From: whatis@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu (....What Is?....)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Some views on Scientology
Message-ID: <17251@life.ai.mit.edu>
Date: 28 Jul 91 06:33:44 GMT
References: <1991Jul24.233541.27713@math.ufl.edu> <55386@apple.Apple.COM> <1991Jul26.143227.7715@math.ufl.edu>
Sender: news@ai.mit.edu
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 18

In article <1991Jul26.143227.7715@math.ufl.edu> sgc@math.ufl.edu (Scott G. Chastain) writes:
>I admit my point was not very clear. Let me restate. If you were to 
>turn in Dianetics as a Ph.D thesis I doubt it would fly; it makes
>so many assumptions and leaps of reasoning. This is not necessarily
>bad, perhaps the Dianetics I have read is simply the layman's
>edition; in which case I would be interested in reading the more
>scholarly writing of Dianetics and in which case I would retract
>my complaint.

Ah.  All of the research that went behind Dianetics can be found in
a reference set called the "Research & Discovery Series".  It's
about the size of a normal set of encyclopedias.  Now you can see why
it's not all included in the papaerback version. :-)

--
Steve Boswell         | This opinion is distributed in the hopes that it
whatis@ucsd.edu       | will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY...
whatis@gnu.ai.mit.edu |