|
This article is totally biased. It does not present the subject of Dianetics in a form that any practioner or student of the subject could agree with. |
|
This article is totally biased. It does not present the subject of Dianetics in a form that any practioner or student of the subject could agree with. |
|
I agree with the above, but I don't know how to change. It should not present the subject in a form that only practictioners or students could agree with; it should present the subject in a form that everyone could (if grudgingly) agree with. To learn how this is possible and desirable, see NeutralPointOfView. --LMS |
|
I agree with the above, but I don't know how to change. It should not present the subject in a form that only practictioners or students could agree with; it should present the subject in a form that everyone could (if grudgingly) agree with. To learn how this is possible and desirable, see neutral point of view. --LMS |
|
Jason, you'd better believe that any detailed article, particularly from an avowed practitioner, is going to be subjected to the harshest critical scrutiny as regards how fairly it presents facts. It should not be a presentation of Dianetics from the point of view of a practitioner, so you're going to have step out of your own skin for bit, or suffer people beating your work into proper submission. A good article would include facts about the history of Dianetics and its public reception, competing views as to whether it is just a sham, details about how professional psychologists view it, and so forth. --LMS |
|
Jason, you'd better believe that any detailed article, particularly from an avowed practitioner, is going to be subjected to the harshest critical scrutiny as regards how fairly it presents facts. It should not be a presentation of Dianetics from the point of view of a practitioner, so you're going to have step out of your own skin for bit, or suffer people beating your work into proper submission. A good article would include facts about the history of Dianetics and its public reception, competing views as to whether it is just a sham, details about how professional psychologists view it, and so forth. --LMS |
|
I don't think the psychology article says precisely that, or if it does, it should be properly qualified. Public reaction to Dianetics has largely been scorn and ridicule, as far as I was aware. I've never met a person whom I knew took it seriously. --LMS |
![[Home]](wikipedia.png)