Flamebait in GD on Louise Hay.

[Dora]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3247174&mesg_id=3247174

I have a deck of Hay's "Power Thought Cards" that my mother gave me as a stocking stuffer. They were my introduction to the power of affirmation - and my entre into the world of deeper spiritual knowledge. I think that Hay's success is simply evidence of the successes that come when we are aligned with our inner purpose.

I'm feeling argumentative today, and I'm not comfortable with it.

:banghead:

[Beaverhausen]

1. I'm on it

about 10 years ago I found a Louise Hay trained "counselor" who absolutely saved my life. I will defend her to anyone, anywhere.

[Dora]

2. Ha - you and a bunch of others.

The OP fled, methinks. I'm glad to see the NY Times ran a feature on her, and I'm looking forward to reading it.

[Brewman_Jax]

3. I missed it

to most skeptics, there will never be enough evidence.

[kentauros]

4. I have met some skeptics for whom evidence is irrelevant.

They contend that science is not about proving that something is true and real, but disproving discoveries, suppositions or theories. (Too often this is put forth with the stamp of approval by the Amazingly Skeptical Randi ;))

Of course, I cannot "prove" this opinion, but it seems to me that if all discoveries made by humanity over the millennia had been put to this kind of skeptical test in the beginning, then we probably would have had only a fraction of those discoveries "allowed" into everyday use.

I still don't get the "anti-science/anti-intellectual" label being put on us. If that were true, would any of us even be online much less own anything more technologically advanced than a cave for shelter and maybe some leaves for "clothing"? ;)