CB Willis ( wrote:
>How is scientology different from epistemology? 

     Epistomology: 1.) The division of philosophy that investigates the
nature and origin of knowledge.  2.) A theory of the nature of

     At its most basic levels Scientology is a *BRAND* of epistomology,
a specific theory of the nature and origin of knowledge.

     It's basic catechism is:

     The source of all things that are created is a Static.  All things
that are created are Kinetics.

     The static is a 'knowingness', an infinite potential knowledge
creator.  Knowledge is kinetics, and knowledge about kinetics.

     First created, is a signficance-free perception of color form, this
is a vanishing truth.  Color forms are the kinetic objects you see
around you.

     Second created, are add on significances that alter the perception
of the color form producing a persisting truth.  This gives a 'What is
it?' to the color form.

     Third created are further add on significances that contradict the
original ones producing a persisting falsehood.

     The static itself is a knowingness, it has no knowledge as defined
in 1 2 and 3 above, it simply CAN operate with innate facility the
creating and destroying items in the 1 2 and 3 category.

     The static has no innate knowledge, it only has the innate ability
to create knowledge.

     The static 'knows how to create knowledge', it has no knowledge
itself until it creates some.

     The static's knowingness is not a knowledge based knowingness, it
just knows how to do it!  It is skill without thought.
     At more practical levels of Scientology, Scn is a body of technique
and approach based on the above epistomological theory, that allows
beings to undo the process of creation and recover the native state
either in all or in part, and regain the ability to create further.

     It is a science of how to undo the mess, based on how we got into
the mess.  Mess = manifesting and persisting knowledge, both true and

     Scn tries to bring the static up from a state of not know about,
back into a state of know about and know.
     'Science of knowing how to know' refers to this practical level of
recovery and enhancement of the ability to create knowledge, postulate
vanishing and persisting truths, and persisting falsehoods, and dis
create them later.
     This process of creation by the static is called in the vernacular
'Questions and Answers'.

     The static creates knowledge (Answers) out of whole cloth, then
covers them with alter-is and falsehoods and not-is, and this results in
not know and therefore Questions.

     The static then plays the self created game of Question Asking and
Answering Questions.

     The average person thinks that Questions come first, and Answers
second, but the above epistomology claims that Answers come first and
ignorance and Questions second.  This is intentional and defines 'game'.
     Thus Ron says Scn is the 'Science of knowing how to know Answers to
Questions.' - Phoenix Lectures

     He also says 'The only aberration there is waiting for an Answer.'
- Dianetics 55!

     This of course makes no sense to the Question asker, but if you
look at it from the static point of view, the Answer came first, so why
is it asking Questions and then waiting for an Answer?

     It CREATED the Answers as cause, so waiting for an Answer as effect
is kind of silly.

     Again the term 'aberration' has a connotation of something bad,
something that oughtn't be, something that we could do with out, but in
this sense it IS the mechanism of static at play.

     Thus by definition all games are 'aberrated'.

     The efforts to answer questions and to question answers on the part
of the mind form part of that aberration.

     Stilling the mind from all efforts to ask and answer questions,
and to question answers, is a powerful meditation exercise.

     Doing this breaks the game and can return one to the static