect…” LRH, Logics 7-9 and 10-23, 12 November 1952
The thetan is defined as a conscious being, with a self and awareness of awareness or consciousness. The monad is not necessarily conscious but has the potential to become conscious.
Scientology Axiom 1: LIFE IS BASICALLY A STATIC. Definition: A life static has no mass, no motion, no wavelength, no location in space or in time. It has the ability to postulate and to perceive.
The following four premises, are corollaries of Scientology Axiom1
The static has no energy.
The static has the ability to postulate.
Postulating involves change and is equivalent to ‘work’.
Energy is the ability or capacity to do work.
CONCLUSION: The static has energy – QED
THE DYNAMIC PRINCIPLE OF EXISTENCE IS REASON
It is not survival, as many things exist but don’t survive. But everything that exists has a cause and a reason why it is thus and not otherwise.
LOGIC 21R: MATHEMATICS ARE REASON
Mathematics are the basic epistemological and ontological concepts (postulates, considerations, thoughts) underlying the very structure and functions of the universe or all that is. The most basic and simple concept of all is zero or nothing. Nothing requires nothing to exist. This zero was erroneously considered ‘static’ by Hubbard. There is no such thing as a static nothing, such cannot exist and is the idea of absolute non-existence of which we cannot say anything at all. True mathematics therefore could be defined as the study of the dynamic zero. X + (–) Y = 0
Hubbard referred frequently to the principle that function monitors structure. I think now that it is more precise to say that mathematics monitors both function and structure.
In other words mathematics is the study of numbers, relationships, structures, functions, symmetries, dimensions and frequencies, encompassing zero and infinity and what lies in between.
Some of these basic concepts are: existence, reason (cause), mind, monad, thought, order (sequence), energy, motion, frequency, symmetry, space, time.
ref. book: Critique of Pure Scientology
I have been working the last few months on a scientology research project – as part of a new book – aiming to scrutinize scientology by logically applying it to itself. The discovery of ritual Word Clearing is a relatively small part of it. In Scientology Word Clearing has become “prescription only”, meaning it is has to be done in a rigorous ‘holy’ never to be questioned manner, anything else is an ethics offense.
Method 8 Shock
I looked up the bulletin on Word Clearing Method 8 and to my astonishment I found sneaked into the text a complete invalidation of the student who is familiar with and knows the meaning of a word such as an average literate person. It was embedded in the following paragraphs:
“Method 8 is an action used in the “Primary Rundown” where one is studying Study Tech or where one is seeking a full grasp of a subject. Its End Product is SUPER-LITERACY. The steps are these: Usually an alphabetical list of every word or term in the text of a paper, a chapter or a recorded tape is available or provided.
1. The person looks up each word on the alphabetical list and uses each in sentences until he has the meaning conceptually.
The words are looked up in a big dictionary. “
HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JUNE 1972 Issue IV Word Clearing Series 41 METHOD 8
Enforcing such a ritual as the above is a covert invalidation of the knowingness of the being, who knows the definitions. If not that, then it is at least an unnecessary burden and waste of time for the student, stretching the runway.
Primary Rundown
For some reason I had not noticed this before, but in an internet forum recently the Primary Rundown was being discussed and drew my interest. I had started that rundown in 1972 and had ended up in an endless chain of words to be cleared. I don’t even remember how it ended. So it is perhaps not surprising that some attention units got stuck there. I had been using the two volume World Book dictionary, a big dictionary, just like it said in the above bulletin.
The idea of clearing up the meaning of words and the effect of misunderstoods had been firmly established since the summer of 1964. This was when LRH did a course in photography and had many realizations about studying and gave a series of lectures on his findings. In the earlier Scientology materials the clearing of words outside of the context of clearing auditing commands is never mentioned.
It appeared to be a rather simple discovery that blanks in memory were caused by misunderstood words, however when the relationship between overts and the misunderstood word or symbol was revealed its true significance became apparent.
First Bulletin on PRD
Anyway back to the PRD, I looked up the first bulletin on the subject namely: HCOB 30 March 1972 The Primary Correction Rundown, Vol VIII, p.65 and it states the following simplicity:
… STUDY TAPES.
(a) One time through picking up and looking up every word even faintly in doubt of or when not understanding, going back to find the word that was missed.
(b) Then going through the Study Tapes for content with Method 4 at the end of each tape.
This bulletin says it all, it is a simple and very doable action and won’t take very long in fact it would speed up one’s study and improve the quality. All the following HCOBs however start to complicate the action until one had created a formidable ‘rundown’ out of a simple action, which was already covered in the 9 July 1964 lecture on Data Assimilation.
Here is the origin of what was later blown up to a large and impressive rundown, the Primary Rundown.
Source
“You see how important nomenclature is? But a comprehension of the nomenclature which is used is primary to the study of anything. Now, for instance, I’m studying a parallel course to get insights into study of Scientology. And a very, very smart thing – an extremely smart thing to do – is to take a page of material and look over it for words you don’t know – words that don’t instantly react to you. Circle each one of those words or make a list of each one of those words and look up and study their definitions or ask people and get definitions for them. Find out exactly what those words mean. Don’t tackle the subject of the page. Just tackle the nomenclature of the page. Get that nomenclature slick as a whistle, tackle the subject, you’ll find out the subject was very easy. From Studying: Data Assimilation L. Ron Hubbard 9 July 1964
All this raises some serious questions. What would be behind such blatant alter-is and over complication even as early as 1972? Why was the primary rundown later almost forgotten? Did they realize the blunder, but would rather obscure it rather than admit. Some few researchers have hinted that LRH was already replaced at the end of 1965.
Researchers such as Michel Snoeck, http://www.wiseoldgoat.com/ lists a lot of material on the history of the PRD but seems to have missed these points.
The next article will take up Method 1 Word Clearing
GovernMents and Intelligence would be better off without such smarties. E-Scientologists or Ecclesiastical Scientologists are much easier to control from the top and are weak at numbers 1, 2, 7, 8 and thereby also number 10. Many of the X-Scientologists still have the original technology and philosophy which was quite workable.
Abstract:
If there is one concept, that defines scientology then it is Hubbard’s postulated state of clear. The book Dianetics: The modern science of mental health audaciously put out a theoretical, ideal state of man and postulated that there must be a single source of all dysfunctional behavior (aberrations). The entire construct rests on the assumption that all aberration and psychosomatic ills stem from a single source which was named the engram, the main constituent of ‘the reactive mind’. The ‘experimental evidence’ provided at the time was the simple observation that hypnosis seems to work, most of the time, as in post-hypnotic suggestion.
The entire history of scientology revolves around this concept of clear and the ceaseless attempts to establish such a state and to prove it. There were book one clears, MEST clears, theta clears, first goal clears, third goal clears, near clears, keyed-out clears, dianetic clears, past life clears, natural clears, scientology clears.
In this article we attempt to shine some light on the nature, politics and difficulties of establishing and verifying supposed state of clear.
Chronology
The scientology state of clear cannot be understood without consulting the chronology of the subject.
“A clear has no reactive mind and operates at total mental capacity, an unaberrated person.” This ideal theoretical state was also described as a completely self-determined individual and as a being cleared of enforced and unwanted behavior patterns and discomforts.
The state of clear was first defined and postulated, as above, in 1950. When this ideal and absolute state could not be reached in practice, as quickly became evident, new approaches were invented and the target shifted for a while towards increasing general spiritual and mental abilities.
In 1952 the goal was theta clear and then cleared theta clear. The latter was the equivalent to what later was named operating thetan. The standard operating procedure consisted of creative processing and postulate processing.
In 1954, the time the book ‘Creation of Human Ability’ was published, the clear was a theta clear i.e. ‘An individual who, as a thetan, is certain of his identity apart from that of the body, and who habitually operates the body from outside.’
In 1955 Hubbard wrote: “A clear, by definition, is somebody who does not have any engrams in present time with him. By actual practice a clear would have to be a stable thetan exterior since the body itself is composed of energy masses which unfortunately contain engrams.” That was called the one-shot clear, which was a thetan exterior. (Dn 55)
In December 1957 clear was defined as follows: ‘A thetan who can knowingly be at cause over Life, Matter, Energy, Space and time, subjective and objective’. (Scn Clear Procedure Issue One) This definition of clear was later separated out into the definition of OT which you could consider a generalized statement of the vedic siddhis or powers of the gods.
In the 1958 clear procedure, the preclear was made to make mockups until he got rid of the automaticity. Clear was defined as: ‘null on all mockups. He knows he is mocking up bank. He can mock up bank.’ (mockup: a–‘knowingly’–created mental holographic image)
In 1959 he described three grades of clear, book one clear, theta clear and OT the latter he said was a rather esoteric level, hard to reach. But at that time was under the general heading of clear.
1960 “When the tone arm reads at clear for the person’s sex no matter what one attempts to restimulate on the case you have a clear.” HCOB Responsibility-Key to all cases.
In 1963 it was discovered that the reason people weren’t clear or staying clear is that there were unresolved valences. Extremely sophisticated techniques were developed between 1960 and 1963 to address this phenomenon in the form of Goals Problem Masses (GPMs).
Hubbard by now had concluded that the earlier attempts to make a clear by taking over the creation of the time track (creative processing) was of no value and the following years were devoted to handling the implanted GPMs and the actual GPMs were forgotten or left alone. Engrams were mere locks on these heavy charged designer implants which formed the core of the reactive mind.
All that, was researched and it culminated in the Clearing Course, where the being had to run out certain implanted GPMs, which had a very intricate and complex pattern, in solo sessions to reach the state of clear.
By then, in 1965, the definition of clear was given as: ‘a thetan who can be at cause knowingly and at will over mental matter, energy, space and time as regards the first dynamic (survival for self)’. At that time all the lower grades were a requisite to clearing and the state could exclusively be attained on the Clearing Course at an Advanced Organization.
After clearing the next levels called OT levels from OT I – OT III were all concerned with clearing up charge on the various entities. then the thetan was exteriorized at OT IV and started to operate at OT V and VI, with rehabilitated intention at OT VII.
The Stanford Research Institute and the CIA
So far everything is quite reasonable and makes sense. In the early seventies this was what scientology consisted of and it was at that time that Ingo Swann, Harold Puthof and some others did all these levels up to and including OT VII and they were CIA and got involved with the Stanford Research Institute and dramatically showed the power of these OTs. Ingo managed some impressive feats. He affected the readings of a magnetometer encased in solid concrete five feet beneath the foundation of the Varian Hall of physics at Stanford University where the experiment took place. In a remote viewing session he observed the planet Jupiter, and reported amongst other details, to have seen bands of crystals, similar to the rings of Saturn. This was prior to the Voyager probe’s visit there in 1979. What he said was supported later by observations by NASA’s Galileo spacecraft of clouds of ammonia ice crystals and rings of Jupiter.
The reason I mention this detail is that obviously the military and the government got very interested in the fact that scientology could produce abilities such as Ingo demonstrated.
Technical Anomalies
In terms of scientology theory development it was practically completed by 1970 the last Hubbard lectures were on the Flagship Apollo, in December 1975. There is also some evidence that Hubbard, from 1976-1977 onward, was no longer in control of the church.
In the following years in particular since 1978, significant technical anomalies arise the first of which was a re-definition of the main concept namely ‘reactive mind’ and ‘the state of clear’. These are anomalies because the reactive mind core had been researched extensively by Hubbard in the late sixties and was found to consist of GPMs. From 1978 onward the reactive mind was all of a sudden consisting merely of engrams–the GPM kernel component was dropped without even a comment. This covert re-definition of the reactive mind made it possible to declare the possibility of attaining the state of clear on Dianetics.
The definition of clear had been changed numerous times before, as can be seen from the chronology sketched above. The new and final definition of clear was: a being who no longer has its own reactive mind. The difference with earlier definition changes was that L. Ron Hubbard always gave a full explanation of the changes. Well there was some attempt at an explanation such that the nature of a being was very complex and was not a single entity and that there are beingnesses, valences or personalities which could be the source of aberration. The definition of clear was supposed to apply only to the one entity, the first dynamic. And one had to be cleared on all dynamics. All this however did not explain the complete change in the definition and structure of the reactive mind.
Later in the early ‘80s the OT levels beyond OT III were completely taken out of the scientology line up and substituted with ‘pre-OT’ levels, effectively denying people the OT abilities which the CIA had been so interested in.
At the beginning of the millennium I found out that the Power Processes – contrary to what Hubbard had said – could be run on dianetic clears. That was the first time I started to suspect there was something wrong with ‘dianetic’ clears. I myself had reached the state of clear on the Clearing Course Solo Auditing. Later in my practice I re-instated the original route to clear based on eradicating certain GPMs. In 2006 this was one of the reasons for leaving the Rons Org group, based in Switserland, where I was a senior technical member.
If the clear does not have its own reactive mind then there must be other reactive minds capable of influencing it, but how do you verify such a state in the presence of other minds?
Basic Assumptions, and testing of the State of Clear
There is a basic assumption underlying the theoretical state of clear, which I will elucidate in the following. The test of clear has always been whether s/he/it can consciously create or re-create a reactive mind. (Tech Dictionary, Clear def. 9) For many years now something equivalent to the clear cognition has been promoted all over the new age and esoteric scene namely “you create your own reality” which didn’t make the testing easier to say the least.
A positive proof would require the demonstrated ability to consciously create a reactive mind. In creative processing one could make an individual consciously create a mental image picture of a moment of pain. But it would be very hard if not impossible to consciously create the unconsciousness part of the engram, let alone the entire reactive mind including all the GPMs and whatever else that may contain. Per Hubbard’s data from the sixties the reactive mind kernel is an entity that all beings have in common (GPM), therefore he also stated that there never had been a real clear in this universe.
The negative proof would require exposing the candidate to an x number of potential restimulators of reactivity and see whether the state including its Floating Needle would last. From a scientific viewpoint if the claim to be clear cannot be falsified (K.Popper) than it remains questionable.
We are not even going into the difficulty of distinguishing one’s own reactive mind from theorized other reactive minds.
What has been done in actual practice is to accept a clear cognition–the realization that one is creating one’s own troubles/engrams accompanied by an FN, VGIs.
Now here, and that also goes for the state of clear attained on the clearing course, the assumption is that once one is aware of the automaticity of creating mental images of charged situations like those containing trauma with pain and unconsciousness one will stop doing it.
We now have pin pointed exactly the basic assumption of scientology: If one becomes familiar with and aware of creating mental holograms one will stop doing it and can no longer be the unwilling, unknowing effect of a reactive mind.
This is the central unproven assumption underlying the supposed scientology state of clear.
In scientology the reactive mind is equated with the unconscious mind. One area of the unconscious which scientology avoided was the subject of sleep and dreams. Another omission is not taking into account evil intentions as part of the procedure to reach the state of clear. Per definition a clear should have no bad computations which would throw the analytical mind a curve.
All this however does not make less of the value of the philosophical excursions and factual discoveries of various mental phenomena and their solutions that were made in scientology between approximately 1950 – 1970.
The MGT Institute for Consciousness Exploration Approach
Our solution to the exposed clear conundrum has therefore been to drop the whole theoretical idea of clear in favor of a more practical approach. At the MGT Institute for Consciousness Exploration we have developed and tested the concept of personal harmony.
We found that by using what we call the Universal Imagination Processing© technique–based on creative processing, postulate processing and concept processing–combined with Traumatic Incident Reprocessing and a few other techniques on the various charged issues or disharmonies that someone is experiencing in his or her personal life one can reach a relatively stable state of personal harmony (first domain). This also includes some education of the principles involved in leading a harmonious life also taking into account to some degree the influences of the other domains on the individual’s life.
There is no generic state that is valid for everyone, the key is living in harmony with one’s own considerations and that can be tested by an individual.
http://www.mgtconcepts.com/personal-harmony.html
All this is fully described in the “The Self-Explorer’s Handbook”, Caspar de Rijk, BoD 2015. ISBN 978-3-7392-2254-7 https://goo.gl/fWFPUR
by Caspar de Nada
Scientology, the corporate organized religion as well as many independent offshoots, pretend to offer a bridge leading from one level of life and consciousness to a higher 
plateau, which is referred to as OT (Operating Thetan) or Total Freedom.
Hubbard, the founder of the religion, however never finished his project and left behind a ‘bridge’ ending in mid air (OT 8 out of supposedly at least 15 or 18 levels).
Either his followers continue the research to reach the other end or the subject of Hubbardian Scientology will just end there and be replaced by a farther reaching technology which would reach the other side of the chasm.
In the eighties a letter to David Mayo was published which gave the research assignment to Mayo for the next twenty years. Presumably Hubbard had in mind to return in about that amount of time. David Mayo was sued and persecuted and finally gave up, Captain Bill Robertson later picked it up and developed a great number of additional OT levels but also didn’t complete the project.
This does not mean that all is lost as the Scientology Bridge never was the only bridge in existence and it would be wise for the inspired scientology researchers to study the vedic scriptures and the experiences of the Tibetan Buddhists and others of the Sanatana Dharma tradition. That plus the modern western technology may yield a new actual bridge to complete spiritual freedom.
In April 1965 Hubbard wrote that the state of Clear was at level VI, Theta Clear at level IX and Operating Thetan at level XVIII. The route to OT he thought did already exist in the route he outlined in the book ‘The Creation of Human Ability’ as Route 1. In later years this was apparently forgotten and Hubbard never referred back to these grades or levels.
Scientology turned–not in its first decade, but later–into a closed system or exclusive religion like other founded religions as Judaism or Christianity.
In the early years it was a fresh breath and a novel and promising approach where East and Western Technology would meet and create something that would surpass any existing paths. In those early years scientology was still an open system with the inquisitive spirit of science. In February 1965, the date of the publication of the ‘Keeping Scientology Working’ policy, Hubbard claimed sole authorship of the subject and made it deadly serious. Any deviation from Hubbard’s standard was deemed a high crime. Certainly after his death in 1986 technology was forever fixed in red-on-white bulletins written and/or signed by Hubbard and scientology effectively became a closed system.
As a closed system it demanded a sharper break with the natural community, similar to other founded religions such as Christianity . For example, Jesus also demanded that his followers leave behind all loyalties to family in order to participate in the new community.
“ If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.” Luke 14:26
In the Scientology communities, it was usually ordered by the leadership and was called disconnection.
Since the 1980s many members left the Church or were disconnected due to raising questions or having ‘new ideas and formed a ‘Free Zone’ of independent groups which were more liberal. A majority though still held onto the same rigid rules of only Hubbard brand standard technology is valid and cannot be improved.
A possible solution
Some of us who were greatly inspired by the dream of a bridge to complete spiritual freedom, would not give up. None of the potential other bridges such a Yoga, Buddhism or Sanatana Dharma or more modernly the Course in Miracles used anything even vaguely resembling the technology of auditing which we considered the jewel of modern spiritual technology.
Shortly after Hubbard passed, a former close aide of his by the name of Geoffrey Filbert published a book with the title ‘Excalibur Revisited, Akashic Applications of Scientology’ in which he described a full bridge which he claimed would reach the other end. However we are not informed of anybody who could or did actually cross that bridge, which is unfortunate. There were rumors that a Class XII by the name of Pierre Ethier in collaboration with other highly trained ex-scientologists have been working on higher levels and a more complete bridge but little is known about their success or failure. An auditor in Austria, Ralph Hilton also did report some progress on further levels of this type of bridge. Some OT VIIIs I know have been working on extending OT II in the sense of doing a full run of all the sections. There is a lot more going on, but none of it in a coordinated fashion.
Open Scientology
If one defines scientology as a science of knowing how to know, this should be of general interest and not the guarded precinct of a special group. As I have stated above the scientology movement started off as a more or less scientific endeavor and ended up as a more or less closed belief system.
What I am basically proposing is for those who are interested in working with a science of consciousness or knowing how to know in any practical sense, to embrace ‘Open Scientology’.
This means getting rid of the holy cows, such as oximoronically ‘keeping a science working’ and opening the investigation into the areas that were left hanging such as actual GPMs and such or look into the possible validity of something like ‘super static’. By looking into is meant, investigating in a philosophical, scientific, religious and in particular practical sense.
Open Scientology does not invalidate Hubbardian Scientology but is itself and would acknowledge being inspired by Dr. A. Nordenholz as well as L. Ron Hubbard. Hubbardian Scientology is what it is. But x-scientologists who wish to go further on the road to truth would never be content with an incomplete bridge.
Hubbard, I remember the quote but not the lecture, said: “There is no short stop on the road to truth. That is the only track that you have to go all the way on. Once you have put your feet upon that road, you have to walk to its end.”
I think you will be able to think of other good reasons for an open scientology. I have given some more on my blog.
For God’s sake let’s get together and build a better bridge!
Caspar de Nada, December 2017
Miscavige’s worst nightmare
by Caspar von Bigera
The first thing to understand about the term scientology is that it is a complex with many different meanings. For some it is exclusively the epitome of evil, for others it represents the high hopes of heaven and for others it is an emotional issue of severe disappointment.
In the last twenty years an increasing number of books have spoken about it and about the character and doings of its alleged source L.Ron and its current leader David Miscavige. Scientology has become a regular feature of press articles, tv shows and interviews.
Achillesheel
In this article I will demonstrate what may be considered the achilles heel of corporate Scientology and show that the word scientology can become a generic term and what the implications will be if the many writers about scientology start to use this fact.
What happened is I remembered an SPD (Scientology Policy Directive) that I read many years ago advising staffmembers how to use trademarks in speech and writing, then I realized how the rules given can be easily reversed.1
This approach differs entirely from the one of the First Independent Church of Scientology of Valliers /James Fonda, who are applying for a trademark.
A generic term is a noun or noun phrase that refers to a whole class, or any member of a class as a representative of its class.
Nescafe was originally a trademark, but became a generic term for instant coffee. Similar stories go for aspirine, sellotape, trampoline, band-aid, kleenex etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_genericized_trademarks
The mark scientology is not a strong trademark as per the International Trademark Association because it is already in the weakest category in their hierarchy of marks: generic words. 2
Scientology is a generic term
What I want to establish is the fact that there are already distinctly different brands of scientology, but this is mostly implied and not clearly enough expressed. My take on this is that if we start to consciously use certain wordings it will be rapidly over with the monopoly of the scientology™.3
Let’s examine this in more detail, so you can see what I am getting at. There are two broad categories of scientology. First there is what we should refer to a Ecclesiastical Scientology, which is the sub-brand of Hubbardian scientology as delivered by the Church of Scientology, Inc and chronologically next is Independent or Free zone Scientology.
Further there is pre-Hubbardian scientology, which is not broadly known but nevertheless very factual. Historically, the oldest ‘brand’ of scientology is the name of a science first defined as part of Universology, developed by Stephen Pearl Andrews in 1871.4 Then in the 1930s there was another science called scientology as published in the book Scientology: the science of the character and soundness of knowing and knowledge (knowingness) by Dr. A. Nordenholz.
Please note how I am using the word scientology above as a generic word stressing its different classes. There is much more…
Independent scientology is further subdivided into numerous categories. A somewhat frivolous listing can be seen here https://xscn.mgtconcepts.com/2017/01/05/listing-what-brand-of-scientology-do-you-like-the-most/
Hubbardian scientology
This is the main category of scientology based on or developed by L. Ron Hubbard. This is subdivided in Early Hubbardian (pre-KSW Scientology, late Hubbardian (KSW Scientology) and neo-Hubbardian scientology or post-Hubbardian scientology. There is standard scientology which again is a subdivision of Hubbardian scientology. The next is an example of a neo-Hubbardian scientology.
Robertsonian scientology
Robertsonian scientology is one of the bigger movements except that they do not refer to themselves as such, but use the term Rons org. Apart from the publicly visible Rons Organization, there are some more secretive groups that use Robertsonian scientology, but do not advertise it as a form of scientology.
Filbertian scientology
This is a post-Hubbardian scientology which we could call Filbertian scientology, which is based on the work of Geoffrey Filbert an early co-worker of L. Ron Hubbard who wrote the book Excalibur Revisited, which states on the title page ‘Akashic Applications of Scientology 1982’
Ethier scientology
This a version of a post-Hubbardian standard scientology which is characterized by the development of new OT levels based on the works of Hubbard.
Nordenholz scientology
Nordenholz Scientology is a philosophical scientology, rather than a technical scientology.
I have just listed some of the versions of scientology. Scientology is a plurality. I have not even touched the subject of scientology derivatives under different names such as Avatar, Transformational Processing, Deep Clearing etc. etc.
Just from the enumeration above it should be clear that there are now a number of clearly visible and defined scientology’s.
You will also have noticed that in the text above I have consequently used scientology as a generic term which in fact it is. Let us writers about scientology 5 use this gimmick and break the Ecclesiastical Scientology monopoly in 2017!
References
1 19840316 SPD 85 – How Trademarks are Used in Speech.pdf
“With our trademarks one must use them with a generic word or term:
DIANETICS spiritual healing technology
SCIENTOLOGY applied religious philosophy
DIANETICS auditing
SCIENTOLOGY training…
Even when using a trademark in every day conversation, the trademark must be-used with a generic word or term.”
2 International Trademark Association abt trademark strength http://www.inta.org/TrademarkBasics/FactSheets/Pages/TrademarkStrengthFactSheet.aspx
3 One area in which the Church of Scientology is particularly susceptible to challenge by Independent Scientology is the potential generification of its popular trademarks (think what happened to “zipper,” “aspirin,” “escalator,” et al.), such as “Scientology,” “Dianetics,” and “e-meter.”http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2012/07/26/is-independent-scientology-the-key-to-unlock-the-church-of-scientologys-secret-agreement-with-the-irs/#1169605928f2
4 The primary synopsis of universology and Alwato : the new scientific universal language by Andrews, Stephen Pearl, 1812-1886
5. Scott Pilutik is an attorney who has written extensively on Scientology and is often cited by the Village Voice as a legal expert. “…if FICOS can keep the playing field limited to the First Amendment and its free exercise right to use the generic term “Scientology” in commerce, they stand a good chance of prevailing, I believe.” http://tonyortega.org/2016/02/01/scientology-faces-a-trademark-fight-weve-been-waiting-for-but-will-it-get-spoiled/
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.