An Analysis of Scientology Factor # 1

The very first Factor of Scientology states:

FACTOR # 1: BEFORE THE BEGINNING WAS A CAUSE AND THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF THE CAUSE WAS THE CREATION OF EFFECT.

.

Let’s examine this Factor.

  1. “Beginning” implies the beginning of any manifestation. This includes the universe as an overall manifestation.

  2. If Cause is postulated to be there before the beginning then the question arises, “Can Cause be there all by itself before its effect manifests itself?” An overall effect would be the creation of the universe. 

  3. If the answer is “yes” then Cause will be a manifestation on its own right, and the question then becomes, “What is the cause of the Cause?” This logic inevitably leads to an endless chain of causes, and the beginning keeps getting pushed back earlier and earlier.

  4. If the answer is “no” then the Cause must occur simultaneously with effect. “Cause-effect” would then be part of the same manifestation at the beginning. One may say that God and Universe must have appeared simultaneously as a pair.

  5. One tries to fix the dilemma in (3) by postulating “Uncaused cause.” But this postulate appears to be self-contradictory and simply a device of convenience.

  6. Thus, CAUSE seems to be part of the created considerations. This seems to be consistent with the idea that TIME itself would start at the beginning.

  7. Thus, there would be no such thing as “before the beginning.”

  8. Thus, CAUSE is part of a system of interdependent considerations. It is part of the creation like anything else. There is no linear chain of considerations as implied by the factor above.

  9. The idea “before the beginning” would then be a projection that is created after the fact of beginning. Thus, the idea of God as the Creator would appear after the fact of Creation.

  10. The assumption that CAUSE, a consideration in itself, can be separated from, and can be extended beyond, the system of considerations it generates, seems to be the basic inconsistency.

.

Thus, it appears that beginning is simply there. We do not know how the beginning of creation comes to be. We may try to explain or justify it with arbitrary postulation, but the fact remains that we do not really know the answer.

This conclusion is uncomfortable to face. That is why we get postulates like “Uncaused cause,” “God as the Creator,” and Scientology Factor #1.

To see how the inconsistency in Factor #1 may be addressed please see: KHTK AXIOM ZERO

.

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Comments

  • vinaire  On October 28, 2012 at 9:20 PM

    This essay supports the critique on Scientology Axiom # 1

    .

  • vinaire  On October 28, 2012 at 9:27 PM

    Hubbard further says:

    FACTOR 2: In the beginning and forever is the decision and the decision is TO BE.

    This factor is about TIME. Once the individuality is postulated per Scientology Axiom # 1 it persists forever from the viewpoint of that individuality.

    .

    • Chris Thompson  On October 29, 2012 at 10:42 PM

      Regarding time: Then there would be a fractal machine underlying re-iterating the decision. Re-posing the postulate once the seed had been sown. This re-iteration would use the result of the previous iteration, and this would account for the alter-isness which has been posited to bring about duration.

    • vinaire  On October 30, 2012 at 4:28 AM

      The alter-is-ness is the change from Axiom Zero to Axiom One. There is a manifestation. That manifestation is the beginning. There is a complete inherent belief in that manifestation..Axiom Zero is forgotten. There is nothing to compare Axiom One with. Axiom One becomes the background. The next postulate is made with Axiom One as the assumption.

      This is what happened in Scientology. At the rock bottom is individuality. One can hold on to it, and think all the rest with it.

      .

  • vinaire  On October 29, 2012 at 9:43 PM

    Hubbard states:

    FACTOR 3: The first action of beingness is to assume a viewpoint.

    Individuality manifests itself as peculiar and particular considerations attach themselves to a point in space and use it as a reference point. Thus a viewpoint is formed simultaneous to the individuality manifesting itself.

    .

  • vinaire  On October 29, 2012 at 10:06 PM

    Hubbard states:

    FACTOR 4: The second action of beingness is to extend from the viewpoint, points to view, which are dimension points.

    (1) A ‘beingness’ is the manifestation of a unique set of considerations as individuality.

    (2) That point in space at which this beingness is manifested becomes the viewpoint.

    (3) The surrounding points impinge upon the viewpoint.

    (4) The viewpoint views them through its considerations..

    (5) The viewpoint perceives them as dimension points.

    .

  • fredwx  On November 13, 2012 at 12:38 PM

    Another version of which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: