From: sgc@math.ufl.edu (Scott G. Chastain)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Some views on Scientology
Message-ID: <1991Jul24.233541.27713@math.ufl.edu>
Date: 24 Jul 91 23:35:41 GMT
References: <h+9lzll@rpi.edu> <17184@life.ai.mit.edu> <1991Jul24.140607.32251@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>
Sender: news@math.ufl.edu
Organization: Department of Mathematics at the University of Florida
Lines: 39

I would like to make a few comments but let me say at the onset to avoid obvious flames that:1) I have read Dianetics, 2) I have read and used Self Analysis, and 3) I have an open mind and would like to discuss the issue in a reasonable way.

-I understand the criteria used by LRH, if it works accept it. But it seems that Dianetics was produced with much to little skepticism. Yes a person my feel better after Auditing, but a person my feel better after pcycoanalysis or after preyer. Making by your criterion these incompatible belief systems all true.

-Christianity and Scientology are not compatible. Christianity assumes all men are by nature evil and must be saved. Scientology assumes all men are good. You connot therefore be a true Christian Scientologist unless you alter one or the others beliefs.

-I believe scientology should be judged independent of LRH. I used to spend time worrying about wether Jesus really believed himself to be the messiah, but finally decided Christianity should be judged on its principles not on the history of its founder. Note Christians would likely disagree with this. The same hold for Scientology.

-Why is all the scientology literature I have seen seem to be writen on a high-school level. I think this is a big reason people, like myself have trouble buying into it. Skeptical people tend to disbelieve metterial that is so simplistic. For example saying that man consist of four things, mind, body, being etc. This looks like it was written in the middle ages. Western thought finally rejected dualism, way should except this quadism.

-The heart of my objection is that Scientology is not compatible with modern western thought. It is not written in the context of academic thought and does not seem willing to enter into academic discussion. Give me examples of positve discussion of the principles of Dianetics in a accepted scientific or philisophical publication please.

I welcome discussion and mail. Scott

The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the author or authors which wrote them and may not reflect the views and opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page. The opinions may or may not be those of the Chairman of The Skeptic Tank.

Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank