From: isds11990012@memstvx1.memst.edu
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Some definitions and Comments
Date: 14 Oct 92 22:58:24 -0600
Organization: Memphis State University

All of this arguing about the definition of science is
not really getting us anywhere.  I agree that Scientology
isn't a science as Phil, Don, and Gisle define Science, but
I still think other definitions apply.

What I want to do with this post is explain why Scientologists
use the word "science".

Logic 5:  A definition of terms is necessary to the alignment,
          statement and resolution of supposositions, observations,
          problems and solutions and their communication.

          (from The Logics, 1951, found in Scientology 0-8)

If we don't agree on the same definition, we aren't talking about the
same thing, right?

So here are some definitions AS SCIENTOLOGY DEFINES THEM for some
of the words that you might have different definitions for.

Most of these come from The Dianetics and Scientology Technical
Dictionary.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

SCIENCE  1. a science is an organized body of knowledge which,
proceeding from certain definite axioms, is able to predict knowledge
where, when you look, knowledge will be found.  It doesn't have
variables in it.    2.  a science is not merely a collection of facts,
neatly arranged.  An essential of a science is that observations
give rise to theories which, in turn, predict new observations. 
When the new observations are made, they, in turn, give rise to better
theories, which predict further observations.


SCIENTIFIC TRUTH, something which was workably and invaribly right 
for the body of knowledge in which it lay.


SCIENTOLOGIST, 1.  One who betters the conditions of himself and the
conditions of others by using Scientology technology.    2. one who
controls persons, environments and situations.  A Scientologist
operates within the boundaries of the Auditor's Code and the Code
of a Scientologist.  3.  one who understands life.  His technical skill
is devoted to the resolution of the problems of life.  4. a specialist
in spiritual and human affairs.


SCIENTOLOGY, 1. it is formed from the Latin word scio, which means 
know or distinguish, being related to the word scindo, which means cleave.
(Thus the idea of differentiation is strongly implied.)  It is formed
from the Greek word logos, which means THE WORD, or OUTWARD FORM BY WHICH
THE INWARD THOUGHT IS EXPRESSED AND MADE KNOWN: also THE INWARD THOUGHT
or REASON ITSELF.  Thus, SCIENTOLOGY means KNOWING ABOUT KNOWING, or
SCIENCE OF KNOWLEDGE.


TECHNOLOGY, 1. the methods of application of an art or science as opposed
to mere knowledge of the science or art itself.  2. a body of truths.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

You may or may not agree with these defintions, but that is how Scientology
defines the words.  Of course it doesn't proove that Scientology is
a science, but I assert that by these definitions, Scientology is a
science.

Having a different definition for the word doesn't make Scientology
any less of a science, it just means we aren't talking about the same
thing.  So what is the point in arguing about the definition of the 
word anymore?  I feel no need to make you wrong in order to be right
about this. 

In telling other people about Scientology, I feel justified using the
word "science" because it communicates to them.  They know what I am
talking about.  By the definition of science used in conversation by
most people, Scientology IS science.  I think that average people
are really more interested in how they can USE Scientology, not
who can force the other group into accepting their definition.

But if you are still waiting for "independent verification" methinks
you'll be waiting a long time.  Scientology doesn't work that way.
We don't waste time trying to prove anything to anyone.  Anybody
who wants to, may find out for himself, and untill he finds out for
himself, I or any other Scientologist don't expect him to simply take
our word for anything.

What I've been trying to say all along is that anyone who wants to
verify Scientology can.  I feel that anybody who really wants to know
about Scientology can study the subject and verify it all they want to.
And lets face it, anybody who really WANTS to know will.  

Look at what you really want to do.  Do you want to know if it works
or not, or do you just want to proove that it can't?

I realize that no matter what I say, some will still keep saying
"No, give us independent verifiable proof."  Lets just keep in mind
that these people are afraid to look for themselves, they want someone
else to look for them, and most likely will only believe a negative
report.

This is true,

John Holifield



Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology