One of the side effects of Scientology I see affecting Scientologists and ex-Scientologist is the latent effect of Hubbard’s ideas about knowledge and definitions of words.
The arrogance inherent in Scientology is that knowledge is an internal thing. “Knowledge is certainty,” I believe is the quote.
But knowledge isn’t certainty; knowledge about something may make you feel more certain.
But a person can be totally certain and completely wrong. Certainty is a subjective state of mind; knowledge is not.
This idea of Hubbard’s about knowledge affects a person’s relationship with knowledge.
I have seen many Scientologists and exes believe that with the help of the internet they can become experts about anything.
In fact, many discredit the idea of their being experts outside of themselves.
Such thinking results in much of the conspiracy theorists mentality seen on this board, as well as the condemnation of officials by those who clearly show little understanding of the forces and factors involved in the subjects they are criticizing.
Now of course, this is a human trait, and not one that only involves Scientologists and exes. But it is very common among Scientologists and exes.
Scientology breeds this kind of thinking.
This anti-intellectualism and ignorance of the concept of professional discipline, experience, and training is one consequence of believing Hubbard’s word view, definitions, and his study tech.
So one then believes he is his own expert.
The study tech stresses definitions of words with no context.
Try and find a Scientologists or an ex that knows the difference between tradition and custom or convention. They don’t.
Study Tech omits context. And it dismisses the important fact that dictionary definitions are also about word usage, not just meaning.
In Scientology, Study Tech itself is a tradition, not a custom.
It is taught as a tradition, performed as a tradition, and never makes it to use as convention or custom.
So people using Scientology Study Tech lose perspective and judgment. And eventually become woefully literal in their interpretation and use of language.
And learning in the absence of mass, well, that is one thing that separates us from the animals.
I am not making the claim here that experts all know what they are talking about. They obvious don’t all know what they are talking about.
But for the most part they have more understanding of the forces and factors involved with their area of expertise than someone whose only exposure are internet links and the news media.
I am no intellectual or expert about anything. But I know I’m not.
I don’t pretend that by looking something up I therefore become more knowledgeable than people who spend their time actively engaged in the subject.
But Hubbard has convinced many people that they are the experts by simply adopting his data.
And even after leaving the cult, many people still believe it and act like they know all that there is to know about the matter at hand.
The Anabaptist Jacques