Path: rambo.bobo.net!xs4all!xs4all!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!207.155.183.80.MISMATCH!global-news-master From: inFormer@informer.org (Rev Dennis Erlich) Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Subject: Re: A lecture on sanity--I think someone needs it! Date: 07 Nov 1998 19:16:32 PST Organization: inFormer Ministry [a 501(c)3 non-profit, religious organization] "... in service of cult victims and their families." Lines: 36 Message-ID: <364c0f1d.35528103@news.concentric.net> References: <3645cfef.878969@news.tiac.net> <3645da6b.18385828@cnews.newsguy.com> Reply-To: informer@informer.org NNTP-Posting-Host: ts024d08.lax-ca.concentric.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451 X-No-Archive: yes Xref: rambo.bobo.net alt.religion.scientology:141115 fast@anywhere.usa (Fast): minton's account lectures us >>You can make an arbitrary division among people who lack perfect sanity. fast >I think that this definition of sanity, always choosing correctly, is >a bit limiting. It seems to imply that decisions can be judged by >some absolute, external standard. Yes, and that is precisely the danger of scienotek. >There needs to be room for people >to have different values and individual situations without being >considered insane. Or being labeled DB, downtone, or couch-potatoes. >It also seems dehumanizing to just classify others as insane so >easily. This is a back to scienobabble definition of sanity. >>Some people ... ... like to put people in categories. >I actually agree with most of the rest of your post. There is >probably something to it. So who actually invented positive thinking? Elrong, Damian or was it the Bob? Rev Dennis Erlich * * the inFormer * *