Talk:Ethics (Scientology)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. —Nightstallion (?) 10:21, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Requested move

[edit] Voting

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments
  • Support: For reason listed in the move request. --Davidstrauss 04:51, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Is the word ethic as used in this context the same kind of ethics described in the Ethics article, or an unrelated concept which happens to share the same word (e.g. a book titled Ethics)? If it is the former, the parenthetical clarifiers normally used for disambiguation should not be used, because the word is not being disambiguated. Instead, a natural title should be used, such as Ethics in Scientology.—jiy (talk) 09:26, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
It's the latter; "ethics" is a specific jargon term in Scientology with its own specific meanings and doesn't really correspond with the conventional meaning of the term. -- Antaeus Feldspar 15:31, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. This is not about "Ethics in Scientology", it's about a Scientology jargon term. - Haukur 17:43, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

[edit] ethics, definition

This article doesn't have one. A common dictionary does not supply a defintion of ethics suffiencent unto this article. I believe the definition dictionaries use;

"the study of the general nature of morals and the specific moral choices to be made by the individual in his relationship with others" isn't really understood by most people. People don't see that it applies to their everyday life and to every decision they make.
Scientology mostly uses; "Ethics are reason" (from Dianetics and Technical dictionary, page 146, def 2. and a person's level of OTness can be defined as "the number of dynamics a person can compute on." Of course this idea is clear and obvious if a person first has the ideas of the dynamics of existence. Terryeo 01:46, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rewrite

Since every other sentence was tagged "citation needed", I've completely rewritten the article with direct citations. It still needs some more critical views, though . wikipediatrix 18:44, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chapter 'Antisocial Personalities'

I had changed:

The Potential Trouble Source, or PTS, was directly linked with controversial policies advocating revenge against Scientology's enemies, including Fair Game and the concept of Suppressive Persons. (Hubbard, HCO Policy Letter of 23 December 1965) [7]

into

The Potential Trouble Source, or PTS, is directly related with the concept of Suppressive Persons.

I did that for reason of:

20:07, 12 June 2006 Olberon (Updated, the version of HCO PL 23 Dec 1965 linked to has not been in use since 1979. the Fair Game section has not been in use (officially) since 1968.)

This article is about 'Ethics (Scientology)' and in this particular article it is to clarify things about 'Antisocial Personalities'. It is supposed to inform what it is about. It is not supposed to confuse with mixing in data that has not been part of it since a very long time. That history part is already addressed in articles like 'Fair Game'.

I removed the Fair Game comment as it bears no relevance to note any of that here. It is also incorrect to link to a cancelled version of the policy letter. It only confuses as people will think that this is how it is presently dealt with.

And now we have user Antaeus Feldspar objecting:

01:14, 13 June 2006 Antaeus Feldspar (rv; none of that makes the statements made inaccurate)

You don't need to note everything that is not inaccurate. --Olberon 06:19, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dynamics

The article has a good definition of Ethics as Scientology uses the word IF and only if a person understands the words used in the definition. Dynamics is used but not defined. Seaching Wikipedia for "dynamics" produces a disambiguation page, none of those articles define the word as used in the first sentence of this article. Dynamics is used here; ... to ensure his continued survival across the dynamics. So we either need to define the word in this article or provide a link to a definition of the word, so the definition of Ethics can be understood.

Dynamics, there could be said to be eight urges (drives, impulses) in life. These we call dynamics. These are motives or motivations. We call them the eight dynamics. The first dynamic - is the urge toward existence as one's self. Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary pg.128 Pub. Pubs Org. ISBN 0-88404-037-2 1975.

The urges toward existence are:

  1. self
  2. family
  3. groups of people
  4. mankind
  5. Life
  6. the physical universe
  7. spiritual existence
  8. The Supreme Being -- Terryeo 16:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, yes, this is already covered here and has been for quite some time. wikipediatrix 16:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay. So we should link that word, Dynamics, to there. Terryeo 17:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. Done. wikipediatrix 17:31, 5 November 2006 (UTC)