9 VOLUME 7 |ISSUE 2 |2016
It was 1998 when, at the age of 18, I was introduced to spiritual
matters by a relative who showed me the book Projections
of the Consciousness, Waldo Vieira’s collection of out-of-body
experiences (OBEs). While reading, I fell asleep and—to my
astonishment—I felt that I was detaching from my body.1
The experience felt as real as if I had been in a waking state.
Though skeptical and antireligious, I had to account for this
peak or mystical experience, so I set out to learn more. I
began to attend free lectures at the International Institute of
Projectiology and Conscientiology (IIPC), Vieira’s organization.
In essence, Conscientiology’s basic invitation was “Would you
like to study the supernatural with a scientific spirit, without
unquestionable truths, based on your own conclusions and
experiences, as a means of self-understanding and self-
improvement?” The message was appealing for a teenager
eager for self-discovery.
For the next couple of weeks after my OBE, I had some success
reproducing the experience at home, using procedures
as simple as focusing my attention before falling asleep.
Eventually, I took courses at IIPC, whose teachers emphasized
that we must be open-minded but critical. My participation
there was not mandatory. I could take years just reading
their voluminous publications on my own and practicing the
techniques. But would I? I attended their activities also because
I needed company to talk with. This was how I began to get
involved with the group.
Conscientiology’s first step is to introduce a worldview called
consciential paradigm. It is a synthesis of Vieira’s opinions,
erroneously presented as a consensus among researchers.
It is basically a model stating that the human being is an
immaterial consciousness, embedded in four bodies (physical,
energetic, emotional, and mental). The consciousness goes
through a series of reincarnations and interacts with multiple
dimensions. Conscientiologists call that a leading-edge relative
truth that should be verified through personal experience.
If you are a spiritualist, you might become excited with the
scientific-like discourse they use to explain your experiences. If
not, you might as well give them the benefit of the doubt. This
is how people end up accepting their worldview. My belief that
I had been out of my body, passed through walls, and floated
around convinced me that IIPC was right. I was not in a true
scientific environment where statements must be submitted
to a more rigorous process before validation. So I just ended
up living comfortably on that new feeling of immortality and
building my studies based on Conscientiology’s discourse.
Soon afterward, I decided to become a volunteer for the
organization.
That process is how Conscientiology made me “free.” I was free
from the need to explore other disciplines. Although we agreed
in principle that people should study everything, we took for
granted that Conscientiology’s classes were structured around
its own books and worldview, with little if any dialogue with
independent fields. Thus, I did not concern myself with the
conventional sciences and ended up believing that my average
intellectual and communication skills were advanced scientific
knowledge. It was enough for me to impress new students, find
space in the media, and therefore feed my distorted self-image.
All this is why I compare Conscientiology to a castle. I, and
many others, were impressed by its charm, not realizing that its
walls were fortified and highly segregational. At first I benefited
from that castle’s power and did not feel constrained. I was
impressed by what seemed to be paranormal experiences.
Along with other students, I felt persuaded, comforted, and
enlightened by that mix of pop psychology and spiritual
common sense.
Evolution of Conscientology
Conscientiology would probably be harmless if it were merely
a school of self-development. Even though the organization’s
scientific pretensions are naive, volunteers sincerely think that
they are offering students a means of personal growth. But
Conscientiology is not just that. It has things to say about every
aspect of your life!
Some words about the group’s history may help clarify how its
originally progressive and democratic principles gave way to
conservative and cultic practices. Vieira began, in the 1980s,
as the leader of a small group of enthusiasts who wanted to
understand psychic phenomena. Being naturally focused on a
fringe study, Vieira and his colleagues developed a relationship
of mutual protection and admiration. Soon they felt as though
they were the announcers of a new knowledge that would
rescue people out of the darkness. Vieira, a self-taught expert
in the field of OBEs, became seen by his collaborators as a
spiritual master, giving advice about everything from health,
leisure, education, and work to marriage and sexual life.
In 1991, the informal group became a nonprofit organization,
and with that came the pressures normal to every economic
enterprise being kept by volunteers, who now had to be
motivated into new bureaucratic functions and sales activities.
The nature of its publications shows how the organization
shifted from an independent study group to a self-help
school—probably a more profitable and broader activity.2
Conscientiology thus became a moral system, which chose
to emphasize its differences to attract students. With that
progression came separateness.
In the following years, the group went further into what I now
consider a cultic dynamic. The institutional setup shifted from
offices dispersed in urban cities to a rural community in the
countryside. A cousin organization called Center for Higher
Studies of Conscientiology (CEAEC) had a piece of land in
the city of Iguassu, where it built classrooms, experimental
laboratories, a library, and so on. In 2002, Vieira moved there,
replaced some local leaders, and turned the location into the
new headquarters for his endeavor.
In 2004, after graduating from college in economics, I too
went to live in Iguassu, just like 800 other people who did
It was 1998 when, at the age of 18, I was introduced to spiritual
matters by a relative who showed me the book Projections
of the Consciousness, Waldo Vieira’s collection of out-of-body
experiences (OBEs). While reading, I fell asleep and—to my
astonishment—I felt that I was detaching from my body.1
The experience felt as real as if I had been in a waking state.
Though skeptical and antireligious, I had to account for this
peak or mystical experience, so I set out to learn more. I
began to attend free lectures at the International Institute of
Projectiology and Conscientiology (IIPC), Vieira’s organization.
In essence, Conscientiology’s basic invitation was “Would you
like to study the supernatural with a scientific spirit, without
unquestionable truths, based on your own conclusions and
experiences, as a means of self-understanding and self-
improvement?” The message was appealing for a teenager
eager for self-discovery.
For the next couple of weeks after my OBE, I had some success
reproducing the experience at home, using procedures
as simple as focusing my attention before falling asleep.
Eventually, I took courses at IIPC, whose teachers emphasized
that we must be open-minded but critical. My participation
there was not mandatory. I could take years just reading
their voluminous publications on my own and practicing the
techniques. But would I? I attended their activities also because
I needed company to talk with. This was how I began to get
involved with the group.
Conscientiology’s first step is to introduce a worldview called
consciential paradigm. It is a synthesis of Vieira’s opinions,
erroneously presented as a consensus among researchers.
It is basically a model stating that the human being is an
immaterial consciousness, embedded in four bodies (physical,
energetic, emotional, and mental). The consciousness goes
through a series of reincarnations and interacts with multiple
dimensions. Conscientiologists call that a leading-edge relative
truth that should be verified through personal experience.
If you are a spiritualist, you might become excited with the
scientific-like discourse they use to explain your experiences. If
not, you might as well give them the benefit of the doubt. This
is how people end up accepting their worldview. My belief that
I had been out of my body, passed through walls, and floated
around convinced me that IIPC was right. I was not in a true
scientific environment where statements must be submitted
to a more rigorous process before validation. So I just ended
up living comfortably on that new feeling of immortality and
building my studies based on Conscientiology’s discourse.
Soon afterward, I decided to become a volunteer for the
organization.
That process is how Conscientiology made me “free.” I was free
from the need to explore other disciplines. Although we agreed
in principle that people should study everything, we took for
granted that Conscientiology’s classes were structured around
its own books and worldview, with little if any dialogue with
independent fields. Thus, I did not concern myself with the
conventional sciences and ended up believing that my average
intellectual and communication skills were advanced scientific
knowledge. It was enough for me to impress new students, find
space in the media, and therefore feed my distorted self-image.
All this is why I compare Conscientiology to a castle. I, and
many others, were impressed by its charm, not realizing that its
walls were fortified and highly segregational. At first I benefited
from that castle’s power and did not feel constrained. I was
impressed by what seemed to be paranormal experiences.
Along with other students, I felt persuaded, comforted, and
enlightened by that mix of pop psychology and spiritual
common sense.
Evolution of Conscientology
Conscientiology would probably be harmless if it were merely
a school of self-development. Even though the organization’s
scientific pretensions are naive, volunteers sincerely think that
they are offering students a means of personal growth. But
Conscientiology is not just that. It has things to say about every
aspect of your life!
Some words about the group’s history may help clarify how its
originally progressive and democratic principles gave way to
conservative and cultic practices. Vieira began, in the 1980s,
as the leader of a small group of enthusiasts who wanted to
understand psychic phenomena. Being naturally focused on a
fringe study, Vieira and his colleagues developed a relationship
of mutual protection and admiration. Soon they felt as though
they were the announcers of a new knowledge that would
rescue people out of the darkness. Vieira, a self-taught expert
in the field of OBEs, became seen by his collaborators as a
spiritual master, giving advice about everything from health,
leisure, education, and work to marriage and sexual life.
In 1991, the informal group became a nonprofit organization,
and with that came the pressures normal to every economic
enterprise being kept by volunteers, who now had to be
motivated into new bureaucratic functions and sales activities.
The nature of its publications shows how the organization
shifted from an independent study group to a self-help
school—probably a more profitable and broader activity.2
Conscientiology thus became a moral system, which chose
to emphasize its differences to attract students. With that
progression came separateness.
In the following years, the group went further into what I now
consider a cultic dynamic. The institutional setup shifted from
offices dispersed in urban cities to a rural community in the
countryside. A cousin organization called Center for Higher
Studies of Conscientiology (CEAEC) had a piece of land in
the city of Iguassu, where it built classrooms, experimental
laboratories, a library, and so on. In 2002, Vieira moved there,
replaced some local leaders, and turned the location into the
new headquarters for his endeavor.
In 2004, after graduating from college in economics, I too
went to live in Iguassu, just like 800 other people who did
