Our main controversy, quite aside from minor ones, is whether or not the soul or knowledge about it could be considered a “scientific subject.” For by definition in these dialectic times, science is a somethingness which considers itself concerned entirely with matters of matter and has sought to accumulate to itself alone—much like other “isms” and “ologies”—the entire proprietorship of knowledge and has then sought to demonstrate that knowledge is only to be found in materialism. This somewhat detoured view becomes artificial on its first inspection. “Science” means only “truth” being derived from the Latin word “scio” which is “knowing in the fullest sense of the word”; more severely and lately used, “science” infers an organization of knowledge: and if this is the case, then this material concerning the human soul, being based on critically observational knowledge and being organized, certainly meets the criteria of “scientific” knowledge.
Being then, based on observable, measurable truth or knowledge and being organized, we assigned to this body of information about the human soul, the word Scientology, which is to say, the “knowledge of knowledge” or “knowing how to know” or “study of truth,” thus and thereby, with the word, taking sides with the “ologies.” But we could just as well call this material “soulism” or “the doctrine of the human soul” and take the alignments of the “isms,” thus, so to speak, edging over on the good side of each and thus avoiding war.
Scientology as a word is quite necessary since we need an identifying symbol to represent these particular discoveries and data and the methodology of their use and to prevent our making errors in conversation; the subject of the soul lends itself readily to any branch of any knowledge, and to keep oriented and localized with the information contained herein we need the word.
Very well, now that we have, we hope, announced our political climate—or lack of one—and have given a word to what we are doing, let us examine WHAT we are doing.
We are studying the soul or spirit. We are studying it as itself. We are not trying to use this study to enhance some other study or belief. And we are telling the story of how it came about that the soul needed rediscovering. And now that we’ve rediscovered it, we are also discovering if the information thus attained can in any way assist us to live better, or for that matter, die better.
Thus you can plainly see that this book is perfectly safe to read. It does not seek to alter your ideological or religious beliefs. If these alter simply because you read this book, no one is to blame but yourself and it was not the author’s intention to tamper.
Of course if you DO read this book and do its few simple experiments, your ideological and religious beliefs will alter, there’s no doubt of that. However, remember, should the idea of blaming anyone occur to you, that whatever actually HAPPENS, we didn’t really INTEND to change your philosophic pattern—all we intended to do, quite innocently, was to give you some data about the human soul—not even your own soul, just the soul in general.
