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

The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the author or authors which wrote them and may not reflect the views and opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page. The opinions may or may not be those of the Chairman of The Skeptic Tank.

Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank