From: Elizabeth.Mccoy@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Elizabeth Mccoy)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Scientology information
Message-ID: <4738@beguine.UUCP>
Date: 24 Jul 91 22:26:22 GMT
Sender: usenet@beguine.UUCP
Followup-To: Elizabeth.Mccoy@bbs.oit.unc.edu
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Lines: 66

[Ugh. This is gonna be long. And some of the ">"s may be messed up. I
wish this system had a *real* Followup command...]
From: mauler@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Message-ID: <1991Jul23.170033.32237@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>

>In article <1991Jul22.180150.17838@cadence.com>,
>deej@cds8613.Cadence.COM (Jim Howard) writes:
>> In article <GATELEY.91Jul19132355@helma.rice.edu>, gateley@rice.edu
>> (John Gateley) writes:
>>> In article <1991Jul19.170332.6608@cadence.com>
>>> deej@cds8613.Cadence.COM (Jim Howard) writes:
>>>         The Creed of the Church of Scientology
>>>        [...]
>>>That the study of the mind and the healing of mentally caused
>>>ills should not be alienated from religion or condoned in
>>>nonreligious fields.
>>>        [...]
>>
>>> Do I understand this correct? What this seems to say is that ALL
>>> "mental healing" and "study of the mind" should be done in the
>>> context of religion ONLY.

>But "mental healing" and "study of the mind" are accomplished
>elsewhere in science, without even mentioning a soul.  Neurosurgery,
>for example, requires an innate knowledge of most psychological mental
>processes in order to hit the right spots in the brain, but no
>mention of a soul is made to "aid" in the study.  If mental healing
>can occur only in context of a soul, then how is it that atheists are
>able to benefit from hospital programs teaching visual imagery to
>"combat" their illnesses (such as: white knights attacking cancer
>cells, etc.).  Often, the addition of a soul will only make things
>worse, as in
>the above visualization, where a person undergoing visualization
>treatment will perceive that their soul/self-will is currently failing,
>and therefore not respond as well to the treatment as someone who
>merely thinks of it as self-will.  Also perception of a soul as being
>innately part of yourself and therefore unchangeable will hurt similar
>experiments from people who are devout <whatever> and refuse to allow
>the change as it was "decreed by Deity".

Well, as I understand it, neurosurgery has to do with the brain -- an
imminently <sp?> physical thing. My understanding of the body-brain-soul
triad is that the soul uses the brain as a "switchboard" to make the
body run. So only a very "powerful" entity could run a body with a
damaged brain. But the brain/switchboard doesn't vary much from body to
body, so it can be studied as a purly physical thing to some extent. (Of
course, the quality of the knowledge gotten with that premise is up to
you to decide...)

As for your claim that a belief in a soul would harm things for
imagery-treatment <sp?> ... I don't really think that's necessarily true
-- the *soul* (entity/spirit/thetan) is not failing. It's *can't*, being
immortal; it's the *body* that's having the problems. With the exception
of the "EnchaAllah"/"God wills it" sorts, I would think that having a
soul would *help* visualisation. (Okay, so I was brought up to believe
that given the right attitude, the soul/spirit/etc can affect *any* part
of the physical universe.)

Disclaimer: I am but human, not even Clear, and my Word is not All.
--Elizabeth.McCoy@bbs.oit.unc.edu
--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 128.109.157.30