Dr. Christopher Evans
British psychologist, computer scientist.
Cults of Unreason
«As organized religion has declined, new
surrogate beliefs, many of them based on pseudoscientific
rationality, have sprung up. These are what Dr. Christopher
Evans calls the cults of unreason, man's attempt to fit
technology to a religion-like belief.
Evans discusses a number of these new "religions" - Scientology,
the flying-saucer cults, the alpha-wave-feedback churches, the
Eastern mysticism sects - describing how they were founded, how
they operate, and how they are helpful or harmful to their
followers. In many of these cults naivete and sophistication
work side by side; ideas about advanced psychology and
physiology are juxtaposed with remnants of pre-Christian myths
and nineteenth-century occultism.
All of the cults of unreason have one thing in common: they
attempt to satisfy man's need to reach simple, understandable
answers to the confusion around him. Dr. Evans wonders if we can
expect more and more of these pseudo-religions as the hapless
individuals in our society are confronted with newer and even
more unwanted life styles and expectations. It is possible that
systematized "unreason" is man's only possible response, and as
such is not only necessary but welcome.
Dr. Evans invites us to explore the area between what we know
and what we would like to think is possible. In doing so we may
find that the cults of unreason are our most intelligent answer
to an unreasonable world.»
Wikipedia: Christopher Evans
| «His other books include Cults of Unreason,
an entertaining and perceptive study of
Scientology and other
pseudoscience, and Landscapes of the Night – how and why
we dream.» |
Lethbridge
Herald: "Author examines new cults" by Doug Walker
| «It is difficult not to succumb to sarcasm when
dealing with cults of unreason. Christopher Evans
succumbs but his sarcasm is not savage and will
entertain all but the ardent believer. The fact is that
Evans ends up being fairer (about Scientology, at least)
than his reporting would lead the reader to expect. He
even acknowledges that readers may be surprised "to find
that after highlighting the absurdities, inconsistencies
and smoky background of Scientology," he concludes
without giving it a "wholehearted thumbs-down."» |
|