This occurs when a critic has made some point that comes close to
bring down the cult supporters world view. He absolutely cannot pass
the point by without disagreeing with it (or it may gain some purchase
with him) but on the other hand he cannot engage with it mentally to
produce a proper reply. This would also be dangerous to the true
believer. He therefore gives an essentially meaningless reply along
the lines of 'you are wrong' or 'where is the evidence' (ignoring any
evidence already offered).
This content free objecting allows the true believer to have the last
word without truly having to read the original post. The behaviour is
everything to do with preserving the fragile faith of the believer and
nothing to do with the issue at hand.
Then there is the content free true disbeliever who hasn't yet
grasped the underlying assertions of the subject, which still seem
absurd to him on the surface because he is still trying to understand it
within his own context of being meat.
THE WORLD IS A DREAM.
Everything you see or experience IS you, glowing tatoos
on your thetan.
Argue with that point, and you will come to understand what
Scientology is trying to tell you.
Don't expect a Scientologist to be able to discuss it clearly
though, they haven't a clue what their own religion says.
Only a very few do.
Homer
>
>
>
> http://leavingscientology.blogspot.com/
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
ho...@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
So... I have to agree to scientology BEFORE I can understand it? This
sounds like putting the cart before the horse to me.