http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Pearl_Andrews Gunner | July 28, 2011 at 8:07 pm | Reply For The Scholars: Excerpts from Stephen Pearl Andrews 1871 publication - 58. SCIENTOLOGY, is, on the contrary, that Branch or Aspect of Universology in which the Universe is considered and treated as consecutively and logically evolved from the Three Abstract Universal Principles above specified (2, 45 see below), related to the Three Primary Numbers. It is, in other words, the Logical and Mathematical Evolution of Being universally, from the Primordial Categories or Basis-Thoughts of Being. Scientology is therefore Universology developed in the spirit of the Exact Sciences, and is wholly new in kind. It is the Core or Centre and the most distinctive Department of Universology, that in which the discovery of this New Universal Science mainly consists; but it is proportionally less popular, in character, and more remote from old and existing scientific ideas. 2. IDENTIFICATION (with each other), by ECHO OF SAMENESS, (which is Correspondence or Analogy), of the Prime Elements of All Spheres of Being. 45. The word-termination -ismus is used to denote a Realm or Domain of Being. These Three Domains are therefore, 1. THE NATURISMUS, 2. THE SCIENTISMUS, and 3. THE ARTISMUS, of Being. It will be the supreme triumph of Scientology, the Exact Branch of this new Universal Science, to exhibit in Diagram, and by illustrative object-teaching, all the Root-thoughts of which the Human Mind is capable, SCIENTOLOGY, defined, is new, of Language and of the Universe. Universological, a third Abstract Science; Universological, asserts the supremacy of Spirit over Matter, of The Abstract over The Concrete; final triumph of, what will be. Andrews was one of the first to use the word “scientology”. The word is defined as a neologism in his 1871 book The Primary Synopsis of Universology and Alwato: The New Scientific Universal Language. In the 1870s Andrews promoted Joseph Rodes Buchanan’s Psychometry besides his own Universology predicting that a priori derived knowledge would supersede empirical science as exact science. Andrews book has been republished on October 14, 2010 This data of Andrews reads as the foundation for the Factors, the Axioms and Logics. CONDITIONS OF EXISTENCE to the Ls: OGDEN’s BASIC ENGLISH, OPERATIONS – 100 words … be, do, have … 1930, Basic English: A General Introduction with Rules and Grammar and other works such as The Key to Life Course id=VxGE3jiRLjEC&dq=The+primary+synopsis+of+universology+and+Alwato:+the+new+scientific+universal+language&hl=nl&ei=DHU1TvabLYSWOqeRnO8L&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA
I am so disappointed. Until now I thought that Hubbard invented the word "Scientology". Looks like the Old Bastard was unable to invent anything
It alsoo points out why Scientologists work with this "Universology predicting that a priori derived knowledge would supersede empirical science as exact science." Anons prefere Empirical science
you'll all have to modify your hyperlinks ^ from Code: [url="/wiki/page_title"]TEXT GOES HERE[/url] to Code: [url=http://en.wikipedia/wiki/page_title]TEXT GOES HRER[/url]
That is one of the first things that struck me when I read Dianetics. He had laid out a body of axioms and derived from them his theses. He may have created an abstract concept with few inherent contradictions, at least what I could gather from Dianetics. But his model does not seem to describe reality very well, from my own personal observation. Clears can go bonkers just as much as any other human being. We've seen Marty gone bonkers, which kind of discredits the independent's line that it's all Miscavige's fault clear doesn't work out for his churchies.
