Amani_Samira Thesis Fourth Edit

Chapter 3: Cult, Religion or Deviant Enterprise

3.1 Scientology Terminology In his fundamental writing, the book of Dianetics, L. Ron Hubbard did not mention the word Scientology despite Dianetics wasbeing first advanced by Hubbard, as a means “to gain control of one's life”. Although Dianetics presented the philosophy and the structure of Church of Scientology the word itself public using started later. “The Church presents the word Scientology literally meaning the study of truth. The term reflects Hubbard’s efforts to bring scientific-type devices or strategies to resolve philosophical and personal issues” (Schaefer and Zellner 9). Technically, it means the study of knowledge or truth.

Hubbard claimed that he have coined the word scientology whilealthough it had been used in German and English texts before. Urban argues that as a response to the crisis from outside and within the movement provoked Hubbard to forsakes Dianetics and attemptsed to establish a “new, separate system of beliefs and practices” which he called it later called scientology on the ground of a new science. Urban describes scientology as “a new word which names a new science” but in a broader context Urban defines “It is formed from the Latin word scio which means know….. It is formed from the Greek word logos, which means the word, or outward from by which the inward thought is expressed and made known. Thus Scientology means knowing about knowing or science of knowledge.” (64) Factually, the Scientology movement started its practice not as a spiritual organization but suggesting new ways to achieve optimum physical and psychological well-being in this

Commented [K1]: What are you trying to say here? That Dianetics, although publicly used, wasn’t used in Scientology until later?

lifetime and looking for further far more ambitious aims beyond the physical realm. Regarding to this, the Scientology movements began as a scientific movement, however, shifted gradually to a religious identity (65). The controversy on whether Scientology is considered a religion or not, is highly contested among scholars. Furthermore, some scholars even identify the Scientology as a cult whichcult that bears morea negative connotation.

3.2 Cult Controversy With the advent of some Christian groups like Christian Science and Spiritualism as a deviation from orthodox Christianity, the term “cult” was coined in order to distinguish these religious groups from the mainline churches in the United States (Melton 17). Therefore, a cult is an initial response to differentiation borderlineof those organizations that are in between a church and sect. Sociologists adopted and used the cult term to describe the groups who did not easily fit as a church or sect. In fact, “Cults were relatively small groups built around a charismatic leader. Cults were described as ephemeral usually fragmenting after their founder/leader passed. They were more concerned with the problems of the individual than those of the society” (18).

Since various new religions camehave come into to existence during constantover the years, the term cult did not remain as a proper label for those numerous new groups. Scholars suggested new terms such as alternative religions and new religion for the religious groups who did not fit to the existing categorization of the church-sect-cult and gradually the cult term havehas gained a different meaning, which has ve associated with aa negative conceptionreputation.

3.2.1 Cult Terminology

Commented [K2]: Did I reword this correctly? Is this what you were trying to say?

The very first definition that can be found in the scholars’ works for the description of a cult is J. Milton Yinger’s saying that, “a cult is a small, short-lived group with deviant beliefs and practices and focused[s] on a dominant leader”. Although this definition was strongly appreciated in the time it was proposed, the advent of ever increasing religious groups hasve manipulated this definition in passingover time (Melton 76). By the end of 1980s, scholars viewed cults in a more negative manor and were described in more negative frame by scholarsas such. As an illustration, scholars like Rodney Stark and William Bainbridge proposed that “a cult is a religious movement not in the main tradition of the society under consideration, or more succinctly, a deviant religious organization with novel beliefs and practices” (77).

Nevertheless, in studying certain religious groups, using the cult term is the dominant category and any new group so classified is frequently compared to a standard array of examples presumed to exemplify the category. Henceforth, few scholars and some psychologists follow this rubric (Gallagher 2). Wessinger argues that “New Religious Movements” is a preferable term for those scholars who believe the term ‘cult’ is somehow pejorative and refuse the freedom of religion since it is defined based on standards, which are not applicable to all new religions.

They suggest that “New Religious Movements” term seems more neural natural label in categorization of non-traditional religious groups (8).

Factually, in the contemporary public discussion of religion, the term cult is the most frequently used categoriesy. It does not only refer to a specific form of worship or a specific type of social group (ie..eg., in opposition to a sect) but also non- religious groups such as various therapeutic and self-help enterprises, political groups and movements, communes, etc. so on and so forth have all been fellfallen into the category of cult. Undoubtedly, the appearance of new

Commented [K3]: This is a really great sentence!

movements as a result of social transformation in 1970s expanded the use of the cult labelcategory as a popular discourse in studying religion (Gallagher 212).

Singer noted that “on one level, all cults are a variation on a single theme” (15). On the other side, she argues that people who join cults are “no different from you and me” (17).

Actually, current usage of the category of cult emphasizes on the differences whichthat are “at the most general level where cults are definitively not like us”. On the contrary, the very primary assumption ofn cults suggests that they are not conclusively like us and there is no significant difference among cults. Superficial differences among cults vary them inbased on types of practice, beliefs, organization, and so forth (Gallagher 217).

Wessinger found it essential to abandon the term cult since it brings a sort of bigotry that people are not aware of it. She believes that: “The word cult dehumanizes the religion’s members and their children. It strongly implies that these people are deviants; they are seen as crazy, brainwashed, duped by their leader. When we label people as subhuman, we create a context in which it is considered virtuous to kill them.” (4) In the same way, Miller makes a similar point, arguing that, “cult today typically means a group that the speaker does not like, considers potentially harmful, and wants to deprecate” (2).

Smith noted that by using the categories of cult or new religious movements imparts , various consequences evoke and it deploys theseparates members into the general categoryies of “like us” and “not like us” to achieve specific social, political, and religious effects. Labeling some religious human organizations as ‘cult’ or ‘new religious movement’, but not others, has multiple

consequences

including

theoretical

and

practical

both

in

academia

and

societyAccordingly, the choice to use the category cult or new religious movement to describe

Commented [K4]: Members or people. I can’t figure who exactly you are talking about here.

some, but not other, forms of human religious activity thus has multiple consequences, both theoretical and practical, in the academy and in society (241).

3.2.2 The Public Perception of Cults 3.2.3 Is Scientology a Cult or a religion?

3.3 Religion or Business

Commented [K5]: You said that you had wanted to reword this into your own language. Let me know if this is the vibe you were going for and if it makes sense to you.