L Ron Hubbard plagiarized Scientology?

Evidence that L. Rob Hubbard plagiarised Scientology from a 1934 German book called "Scientologie." The text seems to map to various hoo-haw from the cult's official doctrine, too. Link (Thanks, Marilyn!)

[#1 posted by tanner , February 27, 2008 10:55 AM]

really? no comments?

[#2 posted by censor , February 27, 2008 10:59 AM]

for epic win, digg this!

[#3 posted by Mr. Gunn , February 27, 2008 11:01 AM]

Before everyone gets all excited, read the comments on the forum. They're saying that there's a list of things he plagiarized from, but this probably wasn't it.

[#4 posted by arttoys , February 27, 2008 11:23 AM]

I thought it was L. Ron Hubbard.

[#5 posted by Songe , February 27, 2008 11:27 AM]

Give the guy some credit.

[#6 posted by arkizzle , February 27, 2008 11:39 AM]

#1 I tried posting almost the exact same comment on this for about 1/2 an hour on and off..

I've gotten a persistent "server dropped connection" on the 'dynamic.boingboing.net/cgi-bin/mt/mt-comments.cgi' page for certain topics over the last week or so..

So, everyone who made any sort of clever comment on ANY thread over the last week.. I thought of it first! ;p

[#7 posted by arkizzle , February 27, 2008 11:41 AM]

#3

Also from the forum comments:

"" The English-language term "Scientology" originated neither with Hubbard nor Nordenholz, but with philologist Allen Upward, who coined the term in 1907 to ridicule pseudoscientific theories. ""

[#8 posted by Jeff , February 27, 2008 11:45 AM]

Going through Boing Boing posting withdrawl....need to post now...

So, how come it's taken so long for someone to clue into this example of Creative unCommons plagerism...?

[#9 posted by notime4 , February 27, 2008 11:55 AM]

Hubbard SUXS. I knew an old lady who gave away everything to SScientology and ended up cleaning toilets on the cult's yacht (probably have many yachts now). She was a innocent enough person - perhaps a little naive and certainly at first caught up in the heady race to go "Clear". When she was too old to do anymore work and she had no money left, no one cared that she fled the cult. She ended up living in subsidized housing and on her old-age pension. She lost her house and all material comforts - but I think the saddest part was she lost her kids b/c they wouldn't become part of the cult and they both died before her. (she was a friend of family member, which is why I know the bones of this story, I'm sure there is even more pathetic, sad details I don't know).

Someone said Cruise is the most powerful person in Hollywood right now. He controls a studio and has at his disposal what amounts to a small fascist state. BOYCOTT ALL CRUISE RELATED FILMS. Only the lack of money-making projects will bring him down. If people think SScientology won't be using Hollywood to promote their agenda - then they deserve to end up cleaning Cruise's toilets. FUCH Scientology.

[#10 posted by Joel Johnson , February 27, 2008 12:19 PM]

Hey guys, we had some comment issues earlier that were causing stuff to get caught in the pipe. Should be working better now. (Obviously, since you can see comments!) Sorry about that!

[#11 posted by abernie , February 27, 2008 12:50 PM]

I have been wondering is Kirstie Alley's new diet program (she recently parted ways with Jenny Craig) will contain some tenets from Scientology. Maybe they are trying to expand the power base?

[#12 posted by MINIONSWEB , February 27, 2008 12:50 PM]

You are soooo going to be on Tom Cruise' sh!tlist.
All your Religion are belong to us!

[#13 posted by Agent 86 , February 27, 2008 12:58 PM]

@joel

so, boing-boing is just a series of pipes?

Does anyone know what Co$'s official party line is on this subject?

[#14 posted by AlsoAnon , February 27, 2008 1:14 PM]

Please, Tom, take our offer.

aa

[#15 posted by Takuan , February 27, 2008 1:14 PM]

@9
Stories like that - which I have heard elsewhere -
are the reason I do everything I can to destroy this evil cult. I have been asked in the past why I am so hostile to $cientology, because "after all, who are they hurting?" This is a prime example of who they hurt. Decent societies protect their weakest members. Decent humans do not cross over to the other side of the road. (that's a Samaritan reference , xtians take note)

I agree; boycott Tom Cruise. He helps evil.

Oh and you made a little typo there; that's "FUCK
$cientology", "Fuch" is something else.

[#16 posted by Antinous , February 27, 2008 1:24 PM]

Wow. I didn't know that anyone else loathes Mr. Cruise as much as me. It figures that it's you. I've had it in for him for years, since I saw him interviewed on a talk show. He was telling a story, the gist of which was that they parked the Rolls on the yacht and it went overboard, isn't that hilaaarious. I, and from the sound of it, the audience were all thinking, "You could feed an whole African country for the money that you waste and laugh about." I'm not too thrilled about that closet thing, either.

[#17 posted by moonracer23 , February 27, 2008 1:29 PM]

just a post test since I've never been able to post on here with my account.

[#18 posted by Andy Nonymous , February 27, 2008 2:49 PM]

you can read the original german text at google books:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/2knknf

[#19 posted by cinemajay , February 27, 2008 2:54 PM]

So, if CoS has been suing the pants off of people for "copyright infringement" all these years when one of their secrets gets out--then all of the judgements in those cases should be overturned--since they were themselves infringing on copyright.

Yes?

[#20 posted by nanuq , February 27, 2008 3:01 PM]

"So, if CoS has been suing the pants off of people for "copyright infringement" all these years when one of their secrets gets out--then all of the judgements in those cases should be overturned--since they were themselves infringing on copyright"

It's the COS. They could always claim that the earlier book is ripping off Hubbard's work from an earlier incarnation.

If the estate of Alfred Korzybski hasn't been able to sue for Hubbard's plagiarism of Dianetics, nobody else has a chance.

[#21 posted by SlyBevel , February 27, 2008 4:14 PM]

I'm not convinced that the doctrines of Scientology came from this. And "Scientologia" would be a pretty standard term in near-middle English. I'd need to see some textual parallels to really dig this groove.

[#22 posted by EarthBornIcarus , February 27, 2008 4:56 PM]

This is amusing. I escaped from a scient(horror)ology-off shoot group started by one of Hubbards "clears". I had access to some very disturbing videotape of Hubbard, and it still shocks and amazes me that people are so easily caught by the bizarre sci-fi tale that he uses to lure people "up the levels" to 0t3 etc. I guess they have done a good job hiding the crazy last bits, until the poor dupe is so brain-washed already that he/she can accept just about anything.

What is really sad is that all that extreme effort and energy could have been used to create a truly good idea for helping people get "clear" about life when they are confused.

Go, little psychopathic narcissists, go.

[#23 posted by Sensoz , February 27, 2008 7:26 PM]

Nice, Boingboing linking to Enturbulation. Our revolution is getting recognition!

[#24 posted by andyhavens , February 27, 2008 7:48 PM]

Or you can find 1 of 43 copies the book at a library near you:

http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/2518944&referer=brief_results

[#25 posted by andyhavens , February 27, 2008 8:45 PM]

Or you can find 1 of 43 copies the book at a library near you:

http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/2518944&referer=brief_results

[#26 posted by certron , February 27, 2008 8:46 PM]

According to this document http://www.aci.net/Kalliste/Jpar14.htm the name was changed from Dianetics (a cross between Diana and cybernetics) to Scientology for tax reasons.

That, and I get to tie into a previous BoingBoing post about Jack Parsons :-)
http://www.boingboing.net/2005/07/11/book-review-strange-.html
and again more recently, comment #8: http://www.boingboing.net/2008/02/19/paranoia-magazine-in.html

Sometimes, I love the Internet.

[#27 posted by Merlin Silk , February 27, 2008 11:31 PM]

This is so funny, there Mr. Hubbard plagiarizes Mr. Nordenholze's ideas and now Mr. Miscarriage (uhh, Miscavige, I keep making this mistake!) is rewriting his works to his own interpretation.

Currently he still says that is all done in Hubbard's spirit and these are now the books as Hubbard wanted them. How can all these Scientologists believe that Hubbard never checked his own books and noticed that there was something wrong with them? How come there has to come a Mr. Miscarriage (see, I did that again!) twenty years after his death and finally put it right?

I am sure that this is only transitional, that eventually it will be revealed that Mr. Miscarriage (damn, again!) was an adviser to Hubbard in an earlier incarnation, maybe even Nordenholz???) and that it's actually his books - and THAT'S why he knows so exactly what Hubbard really meant when he wrote something rather different.

This Miscavige (now I got it right!) version of the scientology scripture is actually a very interesting subject. I had heard that there are missions out and about more or less confiscating old version of those books and selling the 'correct' version. But read the story at www.DelphiParents.com about an ex Scio who had his son in the Scio-cadre school Delphi Academy from which he was expelled when his father's SP-ness came out. For me one of the wildest things was at the end, where actually a mission of three clean-cut scientology missionaries come to his house to sell him the Miscarriage version of all the scientology book for a measly 3k$ - sell it to an SP, who's son they had just kicked out of school!
WOW - these masters of Ethics and personal integrity!

[#28 posted by Jeff , February 28, 2008 7:53 AM]

I don't think there's anything inherently worse about Scientology than any other weirdo cult. It's just that the US has nice tax laws that cults can take advantage of--as would any good capitalist. There's a sucker born every minute. And it's not like people can't make up their own minds.

[#29 posted by jdw242b , February 28, 2008 8:38 AM]

@EarthBornIcarus:

I have a friend that has a partial library of the red and green books plus all of Hubbards blue lecture tapes, and several comm course books.
He didn't require me to study the texts, but to work for him I had to do the comm course, and everything associated with it, and our conversations usually ended up on the topic of being on course.
I'm not unhappy with the results of the comm course, however, some of the higher level texts are so sci-fi that they bend out of reason into just plain crazy. The whole Xenu thing doesn't jibe with me on a beingness level.

I do believe the basic idea of Scientology can help people, if you remove the cultish over the shoulder, big brother, you gotta do this or else, over bearing-ness they put upon pre clears. If it were totally voluntary, anyone could benefit from it.

Let us all remember that Hubbard did say that Religion is where the money is at.

[#30 posted by jdw242b , February 28, 2008 8:39 AM]

one last thing:

Operation Clambake

[#31 posted by arbitraryaardvark , February 28, 2008 8:39 PM]

What's the copyright status of the 1934 german book? Public domain? Any copyleft translations out there?

[#32 posted by NikFromNYC , March 1, 2008 7:34 PM]

KILL FOR A THRILL

[#33 posted by LadyD , March 5, 2008 8:12 AM]

I can't confirm what I am about to write. However I was told by a woman years ago, that she knew for afact that Scientology was created one drunken night when LRON and some of his scifi writer friends started discussing "If science fiction had a religion what would it be like."

Interesting thought,huh. Maybe some of you have heard this,maybe not.

I am always fasinated by anything how easy it is for people to follow.
Wonder how many Scientologist are in key gov't posotions.

[#34 posted by BarbJacome , March 5, 2008 12:01 PM]

This story is typical of the stupid stories which anti-Scientologists try to sell to people who don’t know any better. Even a beginning Scientologist who had read one Scientology book could see what Nordenholz wrote in 1934 is nothing like the workable, immediately applicable philosophy L. Ron Hubbard wrote in Scientology. This nonsense will only work to dupe non-Scientologists. Who, if they prefer to think for themselves, will read a book by L. Ron Hubbard and decide on their own.
Or at least look at www.scientology.org.
Barbara Jacome, Manhattan

[#35 posted by BarbJacome , March 5, 2008 12:04 PM]

This story is typical of the stupid stories which anti-Scientologists try to sell to people who don’t know any better. Even a beginning Scientologist who had read one Scientology book could see what Nordenholz wrote in 1934 is nothing like the workable, immediately applicable philosophy L. Ron Hubbard wrote in Scientology. This nonsense will only work to dupe non-Scientologists. Who, if they prefer to think for themselves, will read a book by L. Ron Hubbard and decide on their own.
Barbara Jacome, Manhattan