Welcome to Antology!

sex shopsex shopsex shopsex shopsex shopsex shopsex shopfethiye sex shop

My name is Antony Allpress Phillips (and, added 2022) I have an active communication line running and you can see details and sign up for it at the following link: http://eepurl.com/gDEOOD (end of 2022 addition).

[and I have updated this a bit in 2012 - see at the end]

I have been associated with Scientology since 1954 (since 1983 outside of the official Scientology body).

Ron Hubbard, Scientology's so called founder, once said that Scientologists should make Scientology their own(footnote).

This I have tried to do, but, I have found some parts I cannot accept, as well as finding ideas and practices outside of Scientology which I have accepted.

So to give my viewpoint or reality a unique name I have chosen to call it Antology. Antology goes beyond and beside Scientology, and the hope is to encourage critical evaluation and creation.

That is: thinking for oneself.

If you are interested in this you are very welcome to peruse the following pages, and write to me if you have comments (click on Contact Ant, to the left of this).

This site started December 2009. [My present body was born on the 31 December 1929 but, December 24, 2023, it is still going fairly well]. It will probably take a few years to complete. If you want to be notified of updates, go to Newsletter subscription

The home page and its author have no connection with official Scientology bodies, such as the so-called "church".  [Added 27-1-2022 Thus we call it part of FriScientology = Scientology not under domination of the so-called Church.]

While we are concerned to present truthfully what we can find of the early days of Scientology, the aim is to present something for those using Scientology outside of the official body to think about and perhaps use, in order to improve their practice, and possibly see through some of the statements made by current official bodies.

By the way, there is only one Antologist, and I have no ambition about increasing the statistic :-)


Update 1. August 2012

As time has gone by I have come to regard the above statement as a trifle pretentious, bumptious and egoistic.  It looks a bit like I am telling others what to do and think (in a veiled way). But in fact I am changing (meaning reconsidering) many things constantly.  It is not that I lack stable data.  The stable data are (mostly) the basics of Scientology, but I am changing my mind now and then as to what the basics are.

What was a secondary aim with this page was to preserve for the future a little of the history of Scientology so that future "generations", people who had not experienced the "Church" and earlier Scientology as I and others experienced it, can nevertheless get an idea of how things were, and some background to the Scientology and Dianetic technology and how and to some extent why, the technology has changed over the year and got to the "mess" it is in today in the official organisation (and the enormous cacophony of different voices outside the "Church" from different people who have come out at different times, or were never in). That now seems to be the primary aim, and I am hoping the site will stay available at least forty years.

The name "Antology" is also some what pretentious, but apart from some very drab (scholarly) titles I can't think of anything better, so I think I will keep it and rely on your tolerance, and hope you regard it as a bit of a joke (an egoistic joke, giving me egg all over my face :-) .

Antony August 1st 2012

†(added 7th of February 2016) I'm on a sort of long-term project (looks like being longer than this lifetime ;-) ) of finding out "what went wrong with Scientology!" When I wrote that sentence I also had in mind the fact (or memory) that Hubbard once suggested that one examines each precept or principle of Scientology individually and accepted or rejected them, individually, I assumed. It almost certainly came from the 1950s, and I can't remember specifically where I got it from. It now occurs to me that modern Scientologists looking at this introduction would find it a bit unreal. I'm therefore investigating this area and may alter this opening somewhat, so it is on the reality of the reader (hopefully).