I'm talking about low level Scientology material only. Spurious BS that only comes much later is not relevant.
It's not that I don't have an inkling (or more) to the answers to these questions for myself, I just want to compare my own answers to yours, so I'm playing devil's advocate and asking where exactly the reactive mind differs from known psychology other than assertions about the subconscious. I was raised in Scientology, so I've had a bias to emphasize the parts that correspond with common knowledge while looking over the debatable aspects. I mean Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and phobias acquired from bad experience are known facts right? Other than dealing with the subconscious and cell imprints, the reactive mind doesn’t seem to much differ from what’s accepted about the mind other than being an arbitrary border between rational and irrational aspects of the mind.
I know I just partially answered my own question, I just want to know if I fully answered it.
Second, more broadly, what makes Scienology a pseudoscience?
After all, Scientologists say Hubbard tested his techniques on a number of people to see what worked and what didn't work and kept only what was workable. Is the right answer just a matter of "It needs to be confirmed by independent studies or peer reviewed"? Or is that the wrong direction for an answer? That usually gets a response about not needing approval from scientists who know nothing of the subject and thus aren't qualified.
Scientologists point to the scientific method; You make an observation, do an experiment to test it by trying a Scientology technique) and form a conclusion based on the result. This is empiricism, at least to the Scientologist. And that is the scientific method applied on a personal level to find out what works for oneself.
So Hubbard tested everything and kept what worked and Scientologists are told to test it to.
Edit: I need to give some examples of what a Scientologist might test and believe to work
- They run out a traumatic experience from the "reactive mind" in auditing and feel a chronic pain go away or some other improvement.
- They do a touch assist or nerve assist and feel better afterward.
- They do a scientology course and feel they can handle life better.
- They do the communication course and feel they can communicate better
It's not that I don't have an inkling (or more) to the answers to these questions for myself, I just want to compare my own answers to yours, so I'm playing devil's advocate and asking where exactly the reactive mind differs from known psychology other than assertions about the subconscious. I was raised in Scientology, so I've had a bias to emphasize the parts that correspond with common knowledge while looking over the debatable aspects. I mean Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and phobias acquired from bad experience are known facts right? Other than dealing with the subconscious and cell imprints, the reactive mind doesn’t seem to much differ from what’s accepted about the mind other than being an arbitrary border between rational and irrational aspects of the mind.
I know I just partially answered my own question, I just want to know if I fully answered it.
Second, more broadly, what makes Scienology a pseudoscience?
After all, Scientologists say Hubbard tested his techniques on a number of people to see what worked and what didn't work and kept only what was workable. Is the right answer just a matter of "It needs to be confirmed by independent studies or peer reviewed"? Or is that the wrong direction for an answer? That usually gets a response about not needing approval from scientists who know nothing of the subject and thus aren't qualified.
Scientologists point to the scientific method; You make an observation, do an experiment to test it by trying a Scientology technique) and form a conclusion based on the result. This is empiricism, at least to the Scientologist. And that is the scientific method applied on a personal level to find out what works for oneself.
So Hubbard tested everything and kept what worked and Scientologists are told to test it to.
Edit: I need to give some examples of what a Scientologist might test and believe to work
- They run out a traumatic experience from the "reactive mind" in auditing and feel a chronic pain go away or some other improvement.
- They do a touch assist or nerve assist and feel better afterward.
- They do a scientology course and feel they can handle life better.
- They do the communication course and feel they can communicate better
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/29aeCFA
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire