Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!decvax!decwrl!ucbvax!usenet
From: usenet@ucbvax.ARPA (USENET News Administration)
Newsgroups: net.med
Subject: Re: Purging Stoll and his kind
Message-ID: <10437@ucbvax.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 20-Sep-85 07:00:30 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.10437
Posted: Fri Sep 20 07:00:30 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 21-Sep-85 01:10:21 EDT
References: <2172@ukma.UUCP> <813@mcnc.mcnc.UUCP> <272@bbncc5.UUCP>
Reply-To: tedrick@ucbernie.UUCP (Tom Tedrick)
Distribution: na
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 25

In article <272@bbncc5.UUCP> sdyer@bbncc5.UUCP (Steve Dyer) writes:
>   ......     I would go further, setting as one of the ground
>rules a certain respect for logic and scientific materialism.  ....

Here is my personal opinion. I have known many people on both
sides of this issue. The unorthodox group is often guilty
of an unscientific approach lacking in logic. The orthodox
group seems to go too far in the other direction, trying to
reduce everything to "logic and scientific materialism".
(not that I accuse Steve of this, I just used the above
 as a starting point for this letter.)
I thought that Godel's incompleteness theorems, Quantum
physics and such had blown scientific materialism out of
the water, at least as far as being a "true" description
of the world. What the unorthodox approach has in its favor
is often based on personal experience, which tends to be
difficult to treat scientifically.

I think that the orthodox group might benefit from practices
promoting personal experience (perhaps Yoga/meditation, fasting
or whatever), while the unorthodox group might benefit from
a study of logic.

-Tom
 tedrick@berkeley


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com