My understanding is that Hubbard claimed scientific evidence to support Dianetics back in the 50s, which the medical community did not recognize.
Is that still the case? Are more and more doctors recognizing the value behind dianetics, or are they still skeptical 50 years later?
2007-12-19 05:04:50 · 6 answers · asked by _Zith 3 in Social Science ➔ Psychology
Anyone can claim "scientific evidence", especially a science fiction author. You see, authors use many sources to put together a piece of work, much like one researches for writing a term paper. So, the information the author chooses, is only going to be that which would support that person's claim, and make it appear as if they are correct. There was and never has been medical credibility as far as this issue goes. There are many other groups very similar in mindset that also have "evidence", it's all a bunch of hot air. Science fiction writers are not scientists, doctors, chemists or researchers.
2007-12-19 05:19:59 · answer #1 · answered by Hot Coco Puff 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Medical practitioner cannot recognise the value behind dianetics .They are always going to be skeptical about anything else unless there are evidence for its place .
Just like acupuncture , homoeopathy and many others unconventional branch of medicine , they weren't acceptable to start with , but they are now . Will Dianetics prove its case ? Only time will tell .......
2007-12-19 06:12:20 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Bob stated: "the techniques in this from different ingredients has been conflicting. some says the inhabitants is increasing, some reducing. however the scientists on the Fish and flora and fauna service regarded in any respect the techniques, and desperate the polar bear replaced into threatened with extinction via international warming. the alternative replaced into introduced via the Secretary of the interior, who works quickly for Bush. on condition that this selection is vulnerable to make issues perplexing for oil agencies (they are suing), you will possibly be certain that the Secretary does no longer have usual this selection from the scientists, except the medical info left him devoid of selection. base line - they did no longer advance 5 cases in inhabitants. That records is flat incorrect." the reason the Polar bear replaced into indexed replaced into that the fashions confirmed that bear populations might desire to doubtlessly start up declining. authentic now, the bear inhabitants is nice.
2016-12-18 05:00:14 · answer #3 · answered by carra 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is no medical credibility behind Dianetics. Your understanding is incorrect. medical doctors do not consider dianetics any more then they do voodoo.
Its not science, its a business used to make money.
2007-12-19 05:11:46 · answer #4 · answered by Jerry M 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's utter rubbish! It has no credibility whatsoever!
2007-12-19 05:13:59 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Definitely not.
What was hogwash then is still hogwash today.
2007-12-19 05:11:43 · answer #6 · answered by michele 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋