Scientology Studies 2.0, Utopia or Opportunity?

Authors

  • Massimo Introvigne Center for Studies on New Religions

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1558/imre.42092

Keywords:

Scientology, Church of Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard, New Religious Movements, philomandarinism, cult controversies

Abstract

To explain why my experience of studying Scientology both parallels, and differs from, what other scholars reported in this discussion, I first offer some autobiographical notes on my career as a scholar of new religious movements. Second, I elaborate on the notion of ‘Scientology Studies 2.0;’ i.e., an approach discussing L. Ron Hubbard’s writings on their own merits, rather than focusing on his controversial biography only, and how they inspire the daily life of ordinary Scientologists, quite apart from court cases and sensational media coverage. Third, I mention how a possible dialogue between scholars of different opinions about Scientology is torpedoed by a gatekeeping activity by professional anti-cultists who strive to make this dialogue impossible. In conclusion, I integrate the suggestions offered in this issue by Bernard Doherty with some of my own.

References

‘250,000 Visitors Saw the Helnwein-Retrospective at the Albertina Museum.’ 2013. NewsHelnwein. 15 October. https://www.helnwein.com/news/news_update/article_5046-250-000-Visitors-Saw-the-HelnweinRetrospective-at-the-Albertina-Museum-250-000-Visitors-Saw-theHelnwein-Retrospective-at-the-Albertina-Museum

Ashcraft, W. Michael. 2018. A Historical Introduction to the Study of New Religious Movements. Abingdon: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315163321

Barker, Eileen. 2020. ‘New Religious Movements.’ In The SAGE Encyclopedia of the Sociology of Religions, volume 2, edited by Adam Possamai and Anthony J. Blasi, 536–539. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Camacho, Ian C. 2018. ‘Degrees of Truth: Engineering L. Ron Hubbard.’ The Journal of CESNUR 2(4): 28–60.

———. 2019. ‘Degrees of ‘Truthiness’: A Response to Stephen A. Kent.’ The Journal of CESNUR 3(1): Supp. LXI–LXXXIV.

Cheng, June. 2019. ‘Watchdog on the Web.’ World Magazine. 20 December. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0262-1762(19)30254-8

Introvigne, Massimo. 2014. ‘Advocacy, Brainwashing Theories, and New Religious Movements.’ Religion 44(2): 303–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/0048721X.2014.888021

———. 2018. ‘‘The Most Misunderstood Human Endeavor”: L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology, and Fine Arts.’ The Journal of CESNUR 2(2):6 0–92.

———. 2019. ‘Disconnection in Scientology: A ‘Unique’ Policy?’ The Journal of CESNUR 3(1): 119–139.

———. 2020. ‘The Most Misunderstood Human Endeavor’: L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology, and Fine Arts. Madrid: FORB.

Kent, Stephen A. 2017. ‘Celebrities Keeping Scientology Working.’ In Scientology and Popular Culture: Influences and Struggles for Legitimacy, edited by Stephen A. Kent and Susan Raine, 103–148. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.

———. 2019. ‘Degrees of Embellishment: Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard, and His Civil Engineering Credentials Fraud.’ The Journal of CESNUR 3(1): Supp. VI–LX.

Kent, Stephen A. and Susan Raine. 2017. Scientology and Popular Culture: Influences and Struggles for Legitimacy. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.

Ortega, Tony. 2020. ‘Apologist Journal Smacked Down by Best Ever Scientology Prof—and with Bunker Assist.’ The Underground Bunker. 20 May. https://tonyortega.org/2020/05/01/apologist-journal-smacked-down-by-bestever-scientology-prof-and-with-bunker-assist/

Rigal-Cellard, Bernadette. 2019. ‘The Visible Expansion of the Church of Scientology and Its Actors.’ The Journal of CESNUR 3(1) :8–118.

Shaw, George, and Susan Raine. 2017. ‘Remember the Whole Track? The Hidden Persuaders in Scientology Art.’ In Scientology and Popular Culture: Influences and Struggles for Legitimacy, edited by Stephen A. Kent and Susan Raine, 305–331. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.

Shoemaker, Pamela J. and Tim P. Vos. 2009. Gatekeeping Theory. Abingdon: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203931653

Šoryt?, Rosita. 2020. ‘We Can Lift This World While Quarantined”: Scientology and the 2020 Pandemic.’ The Journal of CESNUR 4(4): 3–24.

USCIRF (U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom). 2019. ‘Ivan Matsitsky (Released from Pre-Trial Detention).’ https://www.uscirf.gov/ivan-matsitsky-released-pre-trial-detention

———. 2020. ‘“The Anti-cult Movement and Religious Regulation in Russia and the Former Soviet Union.’ https://www.uscirf.gov/sites/default/files/2020%20Anti-Cult%20Update%20-%20Religious%20Regulation%20in%20Russia.pdf

U.S. Department of State. 2020a. ‘China (Includes Tibet, Hong Kong, and Macau) 2019 Human Rights Report.’ https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/CHINA-INCLUSIVE-2019-HUMAN-RIGHTSREPORT.pdf

———. 2020b. ‘China (Includes Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong, and Macau) 2019 International Religious Freedom Report.’ https://www.state.gov/wpcontent/uploads/2020/06/CHINA-INCLUDES-TIBET-XINJIANGHONG-KONG-AND-MACAU-2019-INTERNATIONALRELIGIOUS-FREEDOM-REPORT.pdf

Westbrook, Donald A. 2019. Among the Scientologist: History, Theology, and Praxis. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.

———. 2020. ‘Scientology Studies 2.0: Lessons Learned and Paths Forward.’ Religion Compass 14(2): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec3.12345

Published

2021-03-05

How to Cite

Introvigne, M. (2021). Scientology Studies 2.0, Utopia or Opportunity?. Implicit Religion, 23(2), 156–166. https://doi.org/10.1558/imre.42092

Issue

Section

Comments/Responses