From: goehring@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Scott Goehring)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Perfectionism (was Re: L. Ron Hubbard was an egregious sexist.)
Message-ID: <GOEHRING.91Aug22174325@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
Date: 22 Aug 91 22:43:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: mentor.GOEHRING.91Aug22174325
References: <17563@life.ai.mit.edu> <19116@scorn.sco.COM>
	<1991Aug20.195201.17119@hellgate.utah.edu> <19188@scorn.sco.COM>
Sender: news@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
Reply-To: goehring@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Lines: 54
In-reply-to: sgandy%peruvian.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu's message of 22 Aug 91 20:59:29 GMT

In article <1991Aug22.145929.11774@hellgate.utah.edu>, sgandy%peruvian.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Sildem Gandy) writes:

>Considering your knowledge of abreactive therapy I would hazard a >guess that you are a psychologist, or work in that field. Is that >so?

Why do you ask? So that if the poor soul says yes you can vituperatively attack him/her for being an evil mind-destroying person (as is required by Scientology doctrine)?

I've noticed that you constantly attack the people you disagree with with claims of "you haven't read this or that". I would like to see you post references to your claims. To wit:

|Message-ID: <1991Aug21.144850.9141@hellgate.utah.edu> | |Clearly you haven't read much of LRH's work yourself, else you would know, |or at least be familiar with that fact that he says right in the beginning |of Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health that much of what he |was writing was discovered by others and that he was consolidating it and |putting it into a workable form.


|Message-ID: <1991Aug22.145929.11774@hellgate.utah.edu> | |You obviously missed reading the part where LRH gives credit to Freud for |the discovery of the engram chain etc.

Please produce citations for these claims. I would like to check them myself. I have a hardbound copy of the 1951 edition of Dianetics (which has not been subject to revisionism, unlike the later, more popular versions), and can access most of the non-secret materials.

Oh, and furthermore:

>I don't know of anyone who has been harmed by LRH, but I know >personally hundreds of people who have received Dianetics and >Scientology counselling who have rave reviews of it. I am also a >trained New Era Dianetics Counselor and I know how effective it is.

Of course you don't know of anyone that has been harmed by LRH/Scientology. Scientology declares such people SP (anyone who fails to benefit from Scientological therapy did so because they have, what was it, withheld overts, I believe is the term, and is therefore probably an enemy of the Church; therefore, suppressive). You as a Scientologist may not contact SPs; in fact, you are expected to treat them as if they never existed. So you never meet any of these people. They nonetheless exist, despite your (and Scientology's) claims to the contrary.

-- It's because you...piss...me...off. -- Russ Smith, in rec.games.mud, said to Bruce Woodcock

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