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.