Beliefs: Pathways to Health and Well-being, by Dilts

April 24, 2000

. Thanks for the great ideas expressed in your post. However, for

the benefit of debate, knowledge, and information, I have the following:

A fact can be demonstrated as such 100% of the time. Without fail,

regardless of the belief of any individual involved, in spite of religious

belief, self brainwashing or any hypnotic effect. As an illustration,

surgery for the removal of a tumor is effective in REMOVING a tumor 100% of

the time, provided the surgeon is using his instruments with precision and,

of course, provided " he's " cutting on the correct person.

Now, in another example, high grade steel is a very strong substance. This

can be demonstrated as fact through various physical assaults on a steel

structure. This demonstration can be done repeatedly, with results that are

100% accurate, and 100% reproducable. Whether or not one believes that

steel is a strong substance does not effect this demonstration. However, if

you take liquid nitrogen and spray the structure, thus significantly

reducing it's temperature, and take a sledge hammer to the structure, it

will shatter. A pendulum shift in belief within an observer might cause the

exclamation " See! Steel is not a strong substance after all! " This, of

course, is not an accurate observation, and has caused a belief that is not

in harmony with NATURE. A paradigm shift in belief would lead to the

accurate, again, 100% accurate observation that steel is a strong substance

at moderate temperatures. In this example, the principle of the

temperature's effect on the stability of solid state matter is ABOVE the

idea that steel is either a very strong substance, or a substance which may

be quite easily shattered.

Cancer was not caused by the medical profession. It is also not caused by

the belief structure of a human being. My problem with such sciences

involving any type of nuerologic programming is that the creators and

promoters of these ideologies often do not take the time to understand the

vast and varied interacting principles involved in the life process. This

can be easily demonstrated, in that, the results are dependant upon

subjective involvement, and this can be demonstrated by the fact the results

are not achieved 100% of the time. In contrast, I could teach a simple

meditation that has specific effects that occur 100% of the time,

independent of a belief structure. There is no cop out " you must not have

done it right " .

The result of such systems taught without complete understanding is

catastrophic. We have tens of thousands of new age thinkers swirling little

lights in their heads trying to cure or advise other people, who could

hardly even tell another what a belief IS. Einstein is right: You change

the consciousness FIRST. Beliefs will follow. Once you reach the level

where your beliefs have been redefined, ideas such as living as apposed to

dying hardly matter.

From a metaphysical point of view, which in NO WAY contradicts either the

laws of physics or science, the us against them ideology is very much a part

of the IDEA of cancer. If one closely observes nature, not only our own

species, the underlying principle of cancer slowly reveals itself: It is a

condition of betrayal, to put it in emotional terms. What can cause this?

Diminished food supply, overpopulation, contamination of living conditions,

among other things. Take a nuerolinguistic programmer to Cherynobl and " he "

WILL still get cancer. Any condition of change is holding underyling

principles in balance, while shifting toward the ideological point of

equilibrium.

Nature geometrizes, and there is no principle in action that does not also

apply to the whole of any system, or collection of systems.

Belief and the human mind is a fantastic tool to use for improved health.

However, one must apply caution: I remember watching this video where a

lady tried to cure her own cancer by imagining an AXE chopping up the cancer

in her body. Amazing. Here is a person who would like to believe she

changed her belief structure using an AXE to chop up cancer. The mind, the

ego, the subconscious and the unconscious are VERY powerful ideas in

consciousness. To induce a state of cosciousness change is a feat that very

few people are able to do. Often, when this occurs in ONE person, it

changes the world forever.

When " we " go out into the world as harbringers of a new system, making

claims as such, we should be ABSOLUTELY positive of the results that we are

able to achieve. Anything less, and we not only damage our own credibility,

but we also damage others who are involved in excellent work dedicated for

the betterment of the human condition.

I think your slight towards Dr. Moran is unfair. If the " Dr. Morans " of the

" lists " come and go, it is only, I'm sure, due to the fact that they get

tired of being expected to fend off every emotional attack that does not

achieve the advancement of UNDERSTANDING. Don't expect a logician to engage

in areas of subjective art. The " Dr. Morans " of the lists are no " Barrets " .

Dr. Moran does not come from a profession based on belief, but from one that

is based on clinical experience.

Whether " we " of alternative medicine can match, advance, or demonstrate a

better approach is what this list is all about.

The answer to your bold faced answer of " YES " is no. In my specialized

field of natural medicine, which is outside the scope of this forum, it

doesn't matter if someone believes, disbelieves, or misbelieves. Many times

I've been involved with a person whom has said " You know, this isn't going

to work. " Or even, " My, I just KNOW this is going to be so painful! " ect

ect ect ect. I simply answer, " Well, if it doesn't work, the only thing

you've lost is about an hour. " It's been said that man plans and God

laughs. It can be said the same: " Man believes, God laughs. " In my work,

there is no war against someone else's belief system. One does not try to

manipulate a point of view, one simply effects change.

[ ] Beliefs: Pathways to Health and Well-being, by

Dilts

> Albert Einstein is quoted as saying, " today problems can not be solved in

> the consciousness in which they were created " .

>

> To think that our current epidemic of cancer can be " cured " within modern

> medicine, is to totally ignore the body count it has created. This

> " smokescreen " of modern medicine has so " clouded " our thinking that we

> somehow conclude that because of their intellegence, training, education,

> and contact with sick people dying of cancer, that the traditional doctor

> is still our only hope.

>

> This is a FALSE belief.

>

> The only way to successfully BEAT cancer, it to utilize every tool

> (properly, as accurately determined). Included in the toolbag,

is

> the cancer patient's MIND.

>

> Dilts, author of Beliefs: Pathways to Health and Well-being, used

> NLP, neurolinguistic programming to " cure " his mother's breast cancer.

She

> elected to work with her son, and not take any traditional medical

> treatments. This must have been a real step for her, as by trade, she is

a

> nurse.

>

> She's cancer free.

>

> In this book, Dilts describes how to CHANGE your belief systems, and

create

> strategies for wellness. In reading this book for my own personal use, I

> discovered that I have many NON-WORKING and DESTRUCTIVE belief structures

> myself!!!!!

>

> The bible says, that a doubleminded man is unstable in all his ways. How

> often do we sabatoge our " sincerest " efforts, because we really don't

> BELIEVE in what we are doing?

>

> Oswald Chambers defined anxiety as " not living up to your beliefs " . If

> your thoughts and actions are not congruent, you are not experiencing

> " peace " , an inner knowing that all will soon be well, if it is not already

so.

>

> Dilts discusses on pages 14-16, of this very small (less than 200 page

> book), the Response Expectancy and Placebo Effect. He discussed the

> results of the use of alcohol in a placebo study. It proved that

> physiologically, meaning the results of using alcohol in the body, or not,

> were DETERMINED BY THE PERSON'S BELIEFS, NOT BY THE USE OR NON-USE OF

ALCOHOL.

>

> On page 17, a study of 100 cancer " survivors " was done to determine

> commonality in treatments. None was discovered, as they all chose varying

> treatments. The one thing they commonly shared was the BELIEF that their

> treatment was going to work for them.

>

> On these alt. health lists, I read about this product, and that product,

> and doctors like Moran come and go, to try to influence our belief

structures.

>

> Doc, let me just say this, " if people's beliefs are a necessary part of

> their healing, AND they no longer BELIEVE in the medical establishment,

> then do you HARM them with the treatment that YOU BELIEVE IN? "

>

> YES.

>

> The answer is yes.

>

> Furthermore, to anyone who reads these words, if you are doubleminded in

> any " treatment " plan you choose, you will fail.

>

> In the universe, there is no " try " . There is either " DO " or " DO NOT " .

>

> At some point in our lives, perhaps the diagnosis of cancer is it, we need

> to take control of our minds, stop relying on the " ascended masters of

> medicine " , and believe in our body's ability to be self-healing. We need

> the belief that we can be well FIRST. Before our treatments and salves

and

> magic potions, every single cancer patient should stand in front of the

> mirror and ask themselves if they want to live.

>

> The answer is not always obvious, but only the cancer patient can say.

>

> I have the utmost respect for people that say, " I am done living, and I

> want to go home. "

>

> How many times have I seen people with cancer chewing candy bars, drinking

> beer, and not bothering to change their lives, while telling me their

> cancer story with their remote control to their TV in their hand? (sugar

> is KNOWN to cause cancers to grow more quickly)

>

> Let's stop playing games.

>

> If you are seriously looking for the cure, " look within " .

>

> I once read a story about God. It was a fictional story about how God

> choose to " hide " the secret to eternal life. All the angels had ideas of

> where to hide it. They offered every concievable hiding place as a

> potential source. God simply said, " let's put it somewhere, where

everyone

> can find it " . It's really no mystery, he put it INSIDE us.

>

> Cures to cancer are disingenuous. They say that we can continue in

> unhealthy thought patterns and lifestyles, and then take this magic pill.

> Get cured in a Mexican clinic, then come home to the same life that

created

> your disease, is no cure.

>

> Please purchase this book by Dilts, and read it. You can order direct at

> 1-800-937-7771

>

> If you are honest you may find that this a book that can change your life,

> if you are brave enough to make the changes that only you can make.

>

> We don't need a revolution against the medical establishment, we need to

> revolutionize our beliefs. And we need these tools that Dilts and other

> NLP practitioners give us to SIMPLY change our minds.

>

> I sincerely hope that you are as blessed by the use of neurolinguistic

> programming as I have been. Be not conformed to this world, but

> TRANSFORMED by the renewing of your mind.

>

> Be blessed and always be well,

>

> PS. Another excellent read is Heart of the Mind, by Connirae s.

> This book has SPECIFIC excercises that can be done.

>

> PPS. This email is being posted widely. I apologize for duplicate

copies.

> Please forward freely.

>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Good friends, school spirit, hair-dos you'd like to forget.

> Classmates.com has them all. And with 4.4 million alumni already

> registered, there's a good chance you'll find your friends here:

> 1/2885/4/_/481431/_/956592179/

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> -List Archives:

> /archives.cgi/

> Web Sites:

> http://home.sol.no/~dusan/cancerpage.html

> http://www.geocities.com/~mycleanse/

> http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/1158

>

> By joining the list you agree to hold yourself FULLY responsible FOR

yourself!

>

> To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty message to:

> -unsubscribeonelist

>

> To change status from normal to digest , send an empty message to:

> -digestonelist

>

> To change status from digest to normal, send an empty message to:

> -normalonelist

>

> To subscribe again to the list, send an empty message to:

> -subscribeonelist

>

April 24, 2000

Albert Einstein is quoted as saying, " today problems can not be solved in

the consciousness in which they were created " .

To think that our current epidemic of cancer can be " cured " within modern

medicine, is to totally ignore the body count it has created. This

" smokescreen " of modern medicine has so " clouded " our thinking that we

somehow conclude that because of their intellegence, training, education,

and contact with sick people dying of cancer, that the traditional doctor

is still our only hope.

This is a FALSE belief.

The only way to successfully BEAT cancer, it to utilize every tool

(properly, as accurately determined). Included in the toolbag, is

the cancer patient's MIND.

Dilts, author of Beliefs: Pathways to Health and Well-being, used

NLP, neurolinguistic programming to " cure " his mother's breast cancer. She

elected to work with her son, and not take any traditional medical

treatments. This must have been a real step for her, as by trade, she is a

nurse.

She's cancer free.

In this book, Dilts describes how to CHANGE your belief systems, and create

strategies for wellness. In reading this book for my own personal use, I

discovered that I have many NON-WORKING and DESTRUCTIVE belief structures

myself!!!!!

The bible says, that a doubleminded man is unstable in all his ways. How

often do we sabatoge our " sincerest " efforts, because we really don't

BELIEVE in what we are doing?

Oswald Chambers defined anxiety as " not living up to your beliefs " . If

your thoughts and actions are not congruent, you are not experiencing

" peace " , an inner knowing that all will soon be well, if it is not already so.

Dilts discusses on pages 14-16, of this very small (less than 200 page

book), the Response Expectancy and Placebo Effect. He discussed the

results of the use of alcohol in a placebo study. It proved that

physiologically, meaning the results of using alcohol in the body, or not,

were DETERMINED BY THE PERSON'S BELIEFS, NOT BY THE USE OR NON-USE OF ALCOHOL.

On page 17, a study of 100 cancer " survivors " was done to determine

commonality in treatments. None was discovered, as they all chose varying

treatments. The one thing they commonly shared was the BELIEF that their

treatment was going to work for them.

On these alt. health lists, I read about this product, and that product,

and doctors like Moran come and go, to try to influence our belief structures.

Doc, let me just say this, " if people's beliefs are a necessary part of

their healing, AND they no longer BELIEVE in the medical establishment,

then do you HARM them with the treatment that YOU BELIEVE IN? "

YES.

The answer is yes.

Furthermore, to anyone who reads these words, if you are doubleminded in

any " treatment " plan you choose, you will fail.

In the universe, there is no " try " . There is either " DO " or " DO NOT " .

At some point in our lives, perhaps the diagnosis of cancer is it, we need

to take control of our minds, stop relying on the " ascended masters of

medicine " , and believe in our body's ability to be self-healing. We need

the belief that we can be well FIRST. Before our treatments and salves and

magic potions, every single cancer patient should stand in front of the

mirror and ask themselves if they want to live.

The answer is not always obvious, but only the cancer patient can say.

I have the utmost respect for people that say, " I am done living, and I

want to go home. "

How many times have I seen people with cancer chewing candy bars, drinking

beer, and not bothering to change their lives, while telling me their

cancer story with their remote control to their TV in their hand? (sugar

is KNOWN to cause cancers to grow more quickly)

Let's stop playing games.

If you are seriously looking for the cure, " look within " .

I once read a story about God. It was a fictional story about how God

choose to " hide " the secret to eternal life. All the angels had ideas of

where to hide it. They offered every concievable hiding place as a

potential source. God simply said, " let's put it somewhere, where everyone

can find it " . It's really no mystery, he put it INSIDE us.

Cures to cancer are disingenuous. They say that we can continue in

unhealthy thought patterns and lifestyles, and then take this magic pill.

Get cured in a Mexican clinic, then come home to the same life that created

your disease, is no cure.

Please purchase this book by Dilts, and read it. You can order direct at

1-800-937-7771

If you are honest you may find that this a book that can change your life,

if you are brave enough to make the changes that only you can make.

We don't need a revolution against the medical establishment, we need to

revolutionize our beliefs. And we need these tools that Dilts and other

NLP practitioners give us to SIMPLY change our minds.

I sincerely hope that you are as blessed by the use of neurolinguistic

programming as I have been. Be not conformed to this world, but

TRANSFORMED by the renewing of your mind.

Be blessed and always be well,

PS. Another excellent read is Heart of the Mind, by Connirae s.

This book has SPECIFIC excercises that can be done.

PPS. This email is being posted widely. I apologize for duplicate copies.

Please forward freely.

April 25, 2000

Thanks ,

I too think this is where our well being lies.

Warm regards

Skye

----- Original Message ----- Sent: Monday, April 24, 2000

9:50 AM

Albert Einstein is quoted as saying, " today problems can not

be solved in

the consciousness in which they were created " .

April 25, 2000

has the following comentary and poses questions, which have the

following answers, which most of you on this list, most likely

included, would probably wish to ignore:

PS If you have further darts to throw, I would appreciate them being thrown

off-list since it has strayed VERY far from the focus of this list. My

apologies, in advance, to the list.

1) In reference to " Modern Medical Science did not create cancer, and

cancer is not created by a belief system: On the basis of what do you say

this with such certainty? And then, what is its " cause " ?

First, cancer existed long before modern medical science. Do you think we

developed things like surgery for tumors and chemotherapy, and then cancer

conveniently appeared to match the illness? Second, to give the shortest,

least complex answer that is most readily demonstrated, a simple observation

of cancer in animals, who have had no or little contact with any human

belief structure, answers the question well enough.

2) In reference to a change of consciousness: " And how is this to be

accomplished? "

A bolt of lightening? A fragile rose? A brilliant sunset? A true love's

soft smile? A bullet in the head? If anyone had a formula, I think the

world would be completely transformed in weeks. Some of the greatest minds

in human thought and belief have tried to recreate the conditions for such

occurance ( such as Yung ) and have not succeeded. However, many people

have claimed to succeed, give very expensive seminars, and convice

themselves that they have succeeded.

3) In regards to... once you reach this level, ideas such as living as

apposed to dying hardly matter: " Wouldn't that depend on the individual? "

No, it would not, and if I have to explain that then there is no common

ground on this issue, no starting point, to reconcile the difference between

the two opposing viewpoints.

4) " If metaphysics does not contradict laws of physics then why will a

physical scientist frown on a metaphysical event and deny it validity by

asserting that such an event is " not possible " on the basis that it violates

the physical laws? "

What is a metaphysical event? Must one buy tickets? If you are referring

to, say, an event such as instantly regrowing a limb, or perhaps a man that

" comes to life from the dead " , then one is not really dealing with

metaphysics. Metaphysics is the study of that which is above nature, which

permeates through nature. I believe I illustrated the point when I

mentioned the viewpoint of the " strength of steel " . The physician frowning

is a poor attempt being made to think, and then the abandoning of the idea

in favor of something already understood and unquestioned. The religion

paradigm might state: Man was given two eyes because it is in the image of

God, and God made it so. The scientist might say man was given two eyes for

the purpose of depth perception and triangulation. The metaphysician might

say that man was given two eyes because nature reflects, that diameteric

opposites geometrize in nature, that everything in and " above " nature

mirrors, that everything seen with two eyes is illusion and then would

promptly begin searching for the third principle ( which, for the sake of

creative thought can be viewed as the object of focus, and it's dynamics in

conscious thought, and also a unifying sight that is beyond the dualistic

paradigm ). The scientist might scoff, the religious might cry out

blasphemy, but the metaphysician would neither scoff at nor condemn the idea

of either, because there is room in the structure, being OPEN-ENDED, for

both ideas. Furthermore, the metaphysician is now capable of making

observations that would never even occur to either the scientist nor the

" fundamentalist " , and is also capable of asking several questions ( often

time much more revealing than any answer ) that would never occur to the

other two. And, " he " has the benefit of BOTH other viewpoints. On the

physics note, mankind is constantly redefining the understanding of natural

physics. The whole world scoffed at the idea of flight, but Divinci

developed the helicopter anyway. The examples of the misconception of

physics are numerous.

5) Regarding: If one closely observes nature, not only our own species, the

underlying principle of cancer slowly reveals itself: It is a condition of

betrayal, to put it in emotional terms. The question: " I don't understand

this: could you explain? Betrayal of whom, by whom?

Now you're thinking! There is an excellent question! Some creative ideas.

If we continue at the rate we are in the destruction of our own natural

habitat, including the water, food and oxygen supply, the rates of cancer

will continue to climb. This is the betrayal by our species of the natural

world in which we live, in which we rely. Perhaps overpopulation might be

considered betrayal of a species by the species. In the human body, cancer

can be thought of as the betrayal of the body by the actual cells. Without

going too deep into ideas such as egregors, imagine viewing one human being

as a complete world, an integral part of everything surrounding. In

metaphysical thinking, the body is simply an image of the being, and NOT the

final reality. The human experience IS about 90% emotional. By emotional,

I also refer to the subconscious mind. I can't describe the complexity of

the interaction of the conscious mind, subconscious mind, unconscious, the

superconscious principle, illness and the surrounding world without

shortcutting with various generalizations which would lead to a host of

attacks which, frankly, I just don't have the time to answer. To give one

simple ( non-cancer related ) example of metaphysics successfully put into

motion, I would speak only of personal experience. Every year, from about

the age of fourteen years old to the age of 19, I would get a severe case of

bronchitis which would require about two months to get over with antibiotic

treatment. When I was 22, I realized that lung conditions were emotionally

indicitive and tied in with the feeling of being loved and appreciated.

When that realization hit me, I made an adjustment to my thinking, and

adjusted to a slightly healthier self-love attitude, which was much less

reliant on others. My bronchitis cleared up, never to be experienced again.

In fact, that was the last time I ever needed to take an antibiotic. The

bronchitis was not CAUSED by a belief. It was caused by a misfocus of

energy. I corrected a thought process which made the belief irrelevant, and

simply shifted the focus of energy in my life. A physiological explanation

is just as evident. Try to convince yourself that no solid object is

ultimately real. If you think you've succeeded, you've only brainwashed

yourself. That is why I argue with the idea of changing belief. HOWEVER,

close your eyes, and focus on ONE POINT for long enough, and you will KNOW

that physical objects are not real, only an appearance. Change the focus of

thought redistribute energy, and then apply motion ( or take action ). If

one does not believe one has cancer, that does not mean that one does not.

6) Take a nuerolinguistic programmer to Cherynobl and " he " WILL still get

cancer. Comment was: I disagree; I think it would depend on the

neurolinguistic programmer, and on " God " .

Illustration: If you instantly remove the Earth's atomosphere, every human

being on this planet is going to die. It's not going to depend on the

person. You wouldn't see two or three people 'round to roam the barren

landscapes for years on end breathing vacuum. Now I didn't say the person

was going to DIE of cancer, I just said the cells in their body, in time

short time ) are going to become cancerous. We are not talking fire

walking here. Rather than drag someone all the way out to Cheranobl, I'd

change my thoughts gladly if I saw someone not breath for few hours or so

with no physiological side effects ( under room temperature conditions ).

7) Are you sure? Where do chaos, randomity, and serendipity fit into this

picture?

Chaos and " randomity " are self-limiting principles. How they came to be

self-limiting principles and why is anyone's guess, but is easily

demonstrated by the fact that there actually still is a universe. If the

establishment of an equilibrium can be achieved by any possible combination,

then the method of it's achievement is irrelevant from a metaphysical

standpoint. In randomity, one must view the parameters of the " random "

event within a subset of a greater system. It's like trying to take the

three dimensional concept of a mobius strip, applying a two dimensional idea

to it, then staring in awe at it. There is no such paradox, only the

misunderstanding easily correctable by realizing that the mobious strip is

only creatable in a three dimensional model, and as such, cannot be

theoretically flat. The question you are asking me might be likened to the

question " Where is the randomity in 1+1=2? " This is due, I'm sure, to a

simple misunderstanding of the MODEL, JUST A MODEL, I was trying to

illustrate. There are many ideas, many models, each lead to very

interesting questions that once in a great while lead to a realization.

8) " Well, that's *in Nature*. What about in metaphysics? " ( regarding

principles in action throughout a collection of systems ). A metaphysical

law is SIMPLY an underlying principle and/or force that NATURALLY drive the

laws of nature to begin with. And beyond that, the ideas associated with

consciousness.

9) **I think we are doing this all the time, and are just not aware of it.

I'd like any new-age healing propaganda sheet to read, " To induce a change

in consciousness is a feat everyone pulls off all day, every day. Just

think of it--we are so gifted--and one day we will all reap the results of

our astounding skills and abilities! Dead or alive!! Not to worry--unless

it is yours to worry. "

That sounds like great fun to talk about around a camp fire, and it feeds

the ego very well. I know that one must say things like that two or three

times around certain people in order to be acknowledged and join their

party. However, it's just empty words. The best one can achieve is a

restructuring of the personality, which in no way affects a change in

consciousness, since one must first increase levels of active consciousness

first. It's just stacking a lie upon another lie. But I understand the

SENTIMENT in your statement.

10) My statement: Often, when this occurs in ONE person, it changes the

world forever. Comment: Forever????? I think the world changes all the

" time " . The world is changing every blessed moment!!!!!

My apologies. I didn't have the foresight to have my little email reviewed

by a technical panel before submitting it. I didn't expect someone to try

to reach into every little word, searching not for ideas to explore, but for

maximum attack potential. There is a sentiment in the above statement which

is not stated with philisophical nor scientific precision. It is the

sentiment that I was trying to get across, not the mechanics.

The rest of your comments in " this " section of your reply are pretty

childish. Perhaps you might consider your own advice. As individuals, it

is often us that are the ones who need to hear what we are speaking. This

is another metaphysical practice.

I don't believe in using " God " as a defense, a weapon, or a word that one

throws at another human being under any circumstance, and I don't debate my

own spiritual beliefs. Nowhere have I addressed, AS SUCH, the concept of

God. I was speaking about metaphysics, not spirituality. They are not the

same. Suffice it to say that God's Will, by definition of what God must be,

is done 100% of the time, all of the time. When metaphysics reaches its

limits, that is where spirituality begins.

If you have further darts to throw, I would appreciate them being thrown

off-list since it has strayed VERY far from the focus of this list.

April 25, 2000

Well said JR. I'm glad you found my comments interesting. If I wrote for

belief, I wouldn't write at all. That must be why all those politicians get

elected. They spell correctly. I write for the sake of ideas in some

cases, for the sake of knowledge in others and because I just plain feel

like it sometimes. Believability doesn't enter into the picture. I've

never considered it wise to " believe people " . I certainly don't enjoy being

believed. However, rest assured, if you mean I have made up any part of the

post as a misrepresentation of any thing, I must state that if that

conclusion is drawn from the spelling of my words, I don't follow your

logic. If it's not, I see no justification for your comment. At any rate,

I can assure you that it is not the case. I hope this post meets your

spelling approval.

Re: [ ] Beliefs: Pathways to Health and Well-being, by

Dilts

> Dear Silent Partner: You're coments wher

> mos inneresting. An excep fo the folooing

> wurds init I unnerstan it. They is: Pendulum,

> Paradigm, nuerologic (spelled wrong),nuerolinguistic(spelled wrong

> also),

> equilibrium, geometrizes (also wrong), harbringers (spelled wrong).

> This level

> of writing is not conducive to believability.

> Best anyway, JR

>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Now the best and coolest websites come right to you based on your

> unique interests. eTour.com is surfing without searching.

> And, it's FREE!

> 1/3013/4/_/481431/_/956714611/

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> -List Archives:

> /archives.cgi/

> Web Sites:

> http://home.sol.no/~dusan/cancerpage.html

> http://www.geocities.com/~mycleanse/

> http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/1158

>

> By joining the list you agree to hold yourself FULLY responsible FOR

yourself!

>

> To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty message to:

> -unsubscribeonelist

>

> To change status from normal to digest , send an empty message to:

> -digestonelist

>

> To change status from digest to normal, send an empty message to:

> -normalonelist

>

> To subscribe again to the list, send an empty message to:

> -subscribeonelist

>

April 25, 2000

Dear SP,

Re: [ ] Beliefs: Pathways to Health and Well-being, by

Dilts

>

> Cancer was not caused by the medical profession. It is also not caused by

> the belief structure of a human being.

**On the basis of what do you say this with such certainty? And then, what

is its " cause " ?

Einstein is right: You change

> the consciousness FIRST. Beliefs will follow.

**And how is this to be accomplished?

Once you reach the level

> where your beliefs have been redefined, ideas such as living as apposed to

> dying hardly matter.

**Wouldn't that depend on each individual?

>

> >From a metaphysical point of view, which in NO WAY contradicts either the

> laws of physics or science,

**If metaphysics does not contradict laws of physics then why will a

physical scientist frown on a metaphysical event and deny it validity by

asserting that such an event is " not possible " on the basis that it violates

the physical laws?

the us against them ideology is very much a part

> of the IDEA of cancer. If one closely observes nature, not only our own

> species, the underlying principle of cancer slowly reveals itself: It is

a

> condition of betrayal, to put it in emotional terms.

**I don't understand this: could you explain?

Betrayal of whom, by whom?

What can cause this?

> Diminished food supply, overpopulation, contamination of living

conditions,

> among other things.

**Are you saying these conditions, as they have existed through the ages,

have always produced cancers?

Take a nuerolinguistic programmer to Cherynobl and " he "

> WILL still get cancer.

** I disagree; I think it would depend on the neurolinguistic programmer,

and on " God " .

Any condition of change is holding underyling

> principles in balance, while shifting toward the ideological point of

> equilibrium.

**Are you sure? Where do chaos, randomity, and serendipity fit into this

picture?

>

> Nature geometrizes, and there is no principle in action that does not also

> apply to the whole of any system, or collection of systems.

**Well, that's *in Nature*. What about in metaphysics?

>

> Belief and the human mind is a fantastic tool to use for improved health.

> However, one must apply caution:

**In my opinion, one must proceed as one's self, whatever that is at any

given time.

The mind, the

> ego, the subconscious and the unconscious are VERY powerful ideas in

> consciousness.

To induce a state of cosciousness change is a feat that very

> few people are able to do.

**I think we are doing this all the time, and are just not aware of it. I'd

like any new-age healing propaganda sheet to read, " To induce a change in

consciousness is a feat everyone pulls off all day, every day. Just think

of it--we are so gifted--and one day we will all reap the results of our

astounding skills and abilities! Dead or alive!! Not to worry--unless it

is yours to worry. "

Often, when this occurs in ONE person, it

> changes the world forever.

**Forever????? I think the world changes all the " time " . The world is

changing every blessed moment!!!!!

> When " we " go out into the world as harbringers of a new system,

**Maybe we shouldn't go out into the world with " systems " at all. Maybe we

should go out there honoring the sovereignty and divinity of all beings, in

each moment, or the Grace of God.

making

> claims as such,

**and instead of making " claims " , just keep our mouths shut or, if we have

to speak, confine it to telling it like it is, for us.

we should be ABSOLUTELY positive of the results that we are

> able to achieve.

**I think we just need to know what we have experienced and be open to the

experiences of others, and the exprience of God.

Anything less, and we not only damage our own credibility,

> but we also damage others who are involved in excellent work dedicated for

> the betterment of the human condition.

**Anything more, and we trample all over our own spirit, the spirits of

others, and deny God.

>

Don't expect a logician to engage

> in areas of subjective art.

**Why not? People are not, necessarily, mono-talented by nature. Even an

area of deficit could be stimulated and cultivated.

> Dr. Moran does not come from a profession based on belief, but from one

that

> is based on clinical experience.

**Don't beliefs underly the practices that yield the research and ultimately

the clinical experiences? And don't these beliefs change through the ages

of medicine as new information is discovered?

>

> Whether " we " of alternative medicine can match, advance, or demonstrate a

> better approach is what this list is all about.

** I think even alternative medicine forgets it creates nothing on its own.

> The answer to your bold faced answer of " YES " is no. In my specialized

> field of natural medicine, which is outside the scope of this forum, it

> doesn't matter if someone believes, disbelieves, or misbelieves.

** Is this spiritual hubris? Doesn't this attitude relegate beliefs to the

status of inconsequential, equating to disempowerment and denial of any

co-creative relationship? Do you have treatments so " perfect " that how the

person interfaces with it, mentally and emotionally, or with " God " has no

effect?

Many times

> I've been involved with a person whom has said " You know, this isn't going

> to work. " Or even, " My, I just KNOW this is going to be so painful! "

**But, what people say can indicate exactly nothing of the truth of how it

really is for them, anyway!

I simply answer, " Well, if it doesn't work, the only thing

> you've lost is about an hour. "

**How would it not " work " ; what would be the reasons, if you are working

with " facts " , i.e. protocols that create duplicable results without the

cooperation of beliefs, by your definition? How does one " lose " an hour?

Any possibility if it didn't " work " , there was a belief or some kind or

unexpressed agenda that was designing an outcome other than the one

intended? Is there any room in your treatment protocols for " God " having

such an agenda, if not the client?

It's been said that man plans and God

> laughs. It can be said the same: " Man believes, God laughs. "

**Where does " science " , along with the protocols of both types of medicine,

fit into this? Is this where [laughing, or not] " God " gets squeezed out of

the picture, so man can have what he intends, each and every time,

infallibly, duplicable result, after duplicable result? Where man's (which

man's?) plans always come to fruition and his objectives are always met,

despite what " God " wants? Whose realm is the one in which God takes no

active role so man can have his way? Your discussion of effective medicine

has me a little worried, at this point.

Sincerely,

April 26, 2000

Dear Silent Partner: You're coments wher

mos inneresting. An excep fo the folooing

wurds init I unnerstan it. They is: Pendulum,

Paradigm, nuerologic (spelled wrong),nuerolinguistic(spelled wrong

also),

equilibrium, geometrizes (also wrong), harbringers (spelled wrong).

This level

of writing is not conducive to believability.

Best anyway, JR