Recently I published an in-depth article covering my (continuing) interest in Scientology. There I clarified that my curiosity lies not in Scientology policy or “tech” (Scientology’s applied psychology) but its philosophy, constrained to such fields as metaphysics, epistemology, logic, ethics, and aesthetics.

I also wrote that because Scientology became a religious philosophy by 1954, my interest also includes its theology. However I have since looked into theology—just a touch—and can now confidently jettison Scientology theology from my purview. Two examples will suffice.

One component of theology is soteriology: the study of religious salvation. For Scientology, this is centred around its Bridge to Total Freedom, of which I have only nostalgic interest. ‘The Bridge’ may be built upon Scientology philosophy, but it is not itself philosophy.

Another component of theology is eschatology, which is concerned with such things as what happens after death and the final outcome for Earth and humanity. In Scientology, this would include the ‘between lives’ and other extended space opera pronouncements from Hubbard. These areas of Scientology I particularly have no formal interest in.

Just like Scientology Tech and policy is often confused for its philosophy, its Bridge and space opera can be too. Of course, they are all interrelated; my interest is increasingly concerned with the bare-bones philosophical ideas.