Dianetics Question

[Dulloldfart]

The point is that Ron's 'Engram Theory' says that *all* unconscious input is recorded. All that's necessary to refute that is one example where it's not. That's not a generalization.

If the theory was that 'sometimes unconscious input is recorded', it wouldn't be enough to show one case where it was not.

Oh, and part 2 of Ron's 'Theory' is that Dianetics Auditing can *retrieve* such 'engrams'. So, even retrieval by other means wouldn't support Ron.

Zinj

I'm not trying to support Hubbard's theory, or say that the one experiment didn't show anything. I'm saying that the one experiment didn't disprove everything Hubbard said about Dianetics.

An obvious example would be as to whether a serious physical injury is recorded in anything other than the actual flesh and tissue. I'll trot out my little (idealised) aura picture here.

As far as I know, a serious physical injury would register as a deformation in the electronic fields (aura) in the area concerned that would persist long after the physical tissue has regenerated as much as it is going to. Such deformation is susceptible to being corrected in various ways, not necessarily by Dianetic auditing. I imagine such auditing would have some beneficial effect in the area, if done competently, but since Dianetic tech is pretty shaky it wouldn't address all of the energetic deformations.

I would suggest that calling the auric deformation localised into the area where the injury was sustained equivalent to "an engram" would be in the right ballpark, even if Hubbard didn't look at one that way and all the counterparts to Hubbard's system aren't present in the aura layers.

Scientific experiments done under strict conditions that substantiate all this? Nope. But Barbara Brennan's books, from which my illustration was taken, go into all this, and Brennan was trained as a scientist before she got into healing.

Paul

 

[AnonKat]

I'm not trying to support Hubbard's theory, or say that the one experiment didn't show anything. I'm saying that the one experiment didn't disprove everything Hubbard said about Dianetics.

An obvious example would be as to whether a serious physical injury is recorded in anything other than the actual flesh and tissue. I'll trot out my little (idealised) aura picture here.

Picture

As far as I know, a serious physical injury would register as a deformation in the electronic fields (aura) in the area concerned that would persist long after the physical tissue has regenerated as much as it is going to. Such deformation is susceptible to being corrected in various ways, not necessarily by Dianetic auditing. I imagine such auditing would have some beneficial effect in the area, if done competently, but since Dianetic tech is pretty shaky it wouldn't address all of the energetic deformations.

I would suggest that calling the auric deformation localised into the area where the injury was sustained equivalent to "an engram" would be in the right ballpark, even if Hubbard didn't look at one that way and all the counterparts to Hubbard's system aren't present in the aura layers.

Scientific experiments done under strict conditions that substantiate all this? Nope. But Barbara Brennan's books, from which my illustration was taken, go into all this, and Brennan was trained as a scientist before she got into healing.

Paul

Wow I wass keeping it small did you know memorys are physicly stored as strings of proteïnes in the brain ?

 

[programmer_guy]

Wow I wass keeping it small did you know memorys are physicly stored as strings of proteïnes in the brain ?

This is not what is stated in any way in the Standard Dianetics course pack.
Delving into Scientology apologetics can lead anywhere one wants to go but certainly not any science.

 

[AnonKat]

This is not what is stated in any way in the Standard Dianetics course pack.
Delving into Scientology apologetics can lead anywhere one wants to go but certainly not any science.

No my point is that back than they did know jack shit about the brain and had to think up theories about the mind. Progess in that area has only been made in the 90ties untill now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-Ab3tlpvYA


I am tottaly for brain research and its funny that memory actually has mass.

I think that that is lulzy

Also this.

http://www.dalailama.com/news/post/104-how-thinking-can-change-the-brain

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3C-oRO6Bxz4

 

[AnonKat]

Bumping thread for Terril Park

http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/what-is-psychosomatic-illness

Lots of words.

Terril above thread links back to what we talked about about Imagening the problem you have sitting in that chair . Below just moar on Stress-Management.

moar:

Question: How Can I Prevent Stress-Related Psychosomatic Illness? Is It In My Head?
"I've been under a lot of stress for a while now, and I'm experiencing some physical symptoms. I'm sure it's psychosomatic--due to stress--so I'm not sure if I should take it seriously or not. How should I handle this, as it seems like it could be 'all in my mind'?"

Answer: Stress-related illness is very common, as is the misconception that physical symptoms that occur due to stress are not serious, or not 'real' problems. ("It's just stress.") Pscyhosomatic illness originates with emotional stress or damaging thought patterns, but has physical symptoms that are real and can harm you as much as symptoms that originate from other means. (In fact, it's been estimated that over 90% of doctors visits are due to health problems influenced at least in part by stress, so psychosomatic illness is more common than people realize!)
Do you have a problem with stress and your health? The following resources explain more in depth the link between stress and health, and can let you know more about the major and mild psychosomatic illnesses that could affect you.

http://stress.about.com/od/stresshealth/f/psychosomatic.htm